Impact of long-acting local anesthesia on clinical and financial outcomes in laparoscopic colorectal surgery

Postoperative pain scores and opioid use after standard bupivacaine vs. liposomal bupivacaine regional blocks for abdominal cancer surgery: A propensity score matched study

BACKGROUND

Fascial plane blocks (FPBs) are widely used for abdominal surgery with the assumption that liposomal bupivacaine (LB) is more effective than standard bupivacaine (SB).

METHODS

This was a single-institution retrospective cohort study of patients administered FPBs with LB or SB ​+ ​admixtures (dexamethasone/dexmedetomidine) for open abdominal cancer surgery. Propensity score matching generated a 2:1 (LB:SB) matched cohort. Opioid use (mg oral morphine equivalents, OME) and severe pain (≥3 pain scores ≥7 in a 24-h period) were compared.

RESULTS

Opioid use was >150 ​mg OME in 19.9 ​% (29/146) LB and 16.4 ​% (12/73) SB patients (p ​= ​0.586). Severe pain was experienced by 44 ​% (64/146) LB and 53 ​% (39/73) SB patients (p ​= ​0.198). On multivariable analysis, SB vs LB choice was not associated with high opioid volume >150 ​mg or severe pain.

CONCLUSIONS

FPBs with standard bupivacaine were not associated with higher 72-h opioid use or more severe pain compared to liposomal bupivacaine.

Liposomal Bupivacaine Transversus Abdominis Plane Blocks in Laparoscopic Colorectal Resections: A Single-Institution Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Transversus abdominis plane blocks improve postoperative pain after colon and rectal resections, but the benefits of liposomal bupivacaine use for these blocks have not been clearly demonstrated.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine whether using liposomal bupivacaine in transversus abdominis plane blocks improves postoperative pain and reduces opioid use after colorectal surgery compared to standard bupivacaine.

DESIGN

This study was a single-blinded, single-institution, prospective randomized controlled trial comparing liposomal bupivacaine to standard bupivacaine in transversus abdominis plane blocks in patients undergoing elective colon and rectal resections.

SETTINGS

This study was conducted at a single-institution academic medical center with 6 staff colorectal surgeons and 2 colorectal surgery fellows.

PATIENTS

Ninety-six patients aged 18 to 85 years were assessed for eligibility; 76 were included and randomly assigned to 2 groups of 38 patients.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients in the experimental group received liposomal bupivacaine transversus abdominis plane blocks, whereas the control group received standard bupivacaine blocks.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was maximum pain score on postoperative day 2. Secondary outcomes included daily maximum and average pain scores in the 3 days after surgery, as well as daily morphine milligram equivalent use and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Patients receiving liposomal bupivacaine blocks had lower maximum pain scores on the day of surgery (mean, 6.5 vs 7.7; p = 0.008). No other difference was found between groups with respect to maximum or average pain scores at any time point postoperatively, nor was there any difference in morphine milligram equivalents used or length of stay (median, 3.1 d).

LIMITATIONS

This was a single-institution study with only patients blinded to group assignment.

CONCLUSIONS

Liposomal bupivacaine use in transversus abdominis plane blocks for patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal resections does not seem to improve postoperative pain, nor does it reduce narcotic use or decrease length of stay. Given its cost, use of liposomal bupivacaine in transversus abdominis plane blocks is not justified for colon and rectal resections. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B979 .

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Identifier: NCT04781075.

BLOQUEOS TAP DE BUPIVACANA LIPOSOMAL EN RESECCIONES COLORRECTALES LAPAROSCPICAS UN ENSAYO CONTROLADO ALEATORIO DE UNA SOLA INSTITUCIN

