Pro-Con Debate: Anesthesiologists Should Be Responsible for Treating Preoperative Anemia.

In this Pro-Con commentary article, we discuss whether anesthesiologists should be responsible for treating preoperative anemia. This debate was proposed based on the article published in this issue of Anesthesia & Analgesia by Warner et al, which is an advisory on managing preoperative anemia endorsed by both the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists and the Society for Advancement of Patient Blood Management. All evidence suggests that anemia is not just an innocent "bystander" which can be solved by transfusion. In fact, both anemia and transfusion are independently associated with adverse outcomes, so why not avoid both? It just makes sense that patients show up for surgery with enough red blood cells to avoid needing transfusion with someone else's. Even if we agree that preoperative anemia is worth treating before surgery, the question remains who should be responsible for doing so, and therein lies the reason for this Pro-Con debate. Should it be the responsibility of the anesthesiologist, or not? Let the readers decide.

The impact of hindsight bias on the diagnosis of perioperative events by anesthesia providers: A multicenter randomized crossover study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Hindsight bias is the tendency to overestimate the predictability of an event after it has already occurred. We aimed to evaluate whether hindsight bias influences the retrospective interpretation of clinical scenarios in the field of anesthesiology, which relies on clinicians making rapid decisions in the setting of perioperative adverse events. DESIGN: Two clinical scenarios were developed (intraoperative hypotension and intraoperative hypoxia) with 3 potential diagnoses for each. Participants completed a crossover study reviewing one case without being informed of the supposed ultimate diagnosis (i.e., no 'anchor' diagnosis), referred to as their foresight case, and the other as a hindsight case wherein they were informed in the leading sentence of the scenario that 1 of the 3 conditions provided was the ultimate diagnosis (i.e., the diagnosis the participant might 'anchor' to if given this information at the start). Participants were randomly assigned to (1) which scenario (hypotension or hypoxia) was presented as the initial foresight case and (2) which of the 3 potential diagnoses for the second case (the hindsight case, which defaulted to whichever case the participant was not assigned for the first case) was presented as the ultimate diagnosis in the leading sentence in a 2 (scenario order) x 3 (hindsight case anchor) between-subjects factorial design (6 possible randomization assignments). SETTING: Two academic medical centers. PARTICIPANTS: Faculty, fellow, and resident anesthesiologists and certified nurse anesthetists (CRNAs). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS: After reading each clinical scenario, participants were asked to rate the probability (%) of each of three potential diagnoses to have caused the hypotension or hypoxia. Compositional data analysis (CoDA) was used to compare whether diagnosis probabilities differ between the hindsight and the foresight case. MAIN RESULTS: 113 participants completed the study. 59 participants (52%) were resident anesthesiologists. Participants randomized to the hypotension scenario as a hindsight case were 2.82 times more likely to assign higher probability to the pulmonary embolus diagnosis if provided as an anchor (95% CI, 1.35-5.90; P = 0.006) and twice as likely to assign higher probability to the myocardial infarction diagnosis if provided as an anchor (95% CI, 1.12-3.58; P = 0.020). Participants randomized to the hypoxia scenario as a hindsight case were 1.78 times more likely to assign higher probability to the mainstem bronchus intubation diagnosis if provided in the anchor statement (95% CI, 1.00-3.14; P = 0.048) and 3.72 times more likely to assign higher probability to the pulmonary edema diagnosis if provided as an anchor (95% CI, 1.88-7.35; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Hindsight bias influences the clinical diagnosis probabilities assigned by anesthesia providers. Clinicians should be educated on hindsight bias in perioperative medicine and be cognizant of the effect of hindsight bias when interpreting clinical outcomes.

The Impact of Physician Race and Sex on Patient Ranking of Physician Competence and Perception of Leadership Ability.

