Are Foley catheters needed after minimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum?

Postoperative management of pediatric patients undergoing minimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum: Where are we now?

PURPOSE

Minimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum (MIRPE) often leads to a painful and challenging recovery period. This study aims to describe the postoperative management of pediatric patients undergoing MIRPE and compare postoperative outcomes between patients using different routes of postoperative analgesia.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review of pediatric patients who underwent MIRPE from July 2003 to September 2019 at a single pediatric tertiary care center. Data on pain management and course of hospital stay were ascertained. Descriptive statistics, Mann-Whitney U and Pearson Chi-Square tests were used to analyze data. A p-value <0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

Of the 115 patients identified, 58 (50.4%) managed pain postoperatively using thoracic epidural and 57 (49.6%) used intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IVPCA). The transition from the predominant use of epidural to IVPCA for MIRPE occurred between 2012 and 2013. Higher pain scores were reported by the IVPCA group at 6 h (p<0.001) and 12 h (p<0.001) postoperative. Patients using IVPCA had lower postoperative opioid consumption (p<0.001) and switched to oral opioids sooner than the epidural group (p<0.001). Fewer patients in the IVPCA group required urinary catheterization (p<0.001). Patients using IVPCA had a shorter hospital stay (4 days [IQR 4-5]) compared to the epidural group (5.5 [IQR 5-6]; p<0.001). Readmission was comparable at 3.48% in the total sample.

CONCLUSION

Patients using intravenous patient-controlled analgesia reported higher pain scores however, this route of analgesia was associated with shorter hospital stay. Prospective studies designed to address moderator variables are required to confirm findings and develop standardized recovery protocols.

Monitoring of micturition and bladder volumes can replace routine indwelling urinary catheters in children receiving intravenous opioids: a prospective cohort study

In this prospective observational study, the incidence, risk factors and the time to event of urinary retention in children receiving intravenous opioids were evaluated. Urinary retention was confirmed by ultrasound following the inability to void for 8 h or earlier in patients experiencing discomfort. In total, 207 opioid episodes were evaluated, of which 199 (96.1%) concerned morphine, in 187 children admitted to the pediatric ward or pediatric intensive care unit. The median age was 7.6 years (IQR 0.9-13.8), and 123 (59.4%) were male. The incidence of urinary retention was 31/207 (15.0%) opioid episodes, in which 14/32 (43.8%) patients received continuous sedation for mechanical ventilation and 17/175 (9.7%) received no sedation. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed a significant association with continuous sedation (OR 6.8, 95% CI 2.7-17.4, p 0.001) and highest daily fluid intake (OR 0.8 per 10% deviation of normal intake, 95% CI 0.7-0.9, p 0.01). Opioid dosage, age and gender were not significantly associated. Most events (28/31, 90.3%) occurred within 24 h.Conclusion: The incidence of urinary retention in children receiving intravenous opioids is low, indicating that placement of urinary catheters is not routinely necessary in these patients. However, micturition and bladder volumes must be monitored, especially in sedated children and during the first 24 h of opioid administration. What is Known: • Great variation exists in the routine placement of urinary catheters in children receiving IV opioids. What is New: • Confirmed by ultrasound, the incidence of urinary retention in children receiving intravenous opioids in this study was 15%, indicating that placement of urinary catheters is not routinely necessary in these patients. • Children receiving continuous sedation for invasive mechanical ventilation showed a sevenfold greater risk of developing urinary retention than non-sedated patients.

Withholding Urinary Catheters in Children Receiving Patient-Controlled Analgesia for Appendicitis

BACKGROUND

In some institutions, urinary catheters (UCs) have been placed in all patients receiving opioid patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) because of the increased incidence of urinary retention. Our institutional data demonstrated no UC replacements in 48 children who had PCA for perforated appendicitis who had their catheters removed before discontinuation of the PCA. As part of a quality improvement initiative, we discontinued the practice of requiring UC with PCA for perforated appendicitis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospective list of patients with perforated appendicitis was maintained. Data were gathered regarding 60 consecutive patients. UC placement was allowed for specific indications including urinary retention and surgeon discretion.

RESULTS

Sixteen patients (27%) received a UC with 14 of these being placed in the operating room (OR). Two UCs were placed outside the OR for urinary retention. Patients who underwent UC placement in the OR weighed significantly more than those who did not (33 versus 42 kg, P = 0.05). No patients required replacement of the catheter once removed. There were no postoperative urinary tract infections. Median PCA duration was 68 h (50, 98) for patients with UC placed in the OR compared with 60 h (47, 78) (P = 0.42). Median postoperative length of stay for patients with UC placed in the OR was 95 h (76, 140) compared with 90 h (70, 113) (P = 0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

UC can be withheld from patients with perforated appendicitis who are placed on PCA with a very low placement rate. UC placement at time of operation did not lengthen time receiving PCA or length of stay.