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

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on the Effectiveness of Tranexamic Acid in Controlling Bleeding During Transurethral Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Surgery

Background: Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a frequent condition in ageing men. Surgery is recommended for severe BPH symptoms and BPH-related complications. TURP is the reference standard for BPH surgery, but carries a risk of bleeding, which can lead to significant perioperative morbidity and mortality. To reduce bleeding during TURP, antifibrinolytic agents like tranexamic acid (TXA) have been studied. We aim to review the current evidence regarding TXA use during transurethral BPH surgery. Objective: This review aims to assess the efficacy and safety of tranexamic acid in reducing bleeding during transurethral benign prostatic hyperplasia surgery. Methods: Major clinical research databases such as PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EBSCO, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Web of Science were searched from 2012 to 2022 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the use of TXA to placebo in transurethral BPH surgery using the PICOS format. We included RCTs without language restrictions that assessed intraoperative blood loss, transfusion rates, haemoglobin levels, length of hospital stay, postoperative thromboembolic events, and 30-day perioperative mortality as outcomes. The quality assessment of the included studies was performed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool, RoB 2, for randomised studies. Results: A total of six RCTs, which included 456 patients, were eventually included in the meta-analysis. The results showed that tranexamic acid is beneficial in reducing blood loss and minimising changes in haemoglobin levels during transurethral resection of the prostate. However, it does not lessen the need for blood transfusions or shorten the hospital stay. Conclusions: Tranexamic acid is useful in decreasing blood loss and reducing changes in haemoglobin in patients undergoing transurethral resection of the prostate. Its utility during BPH surgery in low-resource settings where the latest haemostatic enucleation techniques, such as holmium and GreenLight laser enucleation, may not be readily available needs further evaluation

Use of Anabolic-Androgenic Steroids and Male Fertility: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background: Anabolic-androgenic steroids (AASs) are often used by men for bodybuilding and to improve sports performance. The use is not limited to professional competitive athletes, but many amateur men. Objective: The objective of this study was to assess and systematically review the effects of AAS on male fertility parameters, spermiogram, testosterone, follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and luteinising hormone (LH) and to review reversibility and other morbidity impacting fertility. Methods: Eligibility criteria - We included studies mentioning data about adult males using supraphysiologic doses of AAS for sports performance or appearance enhancement, with comparison data from general population or matched controls if available reporting fertility parameters and sexual performance. Information sources - A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar and World of Science. Controlled clinical trials randomised or nonrandomised (if available), case series with or without matched controls, case reports, cross-sectional surveys, reports on follow-up of subjects caught in doping test and their fertility parameters when reported. Risk of bias/quality assessment - The quality assessment of the included studies was performed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Results: Included studies - Thirty-two studies were included. There were 12 cohort studies, 5 case–control studies, 9 cross-sectional surveys and 6 case reports. The study population comprised 9371 individuals, of which 2671 were AAS users. Synthesis of results - AAS users had reduced levels of FSH and LH than the naïve population. These levels remained low for 3–6 months after stopping AAS. One year after stopping AAS, the users and naïve population had insignificant differences in FSH and LH values. The total testosterone (TT) levels were comparable in users and naïve populations at baseline, 3 months and 6 months after stopping, but at 1 year, TT values were lower in AAS users. Sperm concentration in AAS users and naïve population was similar, but sperm motility was lower in AAS users. The testicular size was lower in AAS users. The erectile function improved with AAS use, but on withdrawal, there was decreased libido and erectile dysfunction. Most AAS users need additional medications to mitigate detrimental effects on fertility. Description of the effect - AAS use negatively impacted the gonadotrophin levels and had lower sperm motility and testicular size. Strength - Comprehensive review of 32 publications, study population of 9371 individuals, of which 2671 were AAS users, meta-analysis of reproductive hormones, semen parameters and testis size. Limitations: The limitations are small sample size of most of the studies, polypharmacy, lack of information on dosing and high heterogeneity. Interpretation: AAS use is detrimental for sperm motility and has a partially reversible negative impact on male fertility. Users must be cautioned about its negative impact on libido and erectile function. Registration: PROSPERO Registration No. CRD42023411294

Global Incidence and Risk Factors Associated With Postoperative Urinary Retention Following Elective Inguinal Hernia Repair

Importance Postoperative urinary retention (POUR) is a well-recognized complication of inguinal hernia repair (IHR). A variable incidence of POUR has previously been reported in this context, and contradictory evidence surrounds potential risk factors.Objective To ascertain the incidence of, explore risk factors for, and determine the health service outcomes of POUR following elective IHR.Design, Setting, and Participants The Retention of Urine After Inguinal Hernia Elective Repair (RETAINER I) study, an international, prospective cohort study, recruited participants between March 1 and October 31, 2021. This study was conducted across 209 centers in 32 countries in a consecutive sample of adult patients undergoing elective IHR.Exposure Open or minimally invasive IHR by any surgical technique, under local, neuraxial regional, or general anesthesia.Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was the incidence of POUR following elective IHR. Secondary outcomes were perioperative risk factors, management, clinical consequences, and health service outcomes of POUR. A preoperative International Prostate Symptom Score was measured in male patients.Results In total, 4151 patients (3882 male and 269 female; median [IQR] age, 56 [43-68] years) were studied. Inguinal hernia repair was commenced via an open surgical approach in 82.2% of patients (n = 3414) and minimally invasive surgery in 17.8% (n = 737). The primary form of anesthesia was general in 40.9% of patients (n = 1696), neuraxial regional in 45.8% (n = 1902), and local in 10.7% (n = 446). Postoperative urinary retention occurred in 5.8% of male patients (n = 224), 2.97% of female patients (n = 8), and 9.5% (119 of 1252) of male patients aged 65 years or older. Risk factors for POUR after adjusted analyses included increasing age, anticholinergic medication, history of urinary retention, constipation, out-of-hours surgery, involvement of urinary bladder within the hernia, temporary intraoperative urethral catheterization, and increasing operative duration. Postoperative urinary retention was the primary reason for 27.8% of unplanned day-case surgery admissions (n = 74) and 51.8% of 30-day readmissions (n = 72).Conclusions The findings of this cohort study suggest that 1 in 17 male patients, 1 in 11 male patients aged 65 years or older, and 1 in 34 female patients may develop POUR following IHR. These findings could inform preoperative patient counseling. In addition, awareness of modifiable risk factors may help to identify patients at increased risk of POUR who may benefit from perioperative risk mitigation strategies