Background Biases affect patient perceptions of their physician and influence the physician-patient relationship. While racial disparities in care and inequities in the healthcare workforce are well-documented, the impact of physician race on patient perceptions remains unclear. We aimed to investigate the association of physician race and sex on patient perceptions during simulated preoperative encounters. Methods Three hundred patients recruited consecutively in the Preanesthesia Evaluation and Testing Center viewed pictures of 4 anesthesiologists (black male, white male, black female, white female) in random order while listening to a set of paired audio recordings describing general anesthesia. Participants ranked each anesthesiologist on confidence, intelligence, and likelihood of choosing the anesthesiologist to care for their family member, and chose the one anesthesiologist most like a leader. Results Compared to white anesthesiologists, black anesthesiologists had greater odds of being ranked more confident (OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.10 to 1.89; P=0.008) and being considered a leader (OR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.50 to 2.84; P<0.0001). Among white participants, black anesthesiologists had greater odds of being ranked more intelligent (OR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.54 to 2.81; P<0.0001) and were more likely to be chosen to care for a family member (OR, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.66 to 3.08; P<0.0001). Female anesthesiologists had greater odds of being ranked more intelligent (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.08 to 1.71; P=0.009) and were more likely to be chosen to care for a family member (OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.27 to 1.97; P<0.001) compared with male anesthesiologists. Conclusions Contrary to our hypothesis, patients ranked black physicians more highly on multiple competence and leadership quality metrics. Our data likely highlight the role social desirability bias may play in studies of racial disparities within medicine.

Anesthesiology Residents' Experiences and Perspectives of Residency Training.

BACKGROUND: Anesthesiology residents' experiences and perspectives about their programs may be helpful in improving training. The goals of this repeated cross-sectional survey study are to determine: (1) the most important factors residents consider in choosing an anesthesiology residency, (2) the aspects of the clinical base year that best prepare residents for anesthesia clinical training, and what could be improved, (3) whether residents are satisfied with their anesthesiology residency and what their primary struggles are, and (4) whether residents believe their residency prepares them for proficiency in the 6 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Core Competencies and for independent practice. METHODS: Anesthesiologists beginning their US residency training from 2013 to 2016 were invited to participate in anonymous, confidential, and voluntary self-administered online surveys. Resident cohort was defined by clinical anesthesia year 1, such that 9 survey administrations were included in this study-3 surveys for the 2013 and 2014 cohorts (clinical anesthesia years 1-3), 2 surveys for the 2015 cohort (clinical anesthesia years 1-2), and 1 survey for the 2016 cohort (clinical anesthesia year 1). RESULTS: The overall response rate was 36% (4707 responses to 12,929 invitations). On a 5-point Likert scale with 1 as "very unimportant" and 5 as "very important," quality of clinical experience (4.7-4.8 among the cohorts) and departmental commitment to education (4.3-4.5) were rated as the most important factors in anesthesiologists' choice of residency. Approximately 70% of first- and second-year residents agreed that their clinical base year prepared them well for anesthesiology residency, particularly clinical training experiences in critical care rotations, anesthesiology rotations, and surgery rotations/perioperative procedure management. Overall, residents were satisfied with their choice of anesthesiology specialty (4.4-4.5 on a 5-point scale among cohort-training levels) and their residency programs (4.0-4.1). The residency training experiences mostly met their expectations (3.8-4.0). Senior residents who reported any struggles highlighted academic more than interpersonal or technical difficulties. Senior residents generally agreed that the residency adequately prepared them for independent practice (4.1-4.4). Of the 6 ACGME Core Competencies, residents had the highest confidence in professionalism (4.7-4.9) and interpersonal and communication skills (4.6-4.8). Areas in residency that could be improved include the provision of an appropriate balance between education and service and allowance for sufficient time off to search and interview for a postresidency position. CONCLUSIONS: Anesthesiology residents in the United States indicated they most value quality of clinical training experiences and are generally satisfied with their choice of specialty and residency program.

Anesthesiologist Age and Sex Influence Patient Perceptions of Physician Competence.