ANTECEDENTES:Los bloqueos del plano transverso del abdomen, mejoran el dolor posoperatorio después de las resecciones de colon y recto, pero los beneficios del uso de bupivacaína liposomal para estos bloqueos, no se han demostrado claramente.OBJETIVO:Investigar la eficacia de la inyección con tejido adiposo autólogo recién recolectado en fístulas anales criptoglandulares complejas.DISEÑO:Ensayo controlado, aleatorio, prospectivo, simple ciego, de una sola institución, que compara la bupivacaína liposomal con la bupivacaína estándar en bloqueos del plano transverso del abdomen, en pacientes sometidos a resecciones electivas de colon y recto. Identificador de ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT04781075.ENTORNO CLINICO:Centro médico académico de una sola institución con seis cirujanos de plantilla y becarios de cirugía colorrectal.PACIENTES:Se evaluó la elegibilidad de 96 pacientes de 18 a 85 años; 76 fueron incluidos y aleatorizados en dos grupos de 38 pacientes.INTERVENCIONES:Los pacientes del grupo experimental recibieron bloqueos del plano transverso del abdomen con bupivacaína liposomal, mientras que el grupo de control recibió bloqueos de bupivacaína estándar.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACION:El resultado primario fue la puntuación máxima de dolor en el segundo día posoperatorio. Los resultados secundarios incluyeron las puntuaciones máximas y medias diarias de dolor en los 3 días posteriores a la cirugía, así como el uso diario equivalente en miligramos de morfina y la duración de la estancia hospitalaria.RESULTADOS:Los pacientes que recibieron bloqueos de bupivacaína liposomal, tuvieron puntuaciones máximas de dolor más bajas, el día de la cirugía (media 6,5 frente a 7,7, p = 0,008). No hubo ninguna otra diferencia entre los grupos con respecto a las puntuaciones de dolor máximas o promedio en cualquier momento después de la operación, ni hubo ninguna diferencia en los equivalentes de miligramos de morfina utilizados o la duración de la estancia (mediana de 3,1 días).LIMITACIONES:Estudio de una sola institución con cegamiento de un solo paciente.CONCLUSIONES:El uso de bupivacaína liposomal en bloqueos del plano transverso del abdomen, para pacientes sometidos a resecciones colorrectales laparoscópicas, no parece mejorar el dolor posoperatorio, ni reduce el uso de narcóticos ni la duración de la estancia hospitalaria. Dado su costo, el uso de bupivacaína liposomal en bloqueos TAP no está justificado para resecciones de colon y recto. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B797 . Traducción Dr. Fidel Ruiz Healy.

Clinical practice guidelines for enhanced recovery after colon and rectal surgery from the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons

The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS) and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) are dedicated to ensuring high-quality innovative patient care for surgical patients by advancing the science, prevention, and management of disorders and diseases of the colon, rectum, and anus as well as minimally invasive surgery. The ASCRS and SAGES society members involved in the creation of these guidelines were chosen because they have demonstrated expertise in the specialty of colon and rectal surgery and enhanced recovery. This consensus document was created to lead international efforts in defining quality care for conditions related to the colon, rectum, and anus and develop clinical practice guidelines based on the best available evidence. While not proscriptive, these guidelines provide information on which decisions can be made and do not dictate a specific form of treatment. These guidelines are intended for the use of all practitioners, healthcare workers, and patients who desire information about the management of the conditions addressed by the topics covered in these guidelines. These guidelines should not be deemed inclusive of all proper methods of care nor exclusive of methods of care reasonably directed toward obtaining the same results. The ultimate judgment regarding the propriety of any specific procedure must be made by the physician in light of all the circumstances presented by the individual patient. This clinical practice guideline represents a collaborative effort between the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS) and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) and was approved by both societies.

Impact of Liposomal Bupivacaine on Post-Operative Pain and Opioid Usage in Thyroidectomy

OBJECTIVES

Opioid analgesia has been integral in post-operative pain control for decades. The over-prescription of opioids, commonly in the surgical patient, has contributed to the current opioid epidemic. Liposomal bupivacaine (LB), a long-acting analgesia formulation, has demonstrated decreased post-operative pain and opioid requirements in patients treated across multiple surgical subspecialties. The aims of this retrospective study are to assess post-operative pain and opioid use in patients who received LB at the time of thyroidectomy.

METHODS

A cohort-matched retrospective review of patients who underwent thyroidectomy by 2 surgeons between January 2010 and December 2019 was performed. Patients were divided into those that received LB intraoperatively and those that did not. Statistical analyses were performed using the Chi-square or Fisher's exact test, and 2-sample T-test or Wilcoxon rank sum test.

