Feasibility of dexmedetomidine as sole analgesic agent during robotic urological surgery: A pilot study

Opioid-Free Anesthesia for Pain Relief After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

To compare the efficacies of opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) and opioid-based anesthesia (OBA) in laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

Patients and Methods

A total of 150 patients who underwent 3-port LC procedures were randomly divided into an OFA group with esketamine, dexmedetomidine and lidocaine intravenous combined with local anesthetic incision infiltration or an OBA group with remifentanil combined with local anesthetic incision infiltration. The primary outcome was the consumption of rescue analgesics within 24 hrs after surgery. Secondary outcomes included time to LMA removal, time to orientation recovery, time to unassisted walking, sleep quality on the night of surgery, time to first flatus, hemodynamics during induction of general anesthesia, postoperative pain level on the visual analog scale (VAS), incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and global satisfaction score (GSS) within 24 hrs after surgery.

Results

Both the consumption of rescue analgesics and the time to first flatus in the OFA group were significantly lower than those in the OBA group (P < 0.001 and P = 0.029, respectively). However, the time to LMA removal and the time to orientation recovery were significantly longer in the OFA group than in the OBA group (P < 0.001). In addition, the VAS scores at 2 hrs and 8 hrs after surgery and HR at laryngeal mask airway insertion in the OFA group were significantly lower than those in the OBA group (P = 0.002 and P = 0.001, and P =0.016, respectively).

Conclusion

OFA may be beneficial for patients undergoing LC in that it could decrease the dosage of postoperative analgesics and pain intensity and even shorten the time to first flatus after surgery.

Short-Term Patient Outcomes After Implementation of Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy Under Opioid Free Anesthesia at an Ambulatory Surgery Center

PURPOSE

Opioid free anesthesia (OFA) is associated with decreased risk of PONV and need for rescue analgesia, making it ideal for patients anticipating same-day discharge. The purpose of this project was to describe the perioperative care and short-term outcomes for patients undergoing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) under OFA at an ambulatory surgical center (ASC).

DESIGN

A retrospective descriptive design was used to examine the perioperative care and short-term outcomes of patients undergoing RARP under OFA at an ASC.

METHODS

The records of all sequential patients undergoing RARP over an 18-month period were reviewed. Data collected included patient comorbidities, surgical procedures, medications administered, verbal numeric rating scale (VNRS) for pain scores, times to oral intake, ambulation, and discharge, patient disposition, and unplanned return to the ER or hospital within 30 days.

FINDINGS

Data were extracted from 54 sequential records. Median VNRS scores were zero throughout PACU stay. Fifty-three patients (98.1%) were successfully discharged home, with an average postoperative stay of 250.8 (SD 35.0) minutes. There were no complaints of post-discharge nausea and vomiting or intractable pain at 72 hours after surgery. One patient was transferred to the hospital and two patients returned to the emergency room within 30 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Although generalizability is limited, these results suggest that carefully selected patients can be discharged home after RARP under a balanced OFA technique. Innovative practices are needed to address the current backlog of patients needing non-emergent surgery. Discharge home avoids the increase in resource consumption and infection risk associated with hospital admission.

Improved postoperative recovery profile in pediatric oral rehabilitation with low-dose dexmedetomidine as an opioid substitute for general anesthesia: a randomized double-blind clinical trial

Background

Low-dose dexmedetomidine may be a suitable alternative to opioids for pediatric ambulatory procedures under general anesthesia (GA). However, the recovery profile remains unclear. Herein, we aimed to evaluate the effects of low-dose dexmedetomidine on the recovery profile of children.

Methods

Seventy-two children undergoing ambulatory oral rehabilitation under GA were randomly and equally distributed into two groups (D and F). Group D received an infusion of dexmedetomidine 0.25 µg/kg for 4 min for induction, followed by maintenance of 0.4 µg/kg/h. Group F received an infusion of fentanyl 1 µg/kg over 4 min for induction, followed by maintenance at 1 µg/kg/h. The primary outcome was the extubation time. The secondary outcomes were awakening time, end-tidal sevoflurane (ET-Sevo) requirement, change in hemodynamic parameters, Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS), Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario pain scale (CHEOPS) score, length of PACU stay, and incidence of adverse events.

Results

Statistically significant differences were observed in the recovery profile between the groups: the median time for extubation was 3.65 (3.44-6.2) vs. 6.25 (4.21-7) minutes in groups D vs. F (P = 0.001), respectively, while the corresponding awakening times were 19 (18.75-21) and 22.5 (22-24) minutes, respectively (P < 0.001). The mean ET-Sevo was low in group D (1.1 vs. 1.2; P < 0.001). The heart rate was significantly low across all time points in group D, without resulting in bradycardia. The median RASS and CHEOPS scores were also significantly lower in group D. No significant differences were observed in the mean arterial pressure, incidence of adverse events, or length of PACU stay.

