Reduction in opioid use and postoperative pain scores after elective laparotomy with implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery protocol on a gynecologic oncology service

Variation in Intraoperative Opioid Administration by Patient, Clinician, and Hospital Contribution

Importance

The opioid crisis has led to scrutiny of opioid exposures before and after surgical procedures. However, the extent of intraoperative opioid variation and the sources and contributing factors associated with it are unclear.

Objective

To analyze attributable variance of intraoperative opioid administration for patient-, clinician-, and hospital-level factors across surgical and analgesic categories.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study was conducted using electronic health record data collected from a national quality collaborative database. The cohort consisted of 1 011 268 surgical procedures at 46 hospitals across the US involving 2911 anesthesiologists, 2291 surgeons, and 8 surgical and 4 analgesic categories. Patients without ambulatory opioid prescriptions or use history undergoing an elective surgical procedure between January 1, 2014, and September 11, 2020, were included. Data were analyzed from January 2022 to July 2023.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The rate of intraoperative opioid administration as a continuous measure of oral morphine equivalents (OMEs) normalized to patient weight and case duration was assessed. Attributable variance was estimated in a hierarchical structure using patient, clinician, and hospital levels and adjusted intraclass correlations (ICCs).

Results

Among 1 011 268 surgical procedures (mean [SD] age of patients, 55.9 [16.2] years; 604 057 surgical procedures among females [59.7%]), the mean (SD) rate of intraoperative opioid administration was 0.3 [0.2] OME/kg/h. Together, clinician and hospital levels contributed to 20% or more of variability in intraoperative opioid administration across all analgesic and surgical categories (adjusting for surgical or analgesic category, ICCs ranged from 0.57-0.79 for the patient, 0.04-0.22 for the anesthesiologist, and 0.09-0.26 for the hospital, with the lowest ICC combination 0.21 for anesthesiologist and hosptial [0.12 for the anesthesiologist and 0.09 for the hospital for opioid only]). Comparing the 95th and fifth percentiles of opioid administration, variation was 3.3-fold among anesthesiologists (surgical category range, 2.7-fold to 7.7-fold), 4.3-fold among surgeons (surgical category range, 3.4-fold to 8.0-fold), and 2.2-fold among hospitals (surgical category range, 2.2-fold to 4.3-fold). When adjusted for patient and surgical characteristics, mean (square error mean) administration was highest for cardiac surgical procedures (0.54 [0.56-0.52 OME/kg/h]) and lowest for orthopedic knee surgical procedures (0.19 [0.17-0.21 OME/kg/h]). Peripheral and neuraxial analgesic techniques were associated with reduced administration in orthopedic hip (51.6% [95% CI, 51.4%-51.8%] and 60.7% [95% CI, 60.5%-60.9%] reductions, respectively) and knee (48.3% [95% CI, 48.0%-48.5%] and 60.9% [95% CI, 60.7%-61.1%] reductions, respectively) surgical procedures, but reduction was less substantial in other surgical categories (mean [SD] reduction, 13.3% [8.8%] for peripheral and 17.6% [9.9%] for neuraxial techniques).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study, clinician-, hospital-, and patient-level factors had important contributions to substantial variation of opioid administrations during surgical procedures. These findings suggest the need for a broadened focus across multiple factors when developing and implementing opioid-reducing strategies in collaborative quality-improvement programs.

Guideline No. 443a: Opioid Use Throughout Women's Lifespan: Fertility, Contraception, Chronic Pain, and Menopause

OBJECTIVE

To provide health care providers with the best evidence on opioid use and women's health. Areas of focus include general patterns of opioid use and safety of use; care of women who use opioids; stigma, screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment; hormonal regulation; reproductive health, including contraception and fertility; sexual function; perimenopausal and menopausal symptoms; and chronic pelvic pain syndromes.

TARGET POPULATION

The target population includes all women currently using or contemplating using opioids.

OUTCOMES

Open, evidence-informed dialogue about opioid use will lead to improvements in patient care and overall health.

BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS

Exploring opioid use through a trauma-informed approach offers the health care provider and patient with an opportunity to build a strong, collaborative, and therapeutic alliance. This alliance empowers women to make informed choices about their own care. It also allows for the diagnosis and possible treatment of opioid use disorders. Use should not be stigmatized, as stigma leads to poor "partnered care" (i.e., the partnership between the patient and care provider). Therefore, health care providers and patients must understand the potential role of opioids in women's health (both positive and negative) to ensure informed decision-making.