RESULTS

Of the 201 patients included in this study, 113 patients received LB and 88 did not. Patients who received LB had a lower median visual analog scale (VAS) pain score (2 vs 3, P = .2252), lower maximum VAS pain score (6 vs 7, P = .0898), were less likely to require opioid medications (73.5% vs 85.2%, P = .0434), and had a lower percentage of daily morphine milligram equivalent value ≥45 (89.8% vs 95.3%, P = .1581) during the post-operative period when compared to those that did not.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests a role for incisional infiltration with LB for post-operative pain management in patients undergoing transcervical thyroidectomy. We report reduced post-operative pain scores and opioid analgesia requirements in patients who received LB.

Real-World Data on Liposomal Bupivacaine and Inpatient Hospital Costs After Colorectal Surgery

INTRODUCTION

This study compared costs of care among colorectal surgery patients who received liposomal bupivacaine versus those who did not (control) from a health institution perspective.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This pharmacoeconomic evaluation was conducted among adults undergoing open or minimally invasive colorectal resection at an academic medical center from May 2016 to February 2018. Healthcare resource utilization was derived from the electronic health record. Total cost of care (2018 USD) was analyzed using a generalized linear model adjusted for American Society of Anesthesiologists score, enhanced recovery after surgery management, open surgery, opioid use before surgery, height, cancer, and age. The primary analysis used public costs. A sensitivity analysis used internal costs from the hospital to maximize internal validity.

RESULTS

Of 486 included patients, 286 (59%) received liposomal bupivacaine. Total cost of care using public costs included perioperative local anesthetics (mean ± standard deviation [SD]: $392 ± 74 liposomal bupivacaine versus $8 ± 13 control), analgesics within 48 h after surgery (mean ± SD: $132 ± 99 liposomal bupivacaine versus $117 ± 127 control), postoperative ileus management (mean ± SD: $5 ± 51 liposomal bupivacaine versus $65 ± 284 control), and hospital length of stay (mean ± SD: $4459 ± 3576 liposomal bupivacaine versus $7769 ± 7082 control). Liposomal bupivacaine was associated with an adjusted absolute difference in total cost of care of -$1435 (95% confidence interval -$2401 to -$470; P = 0.004) using public costs and -$1345 (95% confidence interval -$2215 to -$476; P = 0.002) using internal costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of liposomal bupivacaine in colorectal surgery was associated with a significant reduction in total cost of care that was predominately driven by reduced costs for hospital stay and postoperative ileus management despite higher medication costs.

Updates on Wound Infiltration Use for Postoperative Pain Management: A Narrative Review

Local anesthetic wound infiltration (WI) provides anesthesia for minor surgical procedures and improves postoperative analgesia as part of multimodal analgesia after general or regional anesthesia. Although pre-incisional block is preferable, in practice WI is usually done at the end of surgery. WI performed as a continuous modality reduces analgesics, prolongs the duration of analgesia, and enhances the patient’s mobilization in some cases. WI benefits are documented in open abdominal surgeries (Caesarean section, colorectal surgery, abdominal hysterectomy, herniorrhaphy), laparoscopic cholecystectomy, oncological breast surgeries, laminectomy, hallux valgus surgery, and radical prostatectomy. Surgical site infiltration requires knowledge of anatomy and the pain origin for a procedure, systematic extensive infiltration of local anesthetic in various tissue planes under direct visualization before wound closure or subcutaneously along the incision. Because the incidence of local anesthetic systemic toxicity is 11% after subcutaneous WI, appropriate local anesthetic dosing is crucial. The risk of wound infection is related to the infection incidence after each particular surgery. For WI to fully meet patient and physician expectations, mastery of the technique, patient education, appropriate local anesthetic dosing and management of the surgical wound with “aseptic, non-touch” technique are needed.

A Prospective Randomized Trial of Surgeon-Administered Intraoperative Transversus Abdominis Plane Block With Bupivacaine Against Liposomal Bupivacaine: The TINGLE Trial

BACKGROUND

Transversus abdominis plane blocks are increasingly used to achieve opioid-sparing analgesia after colorectal surgery. Traditionally, bupivacaine was the long-acting analgesic of choice, but the addition of dexamethasone and/or epinephrine to bupivacaine may extend block duration. Liposomal bupivacaine has also been suggested to achieve an extended analgesia duration of 72 hours but is significantly more expensive.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare pain control between laparoscopic transversus abdominis plane blocks using liposomal bupivacaine versus bupivacaine with epinephrine and dexamethasone.