Conclusion

Low-dose dexmedetomidine was more effective than fentanyl as an opioid substitute at providing a better recovery profile in pediatric ambulatory oral rehabilitation under GA. Dexmedetomidine also significantly reduced sevoflurane consumption without causing adverse events or prolonging hospital stay.

Impact of intravenous dexmedetomidine on gastrointestinal function recovery after laparoscopic hysteromyomectomy: a randomized clinical trial

Postoperative intestinal ileus is common after laparoscopic surgery, the incidence of those after hysterectomy was 9.2%. Anesthesia is one of the independent risk factors of postoperative ileus. Dexmedetomidine has been widely used in perioperative anesthesia and previous reports suggested that intraoperative dexmedetomidine may be associated with the improvement of gastrointestinal function recovery after abdominal surgery. We hypothesized that dexmedetomidine could improve gastrointestinal function recovery after laparoscopic hysteromyomectomy. Participants in elective laparoscopic hysteromyomectomy were enrolled with a single dose of 0.5 μg kg⁻¹ dexmedetomidine or the same volume of placebo intravenously administered for 15 min, followed by continuous pumping of 0.2 μg kg⁻¹ h⁻¹ of corresponding drugs until 30 min before the end of surgery. The primary outcome was the time to first flatus. Secondary outcomes were the time to first oral feeding and the first defecation, the occurrence of flatulence, pain score and postoperative nausea and vomiting until 48 h after the surgery. Eventually, 106 participants (54 in dexmedetomidine group and 52 in placebo group) were included for final analysis. The time to first flatus (SD, 25.83 [4.18] vs 27.67 [3.77], P = 0.019), oral feeding time (SD, 27.29 [4.40] vs 28.92 [3.82], P = 0.044), the time to first defecation (SD, 59.82 [10.49] vs 63.89 [7.71], P = 0.025), abdominal distension (n%, 12 (22.2) vs 21 (40.4), P = 0.044), PONV at 24 h (n%, 10 (18.5) vs 19 (36.5), P = 0.037), NRS 6 h (3.15(0.68) vs 3.46 (0.87), P = 0.043) and NRS 12 h (3.43 (0.88) vs 3.85 (0.85), P = 0.014) of dexmedetomidine group were significantly shorter than those of the placebo group. Intraoperative dexmedetomidine reduced the time to first flatus, first oral feeding, and first defecation. These results suggested that this treatment may be a feasible strategy for improving postoperative gastrointestinal function recovery in patients undergoing laparoscopic hysteromyomectomy.

Levorphanol in the Perioperative Setting: Decreasing Opioid Requirements While Improving Pain Management

Levorphanol is a Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved long-acting opioid. Most information on perioperative use of levorphanol comes from the early- and mid-1950s when this drug emerged in the field of experimental pharmacology and anesthesia. It was mainly studied during this period with some additional data being generated in the 1960s and 70s. Since this time, perioperative use has declined and research is limited. This review of literature aims to provide pharmacologic and historic description of levorphanol as a tool for perioperative pain management and as an aid to potentially decrease total postoperative opioid use during the current opioid crisis.

A randomised controlled trial to evaluate the peri-operative role of intraoperative dexmedetomidine infusion in robotic-assisted laparoscopic oncosurgeries

Background:

Robotic and minimal invasive surgeries pose challenges to the anaesthesiologists. Dexmedetomidine (dexmed), with distinct properties of sedation and analgesia has emerged as a promising drug. Our primary aim, in this double-blinded study, was to evaluate reduction in the intraoperative opioid requirement with the use of intravenous dexmed infusion. Secondary objectives included effect on intraoperative anaesthetic and postoperative analgesic requirement.

Methodology:

After approval from Ethics board and registration of the trial, 46 eligible patients planned for robotic oncosurgeries (abdomen) were included. As per computer generated randomisation chart, patients were randomised into either dexmed or saline group. Five minutes after insufflation of the abdomen, the study drug bolus—saline or dexmed (1 μg/kg) was given over 10 min and was followed by maintenance infusion (0.2 μg/kg/h) until release of pneumoperitoneum. Study drug titration, fentanyl boluses, and changes in minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) of inhalational agent were protocolised.

Results:

The mean intraoperative fentanyl requirement was significantly lower in the dexmed group 192.6 μg (±66.4) versus the saline group 260.7 μg (±88.6), P = 0.013. The MAC requirement of inhalational agent was significantly lower in the dexmed group. Intraoperative episodes of hypotension and bradycardia were similar in both groups. First analgesic request, 24 h postoperative pain scores and side effects profile were comparable in both groups.

