Feasibility of opioid-free anesthesia in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: A retrospective, quasi-experimental study

A. Tejedor, Lana Bijelic, Marta García
{"title":"Feasibility of opioid-free anesthesia in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: A retrospective, quasi-experimental study","authors":"A. Tejedor, Lana Bijelic, Marta García","doi":"10.4103/joacp.joacp_375_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \n Opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) provides adequate analgesia minimizing opioids. OFA has not been evaluated in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP). Our aim was to evaluate OFA feasibility and its effectiveness in LRP.\n \n \n \n A quasi-experimental retrospective study of 55 adult patients undergoing LRP was performed from September 2020 until December 20223. Predefined protocols for either opioid-based anesthesia (OBA; with continuous remifentanil infusion) or OFA (continuous lidocaine, dexmedetomidine, and ketamine infusion) were followed. In both groups, wound infiltration was performed before skin incision. Primary outcome was postoperative pain management (numerical rating scale [NRS]) in the first 24 postoperative hours. Secondary outcomes were opioid consumption, start to sitting and ambulation, postoperative complications, and length of hospital stay.\n \n \n \n OFA protocol patients had better median pain scores during movement at 1, 18 and 24 h, that is, 1 (interquartile range [IQR] 0–3) versus 2.5 (IQR 0–4), P = 0.047; 0 (IQR 0–1) versus 1 (IQR 0–2), P = 0.017; and 0 (IQR 0–0.25) versus 1 (IQR 0–2), P = 0.013, respectively. At 6 and 12 h, there were no statistically significant differences, that is, 0.5 (IQR 0–2) versus 1 (IQR 0–2), P = 0.908 and 1 (IQR 0–2) versus 0.5 (IQR 0–2), P = 0.929, respectively. Lower morphine requirements were recorded in the first 18 and 24 postoperative hours, that is, 0 (IQR 0–0) versus 1 (IQR 0–2.75) mg, P = 0.028 and 0 (IQR 0–2) versus 1.5 (IQR 0–3) mg, P = 0.012, respectively. Start to sitting and ambulation occurred earlier in the OFA group (P = 0.030 and P = 0.002, respectively). Linear regression showed that ambulation was independently associated with the analgesic technique (P = 0.034). Only one patient had postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and belonged to the OBA group. There was no difference in total complications or the length of stay.\n \n \n \n In this study, OFA strategy was found to be safe, feasible, and provided adequate analgesia, minimizing the use of postoperative opioids, and was independently associated with earlier ambulation.\n","PeriodicalId":508221,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anaesthesiology Clinical Pharmacology","volume":"13 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Anaesthesiology Clinical Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/joacp.joacp_375_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) provides adequate analgesia minimizing opioids. OFA has not been evaluated in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP). Our aim was to evaluate OFA feasibility and its effectiveness in LRP. A quasi-experimental retrospective study of 55 adult patients undergoing LRP was performed from September 2020 until December 20223. Predefined protocols for either opioid-based anesthesia (OBA; with continuous remifentanil infusion) or OFA (continuous lidocaine, dexmedetomidine, and ketamine infusion) were followed. In both groups, wound infiltration was performed before skin incision. Primary outcome was postoperative pain management (numerical rating scale [NRS]) in the first 24 postoperative hours. Secondary outcomes were opioid consumption, start to sitting and ambulation, postoperative complications, and length of hospital stay. OFA protocol patients had better median pain scores during movement at 1, 18 and 24 h, that is, 1 (interquartile range [IQR] 0–3) versus 2.5 (IQR 0–4), P = 0.047; 0 (IQR 0–1) versus 1 (IQR 0–2), P = 0.017; and 0 (IQR 0–0.25) versus 1 (IQR 0–2), P = 0.013, respectively. At 6 and 12 h, there were no statistically significant differences, that is, 0.5 (IQR 0–2) versus 1 (IQR 0–2), P = 0.908 and 1 (IQR 0–2) versus 0.5 (IQR 0–2), P = 0.929, respectively. Lower morphine requirements were recorded in the first 18 and 24 postoperative hours, that is, 0 (IQR 0–0) versus 1 (IQR 0–2.75) mg, P = 0.028 and 0 (IQR 0–2) versus 1.5 (IQR 0–3) mg, P = 0.012, respectively. Start to sitting and ambulation occurred earlier in the OFA group (P = 0.030 and P = 0.002, respectively). Linear regression showed that ambulation was independently associated with the analgesic technique (P = 0.034). Only one patient had postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and belonged to the OBA group. There was no difference in total complications or the length of stay. In this study, OFA strategy was found to be safe, feasible, and provided adequate analgesia, minimizing the use of postoperative opioids, and was independently associated with earlier ambulation.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术中无阿片麻醉的可行性:一项回顾性准实验研究
无阿片麻醉(OFA)可提供充分的镇痛,最大限度地减少阿片类药物的用量。无阿片麻醉尚未在腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术(LRP)中进行过评估。我们的目的是评估 OFA 在前列腺癌根治术中的可行性和有效性。 从 2020 年 9 月到 2022 年 12 月,我们对 55 名接受前列腺癌根治术的成年患者进行了一项准实验性回顾研究3。研究人员按照预定方案进行了阿片类药物麻醉(OBA,持续输注瑞芬太尼)或 OFA(持续输注利多卡因、右美托咪定和氯胺酮)。两组均在切开皮肤前进行伤口浸润。主要结果是术后 24 小时内的疼痛控制情况(数字评分量表 [NRS])。次要结果是阿片类药物的用量、开始坐立和行走的时间、术后并发症和住院时间。 OFA方案患者在1、18和24小时内活动时的中位疼痛评分较好,分别为1(四分位距[IQR] 0-3)对2.5(IQR 0-4),P = 0.047;0(IQR 0-1)对1(IQR 0-2),P = 0.017;0(IQR 0-0.25)对1(IQR 0-2),P = 0.013。在 6 小时和 12 小时内,差异无统计学意义,分别为 0.5(IQR 0-2)对 1(IQR 0-2),P = 0.908 和 1(IQR 0-2)对 0.5(IQR 0-2),P = 0.929。术后最初18小时和24小时的吗啡需求量较低,分别为0(IQR 0-0)对1(IQR 0-2.75)毫克,P = 0.028和0(IQR 0-2)对1.5(IQR 0-3)毫克,P = 0.012。OFA 组开始坐立和行走的时间更早(P = 0.030 和 P = 0.002)。线性回归显示,行走与镇痛技术有独立关联(P = 0.034)。只有一名患者出现术后恶心和呕吐(PONV),属于OBA组。总并发症和住院时间没有差异。 本研究发现,OFA策略安全、可行,能提供充分的镇痛,最大限度地减少术后阿片类药物的使用,并且与患者更早下床活动密切相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Analgesic efficacy of ultrasound-guided retrolaminar block in truncal surgeries: A narrative review Anesthetic challenges in using posterior retroperitoneoscopic approach for phaeochromocytoma in pregnancy A case of lost endotracheal tube PONV, beyond “Apfel” score Clinical experience with stellate ganglion block in a neonate
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1