EVIDENCE

A literature search was designed and carried out in PubMed and the Cochrane Library databases from August 2018 until March 2023 using following MeSH terms and keywords (and variants): opioids, illicit drugs, fertility, pregnancy, breastfeeding, and aging.

VALIDATION METHODS

The authors rated the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. See online Appendix A (Tables A1 for definitions and A2 for interpretations of strong and weak recommendations).

INTENDED AUDIENCE

All health care providers who care for women.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

Opioid use can affect female reproductive function; health care providers and patients must understand the potential role of opioids in women's health to ensure informed decision-making.

SUMMARY STATEMENTS

RECOMMENDATIONS.

Effect of transversus abdominis plane block on postoperative outcomes in gynecologic oncology patients managed on an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery pathway

OBJECTIVES

To characterize the effect of transversus abdominis plane (TAP) blocks on post-operative outcomes in patients undergoing laparotomy for gynecologic malignancy.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study assessed patients undergoing laparotomy in 2016-2017 and 2020 in Alberta, Canada. The primary outcome was opioid consumption in oral morphine milligram equivalent (MME). Secondary outcomes included maximum pain scores, length of stay, and patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) use. Outcomes were compared using t-test with subgroup analysis by NSAID use. Multivariate regression modelling was performed for potential confounders.

RESULTS

Data was collected on 956 patients; 828 received a TAP block, 128 did not. Opioid use in the first 24 h was lower in the TAP block group (35.9 mg MME vs 44.5 mg MME, p = 0.0294), without any increase in pain scores, this did not remain significant after regression analysis. Patients with TAP blocks had significant reduced mean length of stay (3.2 days vs. 5.0 days, p < 0.0001), and PCA use (19.9% vs. 56.25%, p < 0.0001). On subgroup analysis of patients that did not receive NSAIDs (n = 160), mean opioid use was decreased in those patients with TAP blocks compared to those without TAP blocks in the first 24 h (36.1 mg vs. 61.2 mg, p = 0.0017), and at 24 to 48 h (16.3 mg vs. 51.0 mg, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgeon-administered TAP blocks were associated with decreased length of stay and post-operative opioid use in patients not receiving scheduled NSAIDs. This decrease in opioid use was not associated with any increase in average or maximum pain scores.

Enhanced Recovery after Pelvic Organ Prolapse Surgery

The objective of this study was to review on the influence of enhanced rehabilitation in pelvic organ prolapse surgery outcomes, specifically focusing on length of hospital stay, hospital costs, pain, morbidity, and patient satisfaction. Following the PRISMA model and using PubMed as a source, eight articles pertaining to prolapse surgery and two articles concerning vaginal hysterectomies were selected, all published between 2014 and 2021. These studies revealed no significant difference in terms of operating time, intra- and post-operative complications, intra-operative blood loss and post-operative pain scores before and after the introduction of the ERAS program. Only one study noted a difference in readmission rates. There was, however, a noticeable decrease in intra-operative and post-operative intravenous intakes, opioid administration, length of stay, and overall hospital costs with the adoption of ERAS. Additionally, with ERAS, patients were able to mobilize more rapidly, and overall patient satisfaction significantly improved.

Effect of continuous post-operative lidocaine infusion in an enhanced recovery program on opioid use following gynecologic oncology surgery

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effectiveness of implementing an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) program, including continuous intraoperative and postoperative intravenous (IV) lidocaine infusion, on perioperative opioid use.

METHODS

This was a single-institution retrospective pre- post- cohort study. Consecutive patients undergoing planned laparotomy for known or potential gynecologic malignancy were identified after implementation of an ERAS program and compared to a historical cohort. Opioid use was calculated as morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs). Cohorts were compared using bivariate tests.

RESULTS

A total of 215 patients were included in the final analysis, 101 patients received surgery before ERAS implementation and 114 received surgery after. A reduction in total opioid use was observed in ERAS patients compared with historical controls (MME 26.5 [9.6-60.8] versus 194.5 [123.8-266.8], p<0.001). Length of stay (LOS) was reduced by 25% in the ERAS cohort (median 3 days, range 2-26, versus 4 days, range 2-18; p<0.001). Within the ERAS cohort, 64.9% received IV lidocaine for the planned 48 hours, and 5.6% had the infusion discontinued early. Within the ERAS cohort, patients who received IV lidocaine infusion used less opioids compared to those who did not (median 16.9, range 5.6-55.1, versus 46.2, range 23.2-76.1; p<0.002).