DESIGN

This was a parallel-group, single-institution, randomized clinical trial.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at a single tertiary medical center.

PATIENTS

Consecutive patients between October 2018 to October 2019, ages 18 to 90 years, undergoing minimally invasive colorectal surgery with multimodal analgesia were included.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive a laparoscopic transversus abdominis plane block with liposomal bupivacaine or bupivacaine with epinephrine and dexamethasone.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was total oral morphine equivalents administered in the first 48 hours postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included pain scores, time to ambulation and solid diet, hospital length of stay, and complications.

RESULTS

A total of 102 patients (50 men) with a median age of 42 years (interquartile range, 29-60 y) consented and were randomly assigned. The primary end point, total oral morphine equivalents administered in the first 48 hours, was not significantly different between the liposomal bupivacaine group (median = 69 mg) and the bupivacaine with epinephrine and dexamethasone group (median = 47 mg; difference in medians = 22 mg, (95% CI, -17 to 49 mg); p = 0.60). There were no significant differences in pain scores, time to ambulation, time to diet tolerance, time to bowel movement, length of stay, overall complications, or readmission rate between groups. There were no treatment-related adverse outcomes.

LIMITATIONS

This study was not placebo controlled or blinded.

CONCLUSIONS

This first randomized trial comparing laparoscopic transversus abdominis plane block with liposomal bupivacaine or bupivacaine with epinephrine and dexamethasone showed that a liposomal bupivacaine block does not provide superior or extended analgesia in the era of standardized multimodal analgesia protocols.See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B533.

ESTUDIO PROSPECTIVO Y RANDOMIZADO DE BLOQUEO DEL PLANO MUSCULAR TRANSVERSO DEL ABDOMEN REALIZADO POR EL CIRUJANO CON BUPIVACANA VERSUS BUPIVACANA LIPOSOMAL ESTUDIO TINGLE

ANTECEDENTES:El bloqueo anestésico del plano muscular transverso del abdomen se utiliza cada vez más para lograr una analgesia con menos consumo de opioides después de cirugía colorrectal. Tradicionalmente, la Bupivacaína era el analgésico de acción prolongada de elección, pero al agregarse Dexametasona y/o Adrenalina a la Bupivacaína se puede prolongar la duración del bloqueo. También se ha propuesto que la Bupivacaína liposomal logra una duración prolongada de la analgesia de 72 horas, pero es significativamente más cara.OBJETIVO:Comparar el control del dolor entre bloqueo laparoscópico del plano de los transversos del abdomen usando Bupivacaína liposomal versus Bupivacaína con Adrenalina y Dexametasona.DISEÑO:Estudio clínico prospectivo y randomizado de una sola institución en grupos paralelos.AJUSTE:Centro médico terciario único.PACIENTES:Todos aquellos pacientes entre 18 y 90 años sometidos a cirugía colorrectal mínimamente invasiva con analgesia multimodal, entre octubre de 2018 a octubre de 2019 incluidos de manera consecutiva.INTERVENCIONES:Los pacientes fueron seleccionados aleatoriamente 1:1 para recibir un bloqueo laparoscópico del plano de los transversos del abdomen con Bupivacaína liposomal o Bupivacaína con Adrenalina y Dexametasona.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El resultado primario fue el total de equivalentes de morfina oral administradas en las primeras 48 horas después de la operación. Los resultados secundarios incluyeron puntuaciones de dolor, inicio de dieta sólida, tiempo de inicio a la deambulación, la estadía hospitalaria y las complicaciones.RESULTADOS:Un total de 102 pacientes (50 hombres) con una mediana de edad de 42 años (IQR 29-60) fueron incluidos aleatoriamente. El criterio de valoración principal, equivalentes de morfina oral total administrada en las primeras 48 horas, no fue significativamente diferente entre el grupo de Bupivacaína liposomal (mediana = 69 mg) y el grupo de Bupivacaína con Adrenalina y Dexametasona (mediana = 47 mg; diferencia en medianas = 22 mg, IC del 95% [-17] - 49 mg, p = 0,60). No hubo diferencias significativas en las puntuaciones de dolor, tiempo de inicio a la deambulación, el tiempo de tolerancia a la dieta sólida, el tiempo hasta el primer evacuado intestinal, la duración de la estadía hospitalaria, las complicaciones generales o la tasa de readmisión entre los grupos. No hubo resultados adversos relacionados con el tratamiento.LIMITACIONES:Este estudio no fue controlado con placebo ni de manera cegada.CONCLUSIONES:Este primer estudio prospectivo y randomizado que comparó el bloqueo del plano de los músculos transversos del abdomen por vía laparoscópica, utilizando Bupivacaína liposomal o Bupivacaína con Adrenalina y Dexametasona, demostró que el bloqueo de Bupivacaína liposomal no proporciona ni mejor analgesia ni un efecto mas prolongado.Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B533.