BACKGROUND: Uncovering patients' biases toward characteristics of anesthesiologists may inform ways to improve the patient-anesthesiologist relationship. The authors previously demonstrated that patients prefer anesthesiologists displaying confident body language, but did not detect a sex bias. The effect of anesthesiologists' age on patient perceptions has not been studied. In this follow-up study, it was hypothesized that patients would prefer older-appearing anesthesiologists over younger-appearing anesthesiologists and male over female anesthesiologists. METHODS: Three hundred adult, English-speaking patients were recruited in the Preanesthesia Evaluation and Testing Center. Patients were randomized (150 per group) to view a set of four videos in random order. Each 90-s video featured an older female, older male, younger female, or younger male anesthesiologist reciting the same script describing general anesthesia. Patients ranked each anesthesiologist on confidence, intelligence, and likelihood of choosing the anesthesiologist to care for their family member. Patients also chose the one anesthesiologist who seemed most like a leader. RESULTS: Three hundred patients watched the videos and completed the questionnaire. Among patients younger than age 65 yr, the older anesthesiologists had greater odds of being ranked more confident (odds ratio, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.41 to 2.64; P < 0.001) and more intelligent (odds ratio, 2.24; 95% CI, 1.62 to 3.11; P < 0.001), and had greater odds of being considered a leader (odds ratio, 2.62; 95% CI, 1.72 to 4.00; P < 0.001) when compared with younger anesthesiologists. The preference for older anesthesiologists was not observed in patients age 65 and older. Female anesthesiologists had greater odds of being ranked more confident (odds ratio, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.13 to 1.87; P = 0.003) and more likely to be chosen to care for one's family member (odds ratio, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.40 to 2.31; P < 0.001) compared with male anesthesiologists. The ranking preference for female anesthesiologists on these two measures was observed among white patients and not among nonwhite patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients preferred older anesthesiologists on the measures of confidence, intelligence, and leadership. Patients also preferred female anesthesiologists on the measures of confidence and likelihood of choosing the anesthesiologist to care for one's family member.

Distraction in the operating room: A narrative review of environmental and self-initiated distractions and their effect on anesthesia providers.

The operating room (OR) is a busy environment with multiple opportunities for distraction. A well-trained anesthesiologist or certified registered nurse anesthetist (CRNA) should remain focused on providing excellent patient care despite these potential distractions. The purpose of this narrative review is to present the multiple types of OR distractions and evaluate each for their level of distraction and their likely impact on patient safety. Distractions in the OR are common and numerous types of distractions exist. Loud OR background noise can lead to miscommunication within the OR team. In several studies, OR noise has been shown to decrease vigilance and possibly delay recognition of non-routine events. The most commonly observed distracting events are "small talk" and staff entering and exiting the OR and most intense distracting events are faulty or unavailable equipment. Phone and pager use can be particularly distracting. Self-initiated distractions can be seen as unprofessional and can negatively impact patient safety. The impact of OR distractions on patient outcomes deserves more vigorous investigation. We must provide anesthesia trainees with the skills to remain vigilant despite numerous and varied OR distractions while also attempting to reduce such OR distractions to improve patient safety. Further research is needed to inform the institution of policies to lessen unnecessary OR distractions.

Impact of a perioperative oral opioid substitution protocol during the nationwide intravenous opioid shortage: A single center, interrupted time series with segmented regression analysis.

INTRODUCTION: To mitigate the recent nationwide shortage of intravenous opioids, we developed a standardized perioperative oral opioid guideline anchored with appropriate use of nonopioid analgesia, neuraxial and loco-regional techniques. We hypothesize that adoption of this new guideline was associated with: 1) equivalent patient reported pain scores in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU); and 2) equivalent total opioid use (oral and parenteral) during the perioperative period. METHODS: Cases performed from July 1, 2017 to May 31, 2019 were screened. All opioids administered were converted to intravenous morphine milligram equivalents. Segmented regression analyses of interrupted time series were performed examining the change in opioid use, PACU pain scores and number of non-opioid analgesic medications used before and after the protocol implementation in April 2018. RESULTS: After exclusions, 29, 621 cases were included in the analysis. No significant differences in demographic, ASA status, case length and surgical procedure type were present in the pre and post-intervention period. A significant decrease in total (Estimate: -39.9 mg, SE: 6.9 mg, p < 0.001) and parenteral (Estimate: -51.6 mg, SE: 7.1 mg, p < 0.001) opioid use with a significant increase in oral opioid use (Estimate: 9.4 mg, SE: 1.1 mg, p < 0.001) was noted after the intervention. Pain scores were not significantly different between the pre- and post-intervention period (Estimate: 0.05, SE: 0.13, p = 0.69). CONCLUSION: We report our experience with a primary perioperative oral based opioid regimen that is associated with decreased total opioid consumption and equivalent patient reported pain scores.

Neuroanesthesia Guidelines for Optimizing Transcranial Motor Evoked Potential Neuromonitoring During Deformity and Complex Spinal Surgery: A Delphi Consensus Study.

