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

Evaluation of a quality improvement intervention to reduce anastomotic leak following right colectomy (EAGLE): pragmatic, batched stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized trial in 64 countries

Background: Anastomotic leak affects 8 per cent of patients after right colectomy with a 10-fold increased risk of postoperative death. The EAGLE study aimed to develop and test whether an international, standardized quality improvement intervention could reduce anastomotic leaks. Methods: The internationally intended protocol, iteratively co-developed by a multistage Delphi process, comprised an online educational module introducing risk stratification, an intraoperative checklist, and harmonized surgical techniques. Clusters (hospital teams) were randomized to one of three arms with varied sequences of intervention/data collection by a derived stepped-wedge batch design (at least 18 hospital teams per batch). Patients were blinded to the study allocation. Low- and middle-income country enrolment was encouraged. The primary outcome (assessed by intention to treat) was anastomotic leak rate, and subgroup analyses by module completion (at least 80 per cent of surgeons, high engagement; less than 50 per cent, low engagement) were preplanned. Results: A total 355 hospital teams registered, with 332 from 64 countries (39.2 per cent low and middle income) included in the final analysis. The online modules were completed by half of the surgeons (2143 of 4411). The primary analysis included 3039 of the 3268 patients recruited (206 patients had no anastomosis and 23 were lost to follow-up), with anastomotic leaks arising before and after the intervention in 10.1 and 9.6 per cent respectively (adjusted OR 0.87, 95 per cent c.i. 0.59 to 1.30; P = 0.498). The proportion of surgeons completing the educational modules was an influence: the leak rate decreased from 12.2 per cent (61 of 500) before intervention to 5.1 per cent (24 of 473) after intervention in high-engagement centres (adjusted OR 0.36, 0.20 to 0.64; P < 0.001), but this was not observed in low-engagement hospitals (8.3 per cent (59 of 714) and 13.8 per cent (61 of 443) respectively; adjusted OR 2.09, 1.31 to 3.31). Conclusion: Completion of globally available digital training by engaged teams can alter anastomotic leak rates. Registration number: NCT04270721 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov)

Stenotic ligature: a simple technique for managing distal hypoperfusion ischemic syndrome following arteriovenous fistulas

Introduction. Distal Hypoperfusion Ischemic Syndrome (DHIS) is a multifactorial debilitating condition causing peripheral ischemia and potentially tissue necrosis. In an effort to further refine its surgical treatment we aim to describe a modified, simple and reliable technique for managing DHIS in patients with arteriovenous fistulas. Materials and Methods. Twenty-nine consecutive patients with DHIS operated by a single surgical team over a period of 7 years were included in the study. All patients underwent the same surgical technique: stenotic ligature. Outcomes were analyzed clinically and the effectiveness of the procedure was proven using McNemar test. Clinical variables were statistically analyzed in SPSS 17.0 for Windows. Results. The technique we used consists in performing a stenosing ligature on the vein, using a 0-silk suture, and adjusting the suture in order to achieve either a radial pulse or capillary pulse, while maintaining a good thrill at palpation of the vein. The procedure was successful in 83% of patients proved by immediate symptomatic relief. Paired data analysis showed significant decrease of all symptoms: cold extremity (p=0,021), paraesthesia (p<0,001), pain (p<0,001). History of coronary artery disease, arteriopathy or the absence of radial pulse is statistically correlated with an increased risk of developing DHIS. Conclusions. Stenotic ligature is a simple, cheap and reliable technique for managing DHIS with lower septic risks which can be easily performed under local anesthesia

Is Frailty Associated with Worse Outcomes After Major Liver Surgery? An Observational Case–Control Study

Background: The rate of morbidity after liver surgery is estimated at 30% and can be even higher when considering higher-risk subgroups of patients. Frailty is believed to better predict surgical outcomes by showcasing the patient’s ability to withstand major surgical stress and selecting frail ones. Methods: This is a single-centre, observational case–control study on patients diagnosed with liver malignancies who underwent liver resections between 2013 and 2024. The five-item modified Frailty Index (mFI-5) was used to split patients into frail and non-frail. The two groups were compared in terms of preoperative, operative and postoperative outcomes using a chi-squared and logistic regression model. Results: A total of 230 patients were included and split into two groups: non-frail, NF, n = 90, and frail patients, F, n = 140. Overall, F patients had a higher rate of morbidity (p = 0.04) but with similar mortality and length of stay. When considering only major liver resections, F patients had a higher probability of posthepatectomy liver failure (LR 6.793, p = 0.009), postoperative bleeding (LR 9.541, p = 0.002) and longer ICU stay (LR 8.666, p = 0.003), with similar rates of bile leak, surgical site infections, length of stay and mortality. Conclusions: Frailty seems to be a solid predictor of posthepatectomy liver failure in patients undergoing major liver resections and is associated with a longer ICU stay. However, mortality and surgical morbidity seem to be comparable between frail and non-frail patients