CONCLUSION

An ERAS program including a continuous IV lidocaine infusion as the opioid-sparing analgesic strategy was noted to be safe and effective, leading to decreased opioid consumption and LOS compared with a historic cohort. Additionally, lidocaine infusion was noted to decrease opioid consumption even among patients already receiving other ERAS interventions.

Quantifying the impact of reduced opioid use in patients after emergency laparotomy

BACKGROUND

Emergency laparotomies have high rates of morbidity and mortality. The evaluation and management of pain are crucial, as poorly managed pain may contribute to postoperative complications and increase the risk of mortality. This study aims to describe the relationship between opioid use and opioid-related adverse effects and identify what constitutes appropriate dose reductions to elicit clinically relevant benefits.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, observational study of patients presenting for emergency laparotomy due to trauma from 2014 to 2018. The primary objective was to define clinical outcomes that may be significantly affected by changes in milligrams of morphine equivalent during the first 72 hours postoperatively; additionally, we sought to quantify the approximate differences in morphine equivalent that correlate with clinically meaningful outcomes such as hospital length of stay, pain scores, and time to first bowel movement. For descriptive summaries, patients were categorized into low, moderate, and high groups based on morphine equivalent requirements of 0 to 25, 25 to 50, and >50, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 102 (35%), 84 (29%), and 105 (36%) patients were stratified into the low, moderate, and high groups, respectively. Mean pain scores for postoperative days 0 to 3 (P = .034), time to first bowel movement (P = .002), and nasogastric tube duration (P = .003) were the clinical outcomes found to be significantly associated with morphine equivalent. Estimated clinically significant reductions in morphine equivalent for these outcomes ranged from 194 to 464.

CONCLUSION

Clinical outcomes, such as pain scores, and opioid-related adverse effects, such as time to first bowel movement and nasogastric tube duration, may be linked with the amount of opioids used.

Does Liposomal Bupivacaine Decrease Postoperative Opioid Use in Conjunction with an Enhanced Recovery After Bariatric Surgery Pathway? A Prospective, Double-blind, Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Minimization of opiate use is an important focus in the setting of the severe national opioid crisis. This study evaluated the role of liposomal bupivacaine (LB) in decreasing postoperative opioid use before and after implementation of a bariatric enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program.

METHODS

We performed an IRB-approved, prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial of LB versus plain bupivacaine (PB) in patients undergoing elective, minimally invasive, weight loss surgery at a comprehensive metabolic and bariatric surgery program from November 2017 to December 2019. Primary outcomes were postoperative morphine milligram equivalents per day (MME/day) and average subjective inpatient pain level. Secondary outcomes were length of hospital stay (LOS) and adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

Of the 100 patients enrolled, 78 were randomly assigned to LB (42) or PB (36). Thirty-four received the ERAS protocol, and 44 did not. The mean MME/day use did not differ significantly by the bupivacaine group [median, IQR PB: 20.3 (40.95); LB: 33.0 (42.9); p = .314], but it did differ by the ERAS group [median, IQR no ERAS 33.2 (47.1), ERAS 24.0 (34.0); p = .049]. Length of stay, inpatient pain score, and AEs did not differ significantly by either the bupivacaine or the ERAS group.

CONCLUSIONS

In our study, liposomal bupivacaine did not significantly decrease postoperative opioid use either before implementation of ERAS or as part of an enhanced recovery after surgery program for minimally invasive bariatric surgery procedures.

Addition of preoperative transversus abdominis plane block to multimodal analgesia in open gynecological surgery: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block can provide effective analgesia for abdominal surgery. However, it was questionable whether TAP had additional effect in the context of multimodal analgesia (MMA). Therefore, this study aimed to assess the additional analgesic effect of preoperative TAP block when added to MMA protocol in open gynecological surgery.

METHODS

In this prospective, randomized-controlled trial, 64 patients scheduled for open gynecological surgery were randomized to receive preoperative TAP block (Study group, n = 32) or placebo (Control group, n = 32) in addition to MMA protocol comprising dexamethasone, acetaminophen, flurbiprofen and celecoxib, and rescued morphine analgesia. The primary outcome was rescued morphine within 24 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes included pain scores, adverse effects, quality of recovery measured by 40-item quality of recovery questionnaire score (QoR-40) at 24 h, and quality of life measured with short-form health survey (SF - 36) on postoperative day (POD) 30.