STUDY DESIGN: Expert opinion-modified Delphi study. OBJECTIVE: We used a modified Delphi approach to obtain consensus among leading spinal deformity surgeons and their neuroanesthesiology teams regarding optimal practices for obtaining reliable motor evoked potential (MEP) signals. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring of transcranial MEPs provides the best method for assessing spinal cord integrity during complex spinal surgeries. MEPs are affected by pharmacological and physiological parameters. It is the responsibility of the spine surgeon and neuroanesthesia team to understand how they can best maintain high-quality MEP signals throughout surgery. Nevertheless, varying approaches to neuroanesthesia are seen in clinical practice. METHODS: We identified 19 international expert spinal deformity treatment teams. A modified Delphi process with two rounds of surveying was performed. Greater than 50% agreement on the final statements was considered "agreement"; >75% agreement was considered "consensus." RESULTS: Anesthesia regimens and protocols were obtained from the expert centers. There was a large amount of variability among centers. Two rounds of consensus surveying were performed, and all centers participated in both rounds of surveying. Consensus was obtained for 12 of 15 statements, and majority agreement was obtained for two of the remaining statements. Total intravenous anesthesia was identified as the preferred method of maintenance, with few centers allowing for low mean alveolar concentration of inhaled anesthetic. Most centers advocated for <150 µg/kg/min of propofol with titration to the lowest dose that maintains appropriate anesthesia depth based on awareness monitoring. Use of adjuvant intravenous anesthetics, including ketamine, low-dose dexmedetomidine, and lidocaine, may help to reduce propofol requirements without negatively effecting MEP signals. CONCLUSION: Spine surgeons and neuroanesthesia teams should be familiar with methods for optimizing MEPs during deformity and complex spinal cases. Although variability in practices exists, there is consensus among international spinal deformity treatment centers regarding best practices. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5.

Impact of Caffeine Ingestion on the Driving Performance of Anesthesiology Residents After 6 Consecutive Overnight Work Shifts.

BACKGROUND: Residency training in anesthesiology involves care of hospitalized patients and necessitates overnight work, resulting in altered sleep patterns and sleep deprivation. Caffeine consumption is commonly used to improve alertness when fatigued after overnight work, in preparation for the commute home. METHODS: We studied the impact of drinking a caffeinated energy drink (160 mg of caffeine) on driving performance in a high-fidelity, virtual reality driving simulator (Virginia Driving Safety Laboratory using the Driver Guidance System) in anesthesiology resident physicians immediately after 6 consecutive night-float shifts. Twenty-six residents participated and were randomized to either consume a caffeinated or noncaffeinated energy drink 60 minutes before the driving simulation session. After a subsequent week of night-float work, residents performed the same driving session (in a crossover fashion) with the opposite intervention. Psychomotor vigilance task (PVT) testing was used to evaluate reaction time and lapses in attention. RESULTS: After 6 consecutive night-float shifts, anesthesiology residents who consumed a caffeinated energy drink had increased variability in driving for throttle, steering, and speed during the first 10 minutes of open-road driving but proceeded to demonstrate improved driving performance with fewer obstacle collisions (epoch 2: 0.65 vs 0.87; epoch 3: 0.47 vs 0.95; P = .03) in the final 30 minutes of driving as compared to driving performance after consumption of a noncaffeinated energy drink. Improved driving performance was most apparent during the last 30 minutes of the simulated drive in the caffeinated condition. Mean reaction time between the caffeine and noncaffeine states differed significantly (278.9 ± 29.1 vs 294.0 ± 36.3 milliseconds; P = .021), while the number of major lapses (0.09 ± 0.43 vs 0.27 ± 0.55; P = .257) and minor lapses (1.05 ± 1.39 vs 2.05 ± 3.06; P = .197) was not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: After consuming a caffeinated energy drink on conclusion of 6 shifts of night-float work, anesthesiology residents had improved control of driving performance variables in a high-fidelity driving simulator, including a significant reduction in collisions as well as slightly faster reaction times.