Effect of liposomal bupivacaine on opioid requirements and length of stay in colorectal enhanced recovery pathways: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

AIM

Reducing postoperative opioid consumption is a key aim of enhanced recovery after colorectal surgery protocols. Potential solutions include anaesthetic techniques such as local infiltration of anaesthetic agents or transversus abdominis plane (TAP) blocks. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of liposomal bupivacaine (LB) for colorectal resections, across a variety of anaesthetic techniques.

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus and Embase databases were searched for relevant studies assessing LB, administered by any anaesthetic technique. The primary outcome was postoperative morphine consumed (milligrams) and the secondary outcome was length of stay (days). A Bayesian network meta-analysis comparing LB versus non-LB analgesia was performed alongside meta-regression for different surgical approaches.

RESULTS

Twelve trials were included, with a total of 2512 patients. LB-based wound infiltration was most likely to reduce length of stay followed by TAP block with LB (sum under the cumulative ranking [SUCRA] 85.55 and 70.26, respectively). TAP block with LB was most likely to reduce morphine requirements, followed by wound infiltration with LB (SUCRA 83.94 and 75.73, respectively). Compared to standard analgesia, LB-based wound infiltration reduced morphine usage (mean difference 36.64 mg, 95% credibility interval 15.64-59.20) and length of stay (mean difference 1.79 days, 95% credibility interval 0.59-3.81). On meta-regression, the findings held for minimally invasive surgery only.

CONCLUSION

Although LB-based interventions were associated with reduced postoperative morphine requirements and length of stay in this network meta-analysis, the confidence in these estimates was graded as very low. Further well-executed trials are required before LB can be recommended as a first-line agent.

The Efficacy of Liposomal Bupivacaine On Postoperative Pain Following Abdominal Wall Reconstruction: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To study the efficacy of liposomal bupivacaine on postoperative opioid requirement and pain following abdominal wall reconstruction.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Despite the widespread use of liposomal bupivacaine in transversus abdominis plane block, there is inadequate evidence demonstrating its efficacy in open abdominal wall reconstruction. We hypothesized that liposomal bupivacaine plane block would result in decreased opioid requirements compared to placebo in the first 72 hours after surgery.

METHODS

This was a single-center double-blind, placebo-controlled prospective study conducted between July 2018 and November 2019. Adult patients (at least 18 years of age) undergoing open, elective, ventral hernia repairs with mesh placed in the retromuscular position were enrolled. Patients were randomized to surgeon-performed transversus abdominis plane block with liposomal bupivacaine, simple bupivacaine, or normal saline (placebo). The main outcome was opioid requirements in the first 72 hours after surgery. Secondary outcomes included total inpatient opioid use, pain scores determined using a 100 mm visual analog scale, length of hospital stay, and patient-reported quality of life.

RESULTS

Of the 164 patients that were included in the analysis, 57 patients received liposomal bupivacaine, 55 patients received simple bupivacaine and 52 received placebo. There were no differences in the total opioid used in the first 72 hours after surgery as measured by morphine milligram equivalents when liposomal bupivacaine was compared to simple bupivacaine and placebo (325 ± 225 vs. 350 ± 284 vs. 310 ± 272, respectively, p = 0.725). Similarly, there were no differences in total inpatient opioid use, pain scores, length of stay, and patient-reported quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

There are no apparent clinical benefits to using liposomal bupivacaine transversus abdominis plane block when compared to simple bupivacaine and placebo for open abdominal wall reconstruction.