RESULTS

The Study group had less rescued morphine than the control group within 24 h [5 (2-9) vs. 8.5 (5-12.8) mg, P = 0.013]. The Study group had lower pain scores at 1 h [3 (2-4) vs. 4 (3-5), P = 0.007], 2 h [3 (2-4) vs. 3.5 (3-5), P = 0.010] and 6 h [3 (2-3) vs. 3 (2.3-4), P = 0.028], lower incidence of nausea at 48 h (25.8% vs. 50%, P = 0.039), and higher satisfaction score [10 (10-10) vs. 10 (8-10), P = 0.041]. The SF-36 bodily pain score on POD 30 was higher in the Study group (59 ± 13 vs. 49 ± 16, P = 0.023).

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative TAP block had additional analgesic effect for open gynecological surgery when used as part of multimodal analgesia. Rescued morphine within 24 h was significantly reduced and the SF-36 bodily pain dimension at 30 days after surgery was significantly improved.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

www.chictr.org.cn (ChiCTR2000040343, on Nov 28 2020).

Relationship between the Use of Fentanyl-Based Intravenous Patient-Controlled Analgesia and Clinically Significant Events in Laparoscopic Gynecological Surgery: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study

Background: This study examined the relationship between the use of fentanyl-based intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (ivPCA) and the incidence of a clinically significant event (CSE), while considering both the analgesic effects and side effects in laparoscopic gynecological surgery. Methods: This study included 816 patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecological surgery under general anesthesia at Kyoto University Hospital between 2012 and 2018. The primary exposure was the use of fentanyl-based ivPCA. We defined an outcome measure—CSE—that integrates severe wound pain and vomiting assumed to negatively affect patient recovery. We performed multivariable logistic regression analysis to assess the independent relationship between ivPCA use and CSE. Results: Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that fentanyl-based ivPCA was independently associated with increased CSE (adjusted odds ratio (95% confidence interval): 1.80 (1.24−2.61), p = 0.002). Use of ivPCA was associated with a reduced incidence of postoperative severe wound pain (adjusted odds ratio (95% confidence interval): 0.50 (0.27−0.90), p = 0.022), but was also associated with an increased incidence of vomiting (adjusted odds ratio (95% confidence interval): 2.65 (1.79−3.92), p < 0.001). Conclusion: The use of fentanyl-based ivPCA in laparoscopic gynecological surgery is associated with increased CSE.

Perioperative enhanced recovery programmes for women with gynaecological cancers

BACKGROUND

Gynaecological cancers account for 15% of newly diagnosed cancer cases in women worldwide. In recent years, increasing evidence demonstrates that traditional approaches in perioperative care practice may be unnecessary or even harmful. The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programme has therefore been gradually introduced to replace traditional approaches in perioperative care. There is an emerging body of evidence outside of gynaecological cancer which has identified that perioperative ERAS programmes decrease length of postoperative hospital stay and reduce medical expenditure without increasing complication rates, mortality, and readmission rates. However, evidence-based decisions on perioperative care practice for major surgery in gynaecological cancer are limited. This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in Issue 3, 2015.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the beneficial and harmful effects of perioperative enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programmes in gynaecological cancer care on length of postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications, mortality, readmission, bowel functions, quality of life, participant satisfaction, and economic outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases for the literature published from inception until October 2020: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, AMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine), CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), Scopus, and four Chinese databases including the China Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), WanFang Data, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Weipu Database. We also searched four trial registration platforms and grey literature databases for ongoing and unpublished trials, and handsearched the reference lists of included trials and accessible reviews for relevant references.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared ERAS programmes for perioperative care in women with gynaecological cancer to traditional care strategies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened studies for inclusion, extracted the data and assessed methodological quality for each included study using the Cochrane risk of bias tool 2 (RoB 2) for RCTs. Using Review Manager 5.4, we pooled the data and calculated the measures of treatment effect with the mean difference (MD), standardised mean difference (SMD), and risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) to reflect the summary estimates and uncertainty.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven RCTs with 747 participants. All studies compared ERAS programmes with traditional care strategies for women with gynaecological cancer. We had substantial concerns regarding the methodological quality of the included studies since the included RCTs had moderate to high risk of bias in domains including randomisation process, deviations from intended interventions, and measurement of outcomes. ERAS programmes may reduce length of postoperative hospital stay (MD -1.71 days, 95% CI -2.59 to -0.84; I2 = 86%; 6 studies, 638 participants; low-certainty evidence). ERAS programmes may result in no difference in overall complication rates (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.05; I2 = 42%; 5 studies, 537 participants; low-certainty evidence). The certainty of evidence was very low regarding the effect of ERAS programmes on all-cause mortality within 30 days of discharge (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.14 to 6.68; 1 study, 99 participants). ERAS programmes may reduce readmission rates within 30 days of operation (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.90; I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 385 participants; low-certainty evidence). ERAS programmes may reduce the time to first flatus (MD -0.82 days, 95% CI -1.00 to -0.63; I2 = 35%; 4 studies, 432 participants; low-certainty evidence) and the time to first defaecation (MD -0.96 days, 95% CI -1.47 to -0.44; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 228 participants; low-certainty evidence). The studies did not report the effects of ERAS programmes on quality of life. The evidence on the effects of ERAS programmes on participant satisfaction was very uncertain due to the limited number of studies. The adoption of ERAS strategies may not increase medical expenditure, though the evidence was of very low certainty (SMD -0.22, 95% CI -0.68 to 0.25; I2 = 54%; 2 studies, 167 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low-certainty evidence suggests that ERAS programmes may shorten length of postoperative hospital stay, reduce readmissions, and facilitate postoperative bowel function recovery without compromising participant safety. Further well-conducted studies are required in order to validate the certainty of these findings.