Ventilator Mode Does Not Influence Blood Loss or Transfusion Requirements During Major Spine Surgery: A Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Blood loss during adult spinal deformity surgery is multifactorial. Anesthetic-related factors, such as mode of mechanical ventilation, may contribute to intraoperative blood loss. The aim of this study was to determine the influence of ventilator mode and ventilator parameters on intraoperative blood loss and transfusion requirements in patients undergoing prone position spine surgery. METHODS: This single-center retrospective study examined electronic medical records of patients ≥18 years of age who underwent elective prone position spine surgery between May 2015 and June 2016. Associations between ventilator mode and ventilator parameters with intraoperative estimated blood loss (EBL), packed red blood cells (PRBCs), fresh-frozen plasma (FFP), cryoprecipitate and platelet transfusions, and subfascial drain output were examined using multiple linear regression models controlling for age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) physical status score, body mass index (BMI), preoperative blood coagulation parameters and laboratory values, operative levels, cage constructs, osteotomies, transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions, laminectomies, reoperation, spine surgery invasiveness index, and operative time. In a secondary analysis, EBL, blood product transfusions, and postoperative drain output were compared between pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) and volume-controlled ventilation (VCV) propensity score-matched cohorts. RESULTS: Nine hundred forty-six records were reviewed, and 822 were included in the analysis. After adjusting for confounding, no statistically significant associations were observed between mode of ventilation and intraoperative EBL (estimate, -2; 95% confidence interval [CI], -248 to 245; P = .99) or blood product transfusions (PRBC: estimate, -9; 95% CI, -154 to 135; P = .90; FFP: estimate, -3; 95% CI, -59 to 54; P = .93; cryoprecipitate: estimate, -14; 95% CI, -70 to 43; P = .63; platelets: -7; 95% CI, -39 to 24; P = .64). After propensity score matching (n = 27 per group), no significant differences were observed in EBL (mean difference, 525 mL; 95% CI, -15 to 1065; P = .056) or blood transfusions (PRBC: mean difference, 208 mL; 95% CI, -23 to 439; P = .077; FFP (mean difference, 34 mL; 95% CI, -17 to 84; P = .19); cryoprecipitate (mean difference, 55 mL; 95% CI, -24 to 133; P = .17); or platelets (mean difference, 26 mL; 95% CI, -12 to 64; P = .18) between PCV and VCV groups. CONCLUSIONS: In prone position spine surgery, neither mode of mechanical ventilation nor airway pressure is associated with intraoperative blood loss or need for allogeneic transfusion. Use of modern ventilation strategies using lung protective techniques may mitigate differences in blood loss previously observed between PCV and VCV modes.

Individualized Quality Data Feedback Improves Anesthesiology Residents' Documentation of Depth of Neuromuscular Blockade Before Extubation.

Reversal of neuromuscular blockade is an important anesthesia quality measure, and anesthesiologists should strive to improve both documentation and practice of this measure. We hypothesized that the use of an electronic quality database to give individualized resident anesthesiologist feedback would increase the percentage of cases that residents successfully documented quantitative depth of neuromuscular blockade before extubation. The mean baseline success rate among anesthesiology residents was 80% (95% confidence interval [CI], 78-81) and increased by 14% (95% CI, 11-17; P < .001) after the residents were given their individualized quality data. Practice patterns improved quickly but were not sustained over 6 months.

Postoperative Low-Dose Tranexamic Acid After Major Spine Surgery: A Matched Cohort Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This was a retrospective, cohort study investigating the efficacy and safety of continuous low-dose postoperative tranexamic acid (PTXA) on drain output and transfusion requirements following adult spinal deformity surgery. METHODS: One hundred forty-seven patients undergoing posterior instrumented thoracolumbar fusion of ≥ 3 vertebral levels at a single institution who received low-dose PTXA infusion (0.5-1 mg/kg/hr) for 24 hours were compared to 292 control patients who did not receive PTXA. The cohorts were propensity matched based on age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologist physical status classification, body mass index, number of surgical levels, revision surgery, operative duration, and total intraoperative TXA dose (n = 106 in each group). Primary outcome was 72-hour postoperative drain output. Secondary outcomes were number of allogeneic blood transfusions. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in postoperative drain output in the PTXA group compared to control (660 ± 420 mL vs. 710 ± 490 mL, p = 0.46). The PTXA group received significantly more crystalloid (6,100 ± 3,100 mL vs. 4,600 ± 2,400 mL, p < 0.001) and red blood cell transfusions postoperatively (median [interquartile range]: 1 [0-2] units vs. 0 [0-1] units; incidence rate ratio [95% confidence interval], 1.6 [1.2-2.2]; p = 0.001). Rates of adverse events were comparable between groups. CONCLUSION: Continuous low-dose PTXA infusion was not associated with reduced drain output after spinal deformity surgery. No difference in thromboembolic incidence was observed. A prospective dose escalation study is warranted to investigate the efficacy of higher dose PTXA.