Opioid-Sparing Effect of Liposomal Bupivacaine and Intravenous Acetaminophen in Colorectal Surgery

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated the opioid-sparing effect of liposomal bupivacaine and intravenous acetaminophen in colorectal surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was a retrospective, 2 × 2 factorial cohort conducted at an academic medical center from May 2016 to February 2018. Patients undergoing open or minimally invasive colorectal resection were included. Exclusion criteria were age <18 y, surgery after second hospital day, ostomy, and allergy to acetaminophen, opioids, or bupivacaine. Intraoperative liposomal bupivacaine and intravenous acetaminophen administration within 18 h after surgery were evaluated. The primary outcome was intravenous morphine milligram equivalents administered within 24 h after surgery. A linear regression model adjusted for American Society of Anesthesiologists score, enhanced recovery after surgery management, open surgery, opioid use before surgery, and height was used for the primary analysis.

RESULTS

Among 486 included patients, 193 received both liposomal bupivacaine and intravenous acetaminophen, 93 received liposomal bupivacaine only, 104 received intravenous acetaminophen only, and 96 did not receive either. On average, patients received 21 (SD = 31) morphine equivalents over 24 h. Intraoperative liposomal bupivacaine was associated with a reduction of morphine equivalents (adjusted change -11, 95% CI -17 to -6), but intravenous acetaminophen was not (2, 95% CI -3 to 7). Intraoperative liposomal bupivacaine was associated with a reduction of length of stay (adjusted change = -1.2 d, 95% CI -2.1 to -0.3), but intravenous acetaminophen was not (adjusted change = 1.5 d, 95% CI 0.7 to 2.2).

CONCLUSIONS

Liposomal bupivacaine was associated with a significant reduction of opioid use within 24 h after colorectal surgery, but intravenous acetaminophen was not.

Analgesic efficacy of pre-emptive local wound infiltration plus laparoscopic-assisted transversus abdominis plane block versus wound infiltration in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal resection: results from a randomized, multicenter, single-blind, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block is considered a reliable locoregional technique for pain control after laparoscopic colorectal surgery. However, no clear benefit of TAP block over wound infiltration has been demonstrated by the current literature. This multicenter randomized clinical trial tested the non-inferiority of wound infiltration (WI) compared to WI plus laparoscopic-assisted TAP block (L-TAP).

METHODS

All patients with colorectal cancer and diverticular disease scheduled for laparoscopic resection at the Division of General and Hepatobiliary Surgery, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy and at the Colorectal Cancer Center, Kyungpook National University Medical Center, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea, between April 2018 and March 2019 were considered for the trial. Patients were randomly allocated to either the WI group or the WI plus L-TAP group in a 1:1 allocation ratio. In total, 108 patients entered the study and 102 patients were analyzed; 50 patients received WI plus L-TAP and 52 patients received WI. The primary end point was the efficacy in pain control at 6 h measured according to Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). Secondary aims evaluated pain control at 12, 24, 48 and 72 h and other short-term results related to pain management.

RESULTS

Estimation of pain intensity at 6 h was comparable between the two groups (p = 0.16) with a mean (95% CI) difference in pain scores of 0.94 (- 0.13 to 2.02). No differences in pain scores were observed at other interval times or considering analgesic consumption, return of bowel function, postoperative complications and length of hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that adding TAP block to WI does not affect pain control, amount of analgesics and other short-term outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03376048 ( https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ).

Opioid Prescriptions at Hospital Discharge Are Associated With More Postdischarge Healthcare Utilization

Background

Many patients use opioids for nonmalignant pain, and opioid use in the general population has been associated with poor long‐term outcomes. The use of high‐risk medications, including opioid analgesics, may increase the risk of unplanned healthcare utilization.

Methods and Results

We performed a nested evaluation in the VICS (Vanderbilt Inpatient Cohort Study) (N=3000) on patients with an admitting diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome and/or acute decompensated heart failure. Patient enrollment occurred from October 2011 until December 2015 and involved a single investigational site, Vanderbilt University Medical Center (Nashville, TN). Of the 2495 eligible patients, 501 (20%) were discharged with an opioid prescription and were predominantly white and men, with a median age of 59 (interquartile range, 53–67) years. Our primary outcome was unplanned healthcare utilization, which included emergency department presentation or readmission. Secondary outcomes included mortality and a composite of planned utilization behaviors: cardiac rehabilitation and provider follow‐up within 30 days. Cox proportional hazards models did not show a statistically significant association with increased unplanned utilization (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.87–1.28) or mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.84–1.39), compared with those without opioids at discharge. Patients discharged with opioids were less likely to complete planned healthcare utilization (adjusted odds ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.52–0.91).