Utilization and evolving prescribing practice of opioid and non-opioid analgesics in patients undergoing lymphadenectomy for cutaneous malignancy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Opioids are commonly prescribed following surgery and can lead to persistent opioid use. We assessed changes in prescribing practices following an opioid education initiative for patients undergoing lymphadenectomy for cutaneous malignancy.

METHODS

A single-institution retrospective study of all eligible patients (3/2016-3/2020) was performed.

RESULTS

Indications for lymphadenectomy in 328 patients were metastatic melanoma (84%), squamous cell carcinoma (10%), and Merkel cell carcinoma (5%). At discharge, non-opioid analgesics were increasingly utilized over the 4-year study period, with dramatic increases after education initiatives (32%, 42%, 59%, and 79% of pts, respectively each year; p < 0.001). Median oral morphine equivalents (OMEs) prescribed also decreased dramatically starting in year 3 (250, 238, 150, and 100 mg, respectively; p < 0.001). Patients discharged with 200 mg OMEs were less likely to also be discharged with non-opioid analgesics (40% vs. 64%. respectively, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Analgesic prescribing practices following lymphadenectomy for cutaneous malignancy improved significantly over a 4-year period, with use of non-opioids more than doubling and a 60% reduction in median OME. Opportunities exist to further increase non-opioid use and decrease opioid dissemination after lymphadenectomy for cutaneous malignancy.

Postoperative Pain Management in Enhanced Recovery Pathways

Postoperative pain is a common but often inadequately treated condition. Enhanced recovery pathways (ERPs) are increasingly being utilized to standardize perioperative care and improve outcomes. ERPs employ multimodal postoperative pain management strategies that minimize opioid use and promote recovery. While traditional opioid medications continue to play an important role in the treatment of postoperative pain, ERPs also rely on a wide range of non-opioid pharmacologic therapies as well as regional anesthesia techniques to manage pain in the postoperative setting. The evidence for the use of these interventions continues to evolve rapidly given the increasing focus on enhanced postoperative recovery. This article reviews the current evidence and knowledge gaps pertaining to commonly utilized modalities for postoperative pain management in ERPs.

Impact of a Multimodal Analgesia Protocol on Inpatient and Outpatient Opioid Use in Acute Trauma

BACKGROUND

Multimodal analgesia protocols have been implemented after elective surgery to reduce opioid use, however there is limited data on utility after polytrauma. Therefore, we investigated the impact of a multimodal analgesia protocol on inpatient and post-discharge outpatient opioid use after polytrauma.

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients admitted to a Level I trauma center between September 2017-February 2018 (prior to multimodal protocol; "pre-cohort") and October 2018-April 2019 (after multimodal protocol; "post-cohort") was performed. An outpatient controlled substance registry was utilized to capture morphine milligram equivalents (MME) and gabapentin dispensed in the 6 mo after injury.