Anesthesiology Resident Night Float Duty Alters Sleep Patterns: An Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Residency programs utilize night float systems to adhere to duty hour restrictions; however, the influence of night float on resident sleep has not been described. The study aim was to determine the influence of night float on resident sleep patterns and quality of sleep. We hypothesized that total sleep time decreases during night float, increases as residents acclimate to night shift work, and returns to baseline during recovery. METHODS: This was a single-center observational study of 30 anesthesia residents scheduled to complete six consecutive night float shifts. Electroencephalography sleep patterns were recorded during baseline (three nights), night float (six nights), and recovery (three nights) using the ZMachine Insight monitor (General Sleep Corporation, USA). Total sleep time; light, deep, and rapid eye movement sleep; sleep efficiency; latency to persistent sleep; and wake after sleep onset were observed. RESULTS: Mean total sleep time ± SD was 5.9 ± 1.9 h (3.0 ± 1.2.1 h light; 1.4 ± 0.6 h deep; 1.6 ± 0.7 h rapid eye movement) at baseline. During night float, mean total sleep time was 4.5 ± 1.8 h (1.4-h decrease, 95% CI: 0.9 to 1.9, Cohen's d = -1.1, P < 0.001) with decreases in light (2.2 ± 1.1 h, 0.7-h decrease, 95% CI: 0.4 to 1.1, d = -1.0, P < 0.001), deep (1.1 ± 0.7 h, 0.3-h decrease, 95% CI: 0.1 to 0.4, d = -0.5, P = 0.005), and rapid eye movement sleep (1.2 ± 0.6 h, 0.4-h decrease, 95% CI: 0.3 to 0.6, d = -0.9, P < 0.001). Mean total sleep time during recovery was 5.4 ± 2.2 h, which did not differ significantly from baseline; however, deep (1.0 ± 0.6 h, 0.4-h decrease, 95% CI: 0.2 to 0.6, d = -0.6, P = 0.001 *, P = 0.001) and rapid eye movement sleep (1.2 ± 0.8 h, 0.4-h decrease, 95% CI: 0.2 to 0.6, d = -0.9, P < 0.001 P < 0.001) were significantly decreased. CONCLUSIONS: Electroencephalography monitoring demonstrates that sleep quantity is decreased during six consecutive night float shifts. A 3-day period of recovery is insufficient for restorative sleep (rapid eye movement and deep sleep) levels to return to baseline.

The Impact of Alvimopan on Return of Bowel Function After Major Spine Surgery - A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind Study.

BACKGROUND: Pain management following major spine surgery requires high doses of opioids and is associated with a risk of opioid-induced constipation. Peripheral mu-receptor antagonists decrease the gastrointestinal complications of perioperative systemic opioid administration without antagonizing the analgesic benefits of these drugs. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of alvimopan in opioid-naive patients undergoing major spine surgery. METHODS: Patients undergoing >3 levels of thoracic and/or lumbar spine surgery were enrolled in this prospective, randomized, double-blind study to receive either alvimopan or placebo prior to and following surgery. Opioid consumption; pain scores; and time of first oral intake, flatus, and bowel movement were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 24 patients were assigned to the active group and 25 were assigned to the placebo group. There was no significant difference in demographics between the groups. Postoperatively, the alvimopan group reported earlier time to first solid intake [median (range): alvimopan: 15 h (3-25) vs placebo: 17 h (3-46), P < .001], passing of flatus [median (range): alvimopan: 22 h (7-63) vs placebo: 28 h (10-58), P < .001], and first bowel movement [median (range): alvimopan: 50 h (22-80) vs placebo: 64 h (40-114), P < .001]. The alvimopan group had higher pain scores (maximum, minimum, and median); however, there was no significant difference between the groups with postoperative opioid use. CONCLUSION: This study shows that the perioperative use of alvimopan significantly reduced the time to return of bowel function with no increase in postoperative opioid use despite a slight increase in pain scores.