Patterns of opioid use after surgical discharge: a multicentre, prospective cohort study in 25 countries

Background Excessive opioid prescribing following surgery contributes to the growing opioid crisis. Prescribing practices are modifiable, yet data to guide appropriate prescription of opioids at surgical discharge remain sparse. This study aimed to evaluate factors associated with opioid consumption following discharge from surgery. Methods An international prospective multicentre cohort study was performed recruiting adult patients undergoing common general, orthopaedic, gynaecological and urological surgery, with follow-up 7 days after discharge. The primary outcome measures were the quantities of prescribed and consumed opioids in oral morphine milligram equivalents. Descriptive and multivariable analyses were performed to investigate factors associated with the primary outcome measures. Results This analysis included 4273 patients from 144 hospitals in 25 countries. Overall, 1311 (30.7%) patients were prescribed opioids at discharge. For those patients prescribed opioids, mean (SD) 179 (240) oral morphine milligram equivalents were prescribed, yet only 81 (145) oral morphine milligram equivalents were consumed within the first 7 days after discharge. An increased dose of opioids prescribed at discharge was associated with an increased dose of opioids consumed during the follow-up period (β = 0.33 (95%CI 0.31–0.34), p < 0.001). The risk of prescribing more opioids than patients consumed increased as quantities of opioids prescribed at discharge exceeded 100 oral morphine milligram equivalents, independent of patient comorbidity, procedure and pain. Patients were prescribed more than twice the quantity of opioids they consumed in the first 7 days following discharge from surgery. Conclusions Our data suggest that the current quantities of opioids provided at discharge exceed patient needs and may contribute to increasing community opioid use and circulation

Colorectal Cancer Stage at Diagnosis Before vs During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Italy

IMPORTANCE Delays in screening programs and the reluctance of patients to seek medical attention because of the outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 could be associated with the risk of more advanced colorectal cancers at diagnosis. OBJECTIVE To evaluate whether the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic was associated with more advanced oncologic stage and change in clinical presentation for patients with colorectal cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This retrospective, multicenter cohort study included all 17 938 adult patients who underwent surgery for colorectal cancer from March 1, 2020, to December 31, 2021 (pandemic period), and from January 1, 2018, to February 29, 2020 (prepandemic period), in 81 participating centers in Italy, including tertiary centers and community hospitals. Follow-up was 30 days from surgery. EXPOSURES Any type of surgical procedure for colorectal cancer, including explorative surgery, palliative procedures, and atypical or segmental resections. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was advanced stage of colorectal cancer at diagnosis. Secondary outcomes were distant metastasis, T4 stage, aggressive biology (defined as cancer with at least 1 of the following characteristics: signet ring cells, mucinous tumor, budding, lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion, and lymphangitis), stenotic lesion, emergency surgery, and palliative surgery. The independent association between the pandemic period and the outcomes was assessed using multivariate random-effects logistic regression, with hospital as the cluster variable. RESULTS A total of 17 938 patients (10 007 men [55.8%]; mean [SD] age, 70.6 [12.2] years) underwent surgery for colorectal cancer: 7796 (43.5%) during the pandemic period and 10 142 (56.5%) during the prepandemic period. Logistic regression indicated that the pandemic period was significantly associated with an increased rate of advanced-stage colorectal cancer (odds ratio [OR], 1.07; 95%CI, 1.01-1.13; P = .03), aggressive biology (OR, 1.32; 95%CI, 1.15-1.53; P < .001), and stenotic lesions (OR, 1.15; 95%CI, 1.01-1.31; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This cohort study suggests a significant association between the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and the risk of a more advanced oncologic stage at diagnosis among patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer and might indicate a potential reduction of survival for these patients

Impact of opioid-free analgesia on pain severity and patient satisfaction after discharge from surgery: multispecialty, prospective cohort study in 25 countries

Background: Balancing opioid stewardship and the need for adequate analgesia following discharge after surgery is challenging. This study aimed to compare the outcomes for patients discharged with opioid versus opioid-free analgesia after common surgical procedures.Methods: This international, multicentre, prospective cohort study collected data from patients undergoing common acute and elective general surgical, urological, gynaecological, and orthopaedic procedures. The primary outcomes were patient-reported time in severe pain measured on a numerical analogue scale from 0 to 100% and patient-reported satisfaction with pain relief during the first week following discharge. Data were collected by in-hospital chart review and patient telephone interview 1 week after discharge.Results: The study recruited 4273 patients from 144 centres in 25 countries; 1311 patients (30.7%) were prescribed opioid analgesia at discharge. Patients reported being in severe pain for 10 (i.q.r. 1-30)% of the first week after discharge and rated satisfaction with analgesia as 90 (i.q.r. 80-100) of 100. After adjustment for confounders, opioid analgesia on discharge was independently associated with increased pain severity (risk ratio 1.52, 95% c.i. 1.31 to 1.76; P < 0.001) and re-presentation to healthcare providers owing to side-effects of medication (OR 2.38, 95% c.i. 1.36 to 4.17; P = 0.004), but not with satisfaction with analgesia (beta coefficient 0.92, 95% c.i. -1.52 to 3.36; P = 0.468) compared with opioid-free analgesia. Although opioid prescribing varied greatly between high-income and low- and middle-income countries, patient-reported outcomes did not.Conclusion: Opioid analgesia prescription on surgical discharge is associated with a higher risk of re-presentation owing to side-effects of medication and increased patient-reported pain, but not with changes in patient-reported satisfaction. Opioid-free discharge analgesia should be adopted routinely

NK-3 receptors mediate enhancement of substance P release from capsaicin-sensitive spinal cord afferent terminals

1. The effects of NK-3 receptor agonists on the release of substance P-immunoreactivity (SP-LI) have been investigated using superfused rat spinal cord synaptosomes. 2. The Ca(2+)-dependent overflow of SP-LI evoked by 35 mM KCl was concentration-dependently enhanced by senktide (EC(50)=52 nM; maximal effect=70%) or [MePhe(7)]NKB (EC(50)=5.5 nM; maximal effect=125%), both selective agonists at receptors of the NK-3 type. 3. The potentiation of the SP-LI overflow elicited by 100 nM senktide or [MePhe(7)]NKB was prevented by the NK-3 receptor antagonist (+)-SR142801. The antagonist halved, at 10 nM, and almost abolished, at 100 nM, the effect of both agonists. The effect of senktide or [MePhe(7)]NKB was insensitive to antagonists at NK-1 or NK-2 receptors. 4. Capsaicin (0.1–1 μM) stimulated SP-LI release in a concentration-dependent manner from spinal cord synaptosomes. The SP-LI overflow elicited by 1 μM capsaicin was completely dependent on external Ca(2+). Senktide could not affect the capsaicin-evoked release of SP-LI. 5. Senktide failed to potentiate the K(+)-evoked overflow of SP-LI from synaptosomes previously exposed for 15 min in superfusion to capsaicin. 6. The results show that release-enhancing NK-3 receptors are located on axon terminals of capsaicin-sensitive primary afferent neurones in the spinal cord. Antagonists at NK-3 receptors might help controlling pain transmission

Is the significant risk of perioperative complications associated with radical surgery following non-curative endoscopic submucosal dissection for early colorectal cancer still acceptable?

Is the significant risk of perioperative complications associated with radical surgery following non-curative endoscopic submucosal dissection for early colorectal cancer still acceptable