RESULTS

620 patients were included (295 pre-cohort, 325 post-cohort). Total inpatient MME decreased from 177.5 mg-130 mg (P= 0.01) between the cohorts. Daily inpatient MME decreased from 70.8 mg-44.7 mg (P< 0.01). Intravenous hydromorphone decreased from 2 mg in the pre-cohort to 1 mg in the post-cohort (P= 0.02). Inpatient oxycodone decreased from 45 mg-30 mg (P= 0.01). Concurrently, gabapentin increased from 0 mg-400 mg in the post-cohort (P< 0.01). Patients in the post-cohort were prescribed fewer MMEs than the pre-cohort at discharge (P< 0.05). However, the number of patients prescribed gabapentin increased from 6.1%-16% (P< 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Implementation of an updated multimodal analgesia protocol decreased total MME, daily MME, hydromorphone, and oxycodone consumed while increasing gabapentin use. This suggests that while reducing opioid usage in-hospital is critical to reducing outpatient usage, multimodal pain protocols may lead to an increase in gabapentin prescriptions and utilization after discharge.

Postsurgical Opioid Prescriptions and Risk of Long-term Use: An Observational Cohort Study Across the United States

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate differences in risk of long-term opioid therapy after surgery among an opioid-naive population using varying cutoffs based on days supplied (DS), total morphine milligram equivalents (MME) dispensed, and quantity of pills (QTY) dispensed.

BACKGROUND

In response to the US opioid crisis, opioid prescription (Rx) limits have been implemented on a state-by-state basis beginning in 2016. However, there is limited evidence informing appropriate prescribing limits, and the effect of these policies on long-term opioid therapy.

METHODS

Using the MarketScan claims databases, we identified all opioid-naive patients undergoing outpatient surgery between July 1, 2006 and June 30, 2015. We identified the initial postsurgical opioid prescribed, examining the DS, total MME, and QTY dispensed. We used Poisson to estimate adjusted risk differences and risk ratios of long-term opioid use comparing those receiving larger versus smaller volume of opioids.

RESULTS

We identified 5,148,485 opioid-naive surgical patients. Overall, 55.5% received an opioid for postoperative pain, with median days supply = 5 and median total MME = 240. The proportion of patients receiving prescriptions above 7 DS increased from 11% in 2006 to 19% in 2015. Among those receiving postoperative opioids, 8% had long-term opioid use, and risk of long-term use was 1.16 times [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.10-1.25] higher among those receiving >7 days compared with those receiving ≤7 days. Those receiving >400 total MME (15% of patients) were at 1.17 times (95% CI, 1.10-1.25) the risk of long-term use compared with those receiving ≤400 MME.

CONCLUSIONS

Between 2005 and 2015, the amounts of opioids prescribed for postoperative pain increased dramatically, and receipt of larger volume of opioids was associated with increased risk of long-term opioid therapy.

Enhanced recovery pathways and patient-reported outcome measures in gynaecological oncology

Comprehensive peri-operative care for women with gynaecological malignancy is essential to ensure optimal clinical outcomes and maximise patient experience through the continuum of care. Implementation of peri-operative enhanced recovery pathways in gynaecological oncology have been repeatedly shown to improve postoperative recovery, decrease complications and reduce healthcare costs. With increasing emphasis being placed on patient-centred care in the current healthcare environment, incorporation of patient-reported outcome data collection and analysis within the enhanced recovery pathway as part of quality measurement is not only useful, but necessary. Inclusion of patient-reported outcome enhanced recovery pathway evaluation enables clinicians to capture authentic patient-reported parameters such as subtle symptoms, changes in function and multiple dimensions of well-being, directly from the source. These data guide the treatment course by encouraging shared decision-making between the patient and clinicians and provide the necessary foundation for ongoing peri-operative quality improvement efforts. Elements of the gynaecological oncology enhanced recovery pathway are divided into five phases of care: pre-admission; pre-operative; intra-operative; postoperative; and post-discharge. The development process starts with detailing each step of the patient's journey in all five phases, then identifying stakeholder groups responsible for care at each of these phases and assembling a multidisciplinary team including: gynaecologists; anaesthetists; nurses; nutritionists; physical therapists; and others, to provide input into the institutional pathway. To practically integrate patient-reported outcomes into an enhanced recovery pathway, a validated measurement tool should be incorporated into the peri-operative workflow. The ideal tool should be concise to facilitate longitudinal assessments by the clinical staff.