Conclusions

There are decreased odds of planned healthcare utilization among patients with acute coronary syndrome and acute decompensated heart failure discharged with opioid medication. It is imperative to understand how opioid use can affect a patient's relationship with the healthcare system.

Reducing the pain: A cost-effectiveness analysis of transversus abdominis plane block using liposomal bupivacaine for outpatient laparoscopic ventral hernia repair

Background

Transversus abdominis plane block with liposomal bupivacaine has been studied as an effective method of reducing the need for postoperative opioids and increasing same-day discharge rates. However, less is known about the cost-effectiveness of this strategy relative to opioids alone for hernia repair. We performed an economic evaluation of these strategies using a computer simulation model.

Methods

A decision tree was constructed to determine cost-effectiveness as measured by incremental cost-effectiveness ratios per quality-adjusted life-year. Base-case costs, quality-adjusted life-year values, and probabilities were derived from published studies and Medicare fee schedules. For input parameters for which we could not find values in the published literature, we used expert opinion. A 1-month time horizon was selected to focus on the immediate postoperative period. Finally, we performed 1-way, 2-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

Results

The liposomal bupivacaine transversus abdominis plane block was a dominant strategy yielding a $456.75 decrease in cost and an 0.1 increase in quality-adjusted life-years relative to opioids alone. In 1-way sensitivity analysis of cost incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, values were most sensitive to variations in the amount saved by same-day discharge and the cost of bupivacaine. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, transversus abdominis plane strategy was cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/quality-adjusted life-year in 94.5% of iterations and at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year in 97.1% of iterations.

Conclusion

The use of liposomal bupivacaine transversus abdominis plane block resulted in cost savings and improved quality-adjusted life-years in base-case analyses and was cost-effective at conventional willingness-to-pay thresholds in the majority of iterations in probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

•

A decision tree was constructed to determine cost-effectiveness as measured by incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY).

•

The liposomal bupivacaine TAP block was a dominant strategy yielding a $456.75 decrease in cost and an 0.1 increase in QALYs relative to opioids alone.

•

In 1-way sensitivity analysis of cost, ICER values were most sensitive to variations in the amount saved by SDD and the cost of bupivacaine.

•

In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, TAP strategy was cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY in 94.5% of iterations and pay threshold of $100,000/QALY in 97.1% of iterations.

Effects of a metabolic optimized fast track concept (MOFA) on bowel function and recovery after surgery in patients undergoing elective colon or liver resection: a randomized controlled trial

Background

Enhanced recovery after surgery programs (ERAS) using thoracic epidural anesthesia and perioperative patient conditioning with omega-3 fatty acids (n3FA), glucose control (GC) and on-demand fluid therapy, respectively, showed beneficial effects. In the MOFA- study these components were used together in patients undergoing colon or liver surgery. We hypothesized that the use of a perioperative MOFA program improves intestine function represented as time to the first postoperative bowel movement in adult patients compared to standard ERAS.

Methods

After BfArM and IRB approval 100 patients were enrolled in this prospective randomized controlled trial. All patients received ERAS therapy (control). In addition, the MOFA group received 0.2 g/kg fish oil (Omegaven®), preoperatively, followed by a 48 h continuous infusion of 0.2 g/kg/d n3FA; and GC was kept below < 8 mmol/L. Pre- and postoperatively energy drinks were administered.

Results

As compared to control group the MOFA concept resulted in an earlier onset of flatulence by 14 h (46.6 ± 25.7, 32.0 ± 17.9, p = 0.030, hours, control vs. MOFA, respectively). Effects on onset of bowel movement were not observed (74.5 ± 30.4, 66.4 ± 29.2, p = 0.163, hours, control vs. MOFA, respectively). The disease severity (SAPS II score; p = 0.720) as well as deployment of resources (TISS 28 score, p = 0.709) did not differ between groups. No statistic significant difference between MOFA and control group regarding inflammation, impairment of coagulation, length of hospital stay or incidence of postoperative surgical complications were observed.