Conclusion:

Intraoperative dexmed (bolus of 1 μg/kg followed by 0.2 μg/kg/h infusion) has an opioid and inhalational anaesthetic sparing role during robotic oncosurgeries. However, no benefit of the infusion is seen in the postoperative period.

The Benefits of Opioid Free Anesthesia and the Precautions Necessary When Employing It

The use of opioids in the perioperative period is associated with respiratory depression, impaired gastrointestinal function, post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV), pruritus, urinary retention, delirium and the potential for developing opioid addiction. Currently the United States is experiencing an epidemic of prescription opioid abuse and deaths from overdose. Many addicts develop their addiction during a routine surgical admission to hospital. More people now die from overdose of synthetic prescription opioids than from heroin and other street drugs. Public education campaigns teaching family members of addicts to reverse opioid induced respiratory depression with naloxone are currently underway. Preventing the development of addiction in the first place during and after the surgical admission however will be more successful at saving lives. Primary prevention of opioid addiction is possible when non-opioid analgesic drugs are used. Employing alternative analgesic drugs in the peri-operative period that have a lower addiction potential and less respiratory depression has therefore become a matter of great national importance. Many powerful non-opioid analgesics are currently available that have more favorable side effect profiles and a lower potential for developing addiction. However, these medications are currently not used as often in routine clinical practice as they should be. Replacing opioids with other analgesics will not only reduce the development of opioid addiction but will also lead to better perioperative outcomes and enhanced patient recovery. This article briefly reviews the opioid alternatives that can significantly reduce or even entirely eliminate the perioperative use of opioids in the majority of surgical procedures.

Comparison of opioid-based and opioid-free TIVA for laparoscopic urological procedures in obese patients

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Perioperative pain management in an obese patient is challenging. The incidence of respiratory depression is higher in obese patients and is exaggerated with opioids. We evaluated the efficacy of opioid-free anesthesia with propofol, dexmedetomidine, lignocaine, and ketamine in obese patients undergoing urological laparoscopic procedures with reference to postoperative analgesic consumption, hemodynamic stability, and respiratory depression.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In this prospective, randomized, blinded controlled study, patients were randomized to receive either opioid-based (opioid group) or opioid-free (opioid-free group) anesthesia. Postoperative pain was assessed using visual analog score (VAS) 30 min after recovery, hourly for 2 h and every 4 hourly for 24 h. The primary outcomes studied were respiratory depression, mean analgesic consumption and time to rescue analgesia. Intraoperative hemodynamic parameters, mean SpO2, respiratory rate and postanesthesia care unit (PACU) discharge time were secondary objectives.

RESULTS

There were no differences in the demographic and intraoperative hemodynamic profile between the groups. Incidence of respiratory depression, defined as fall in saturation, was more in opioid-based group. Postoperative analgesic requirement (225 ± 48.4 vs 63.6 ± 68.5 mg of tramadol with P value of <0.001) and PACU discharge times (18.1 ± 5.4 vs 11.7 ± 4.3 hours with P value of <0.001) were significantly less in the opioid-free group.

CONCLUSIONS

Opioid-free anesthesia is a safer and better form of anesthesia in obese patients undergoing laparoscopic urological procedures as there is a lower requirement of postoperative analgesia.

American Society for Enhanced Recovery and Perioperative Quality Initiative Joint Consensus Statement on Perioperative Opioid Minimization in Opioid-Naïve Patients

Surgical care episodes place opioid-naïve patients at risk for transitioning to new persistent postoperative opioid use. With one of the central principles being the application of multimodal pain interventions to reduce the reliance on opioid-based medications, enhanced recovery pathways provide a framework that decreases perioperative opioid use. The fourth Perioperative Quality Initiative brought together a group of international experts representing anesthesiology, surgery, and nursing with the objective of providing consensus recommendations on this important topic. Fourth Perioperative Quality Initiative was a consensus-building conference designed around a modified Delphi process in which the group alternately convened for plenary discussion sessions in between small group discussions. The process included several iterative steps including a literature review of the topics, building consensus around the important questions related to the topic, and sequential steps of content building and refinement until agreement was achieved and a consensus document was produced. During the fourth Perioperative Quality Initiative conference and thereafter as a writing group, reference applicability to the topic was discussed in any area where there was disagreement. For this manuscript, the questions answered included (1) What are the potential strategies for preventing persistent postoperative opioid use? (2) Is opioid-free anesthesia and analgesia feasible and appropriate for routine operations? and (3) Is opioid-free (intraoperative) anesthesia associated with equivalent or superior outcomes compared to an opioid minimization in the perioperative period? We will discuss the relevant literature for each questions, emphasize what we do not know, and prioritize the areas for future research.