Comparative short-term outcomes of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program and non-ERAS traditional care in elderly patients undergoing lumbar arthrodesis: a retrospective study

Background

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program is an evidence-based improvement over non-ERAS traditional care. The aim of the present study was to analyze the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of an ERAS program in patients over 70 years undergoing lumbar arthrodesis by comparison with non-ERAS traditional care.

Methods

During January 2018 to December 2018, patients enrolled received non-ERAS traditional care, while the ERAS program was implemented from January to December 2019. Demographic characteristics, comorbidities, surgical data and postoperative recovery parameters were collected from all patients. Postoperative pain scores were evaluated by visual analog scales (VAS). The clinical outcomes were length of stay (LOS), postoperative complications and postoperative pain scores. Compliance results were also collected.

Result

A total of 127 patients were enrolled, including 67 patients in the non-ERAS traditional care group and 60 patients in the ERAS group. The demographic characteristics and comorbidities of the two groups showed no significant differences. The LOS of patients treated with ERAS program (13.6 ± 4.0 days) was significantly less than that of patients treated with non-ERAS traditional care (15.6 ± 3.9 days) (p = 0.034). Complication rate was 8.3% in the ERAS group versus 20.9% in the non-ERAS traditional care group (p = 0.048). VAS (back) in the ERAS group was significantly lower on postoperative day (POD) 1 and POD2. Postoperative recovery parameters were improved in the ERAS group. The overall compliance with the ERAS program was 94%.

Conclusions

Based on our results, ERAS program is safer and more effective for elderly patients over 70 undergoing lumbar arthrodesis than non-ERAS traditional care.

Outcomes of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in gynecologic oncology - A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the benefit of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) on length of stay (LOS), postoperative complications, 30-day readmission, and cost in gynecologic oncology.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science for all peer-reviewed cohort studies and controlled trials on ERAS involving gynecologic oncology patients. Abstracts, commentaries, non-controlled studies, and studies without specific data on gynecologic oncology patients were excluded. Meta-analysis was performed on the primary endpoint of LOS. Subgroup analyses were performed based on risk of bias of the studies included, number of ERAS elements, and ERAS compliance. Secondary endpoints were readmission rate, complications, and cost.

RESULTS

A total of 31 studies (6703 patients) were included: 5 randomized controlled trials, and 26 cohort studies. Meta-analysis of 27 studies (6345 patients) demonstrated a decrease in LOS of 1.6 days (95% confidence interval, CI 1.2-2.1) with ERAS implementation. Meta-analysis of 21 studies (4974 patients) demonstrated a 32% reduction in complications (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.55-0.83) and a 20% reduction in readmission (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.64-0.99) for ERAS patients. There was no difference in 30-day postoperative mortality (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.23-1.6) for ERAS patients compared to controls. No difference in the odds of complications or reduction in LOS was observed based on number of included ERAS elements or reported compliance with ERAS interventions. The mean cost savings for ERAS patients was $2129 USD (95% CI $712 - $3544).

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS protocols decrease LOS, complications, and cost without increasing rates of readmission or mortality in gynecologic oncology surgery. This evidence supports implementation of ERAS as standard of care in gynecologic oncology.

Enhanced recovery for obese patients undergoing gynecologic cancer surgery

OBJECTIVE

To compare post-operative length of stay and complication rates of matched obese and non-obese patients in an enhanced recovery (ERAS) program after open gynecologic cancer surgery.

METHODS

We performed an observational cohort study of patients (n=1225) undergoing open surgery from November 2014 to November 2018 at a tertiary cancer center. Patients undergoing multidisciplinary procedures, non-oncologic surgery, or procedures in addition to abdominal surgery were excluded (n=190). Obese and non-obese patients were matched by date, age, disease status, and surgical complexity. The primary outcome was post-operative length of stay. Secondary outcomes included 30-day peri-operative complications, re-operation, re-admission, opioid use, and program compliance.