Conclusions

The MOFA concept did not result in an improvement of intestine function or faster recovery after elective colon or liver surgery compared to standard ERAS therapy. Omega-3 fatty acids showed no impairment of coagulation or improved resolution of inflammation. Further trials in a larger patient collective are needed to investigate potential beneficial effects of omega-3 fatty acids in abdominal surgery.

Trial registration

This trial was prospectively registered at the European Union Clinical Trials Register (EuDraCT 2005–004814-33, date: 10-05-2005, https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/search?query=2005-004814-33+).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12871-019-0823-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Liposomal Bupivacaine Transversus Abdominis Plane Block Versus Epidural Analgesia in a Colon and Rectal Surgery Enhanced Recovery Pathway: A Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Multimodal pain management is an integral part of enhanced recovery pathways. The most effective pain management strategies have not been determined.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare liposomal bupivacaine transversus abdominis plane block with epidural analgesia in patients undergoing colorectal surgery.

DESIGN

This is a single-institution, open-label randomized (1:1) trial.

SETTING

This study compared liposomal bupivacaine transversus abdominis plane block with epidural analgesia in patients undergoing elective open and minimally invasive colorectal surgery in an enhanced recovery pathway.

PATIENTS

Two hundred were enrolled. Following randomization, allocation, and follow-up, there were 92 patients with transversus abdominis plane block and 87 patients with epidural analgesia available for analysis.

INTERVENTIONS

The interventions comprised liposomal bupivacaine transversus abdominis plane block versus epidural analgesia.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes measured were numeric pain scores and the overall benefit of analgesia scores.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in the Numeric Pain Scale and Overall Benefit of Analgesia Score between groups. Time trend analysis revealed that patients with transversus abdominis plane block had higher numeric pain scores on the day of surgery, but that the relationship was reversed later in the postoperative period. Opioid use was significantly less in the transversus abdominis plane block group (206.84 mg vs 98.29 mg, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in time to GI recovery, hospital length of stay, and postoperative complications. Cost was considerably more for the epidural analgesia group.

LIMITATIONS

This study was conducted at a single institution.

CONCLUSIONS

This randomized trial shows that perioperative pain management with liposomal bupivacaine transversus abdominis plane block is as effective as epidural analgesia and is associated with less opioid use and less cost. These data and the more favorable risk profile suggest that liposomal bupivacaine transversus abdominis plane block is a viable multimodal perioperative pain management option for this patient population in an established enhanced recovery pathway.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

http://www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02591407). See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A737.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of liposomal bupivacaine in colorectal resections

Objective: The objective of the study was to systematically investigate the outcomes of Liposomal Bupivacaine following major colorectal resections. Patients and methods: We conducted a comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Medline, Google scholar, Cochrane Central Registry and clinical trials.gov databases through May 2017 for studies published regarding liposomal bupivacaine. Studies were filtered based on relevance to perioperative analgesia in colorectal resections. Data comparing type of study, techniques of resection, mode of administration of liposomal bupivacaine, details of control group, outcomes were collected. Results: A total of 1008 patients from seven studies were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The studies were mostly retrospective or prospective cohort studies with one randomized controlled trial (RCT). Meta-analysis showed that liposomal bupivacaine was associated with decreased length of stay, standard mean difference in days (SMD) - 0.34, (95% confidence intervals [CI] - 0.56, -0.13, p = .001) and decreased IV opioid use (expressed as intravenous morphine equivalent in milligrams) in the first 48-72 h, SMD -0.49 (95% CI -0.69, -0.28, p < .00001). Pain scores were also significantly low in patients who received liposomal bupivacaine, SMD -0.56 (95% CI -1.07, -0.06, p = .03]. There was no significant difference in hospitalization costs between the two groups. Conclusions: Use of liposomal bupivacaine is associated with decreased IV opioid use, length of stay and lower pain scores. However, our data needs to be interpreted cautiously given the relative paucity of randomized controlled trials.

Port Placement for Laparoscopic Colonic Resections - Video Vignette

Laparoscopic colonic resections often require manipulation and surgical action in all abdominal quadrants. Port placement, a fundamental part of a successful procedure, often varies widely among surgeons and is currently dictated by individual experience and preference. This variability may be suboptimal for the operation at hand, can be confusing for trainees and many times provide inadequate working posture for the surgeons, resulting in discomfort due to muscular fatigue in the hands, arms, shoulders and cervical spine. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.