RESULTS

After matching, 696 patients (348 obese, 348 non-obese) with median age of 57 years (IQR 48-66) were analyzed. Obese patients had a longer median procedure time (218 min vs 192.5 min, p<0.001) and greater median estimated blood loss (300 mL vs 200 mL, p<0.001). Median (IQR) post-operative length of stay was the same for obese and non-obese patients: 3 days (IQR 2-4). Obese and non-obese patients had similar rates of grade III-IV complications (10.9% and 6.6%, respectively, p=0.06), re-operation (2.3% and 1.4%, respectively, p=0.58), and re-admission (11.8% and 8.0%, respectively, p=0.13). Grade I-II complications were more common among obese patients (62.4% vs 48.3%, p<0.001) because they had more wound complications (17.8% vs 4.9%, p<0.001). Obese patients received more opioids both during surgery (morphine equivalent dose 57.25 mg (IQR 35-72.5) vs 50 mg (IQR 25-622.5), p=0.003) and after surgery (morphine equivalent daily dose 45 mg/day (IQR 10-96.2) vs 29.37 mg/day (IQR 7.5-70), p=0.01). Obese and non-obese patients had similar ERAS program compliance (70.1% and 69.8%, respectively, p=0.32).

CONCLUSIONS

Neither post-operative length of stay nor the rate of serious complications differed significantly despite longer surgeries, greater blood loss, and more opioid use among obese patients. An ERAS program was safe, effective, and feasible for obese patients with suspected gynecologic cancer.

Impact of transversus abdominis plane blocks versus non-steroidal anti-inflammatory on post-operative opioid use in ERAS ovarian cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

Treatment of ovarian cancer often requires extensive surgical resection. The transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block has been utilized in benign gynecologic surgery to decrease post-operative pain and opioid use. We hypothesized that TAP blocks would decrease total opioid use in the first 24 hours and decrease length of stay following staging and cytoreductive surgery for ovarian cancer compared with either no local anesthetic or local wound infiltration alone.

METHODS

All patients undergoing surgery for ovarian cancer from November 2016 to June 2017 were included in this retrospective cohort study. Median opioid use at 24, 48, and 72 hours post-operatively, as well as length of stay, were assessed. Multivariate median regression analysis was performed to adjust for potential confounders: post-operative non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) usage, pre-operative opioid consumption, and extent of cytoreductive surgery. Length of stay was compared using Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

One-hundred-and-twenty patients were included in the analysis. Eighty-two patients had a TAP block, while 38 did not. After adjusting for potential confounders there was no difference in median 24 hours opioid consumption (p=0.29) or length of stay (HR 0.95, p=0.78) between patients receiving TAP block compared with those without. After adjusting for potential confounders, patients receiving scheduled NSAIDs had a 2.6-fold greater likelihood of being discharged (p<0.0005) and a significant reduction in median opioid use at 24 hours (23.5 vs 14.5 mg) (p=0.017) compared with those patients without NSAIDs.

DISCUSSION

Post-operative administration of NSAIDs, but not TAP block, was associated with a decrease in post-operative opioid use and length of stay following surgery for ovarian cancer. Further investigation into alternative regional anesthetics for Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) protocols is warranted.

Prediction of early discharge after gynaecological oncology surgery within ERAS

OBJECTIVES

Enhanced recovery after surgery programs (ERAS) have been proven to decrease the length of hospital stay without increasing readmission rates or complications. However, the patient and operative characteristics that improve the chance of a successful early hospital discharge are not well established. The aim of this study was to design a nomogram which could be used before surgery, using the characteristics of patients, to establish who could benefit from early discharge (POD ≤ 2 days).

METHODS

This observational study has been prospectively conducted. All the included patients were referred for surgical treatment of gynecologic cancer. We defined two sub-groups of patients on surgical procedure characteristics: isolated procedures (hysterectomy or lymphadenectomy) and combined procedures (at least the association of two procedures).

RESULTS

230 patients were enrolled during the study protocol. 83.9% of patients were treated with a minimally invasive surgery (MIS). 159 patients (69.1%) were discharged on or before POD 2. On multivariate analysis, the surgical approach (open surgery vs. laparoscopy, OR  0.02 (95% CI [0-0.07]), p < 0.001) and the type of surgery (combined procedure versus isolated procedure, OR  0.41 (95% CI [0.18-0.91]), p = 0.028) were found to be significant predictors of increased hospital stay. A nomogram has been built for the purpose of predicting eligible patients for early post-operative discharge based on the multivariate analysis results (AUC = 0.86, 95% CI [0.81-0.92]).

CONCLUSION

The use of MIS for isolated procedures in oncologic indications constitutes an independent factor of early discharge in a setting of ERAS. These promising preliminary results still require to be validated on a prospective cohort.