Association Between Cannabis Use and Opioid Consumption, Pain, and Respiratory Complications After Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cannabis is a widely used illicit drug with effects on different pain pathways. However, interactions between cannabis and postoperative pain are unclear. Cannabis smoking also affects the lungs, but the impact of cannabis use on postoperative pulmonary complications is unknown. We hypothesized that preoperative cannabis use in adults having elective surgery is associated with higher postoperative opioid consumption. Secondarily, we tested the hypothesis that cannabis use is associated with higher pain scores, hypoxemia (oxygen saturation [Spo2]/fraction of inspired oxygen [Fio2] ratio), and higher postoperative pulmonary complications compared to nonuse of cannabis. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we included adult patients who had elective surgeries at Cleveland Clinic Main Campus between January 2010 and December 2020. The exposure was use of cannabis within 30 days before surgery, and the control group never used cannabis. Patients who had regional anesthesia or chronic pain diagnosis were excluded. The primary outcome was postoperative opioid consumption; 3 secondary outcomes were time-weighted average (TWA) postoperative pain score, TWA Spo2/Fio2 ratio, and composite of pulmonary complications after surgery. We assessed the association between cannabis use and opioid consumption during the first 24 postoperative hours using linear regression on log-transformed opioid consumption with a propensity score-based method (inverse probability of treatment weighting [IPTW]) adjusting for confounders. We further adjusted for imbalanced confounding variables after IPTW was applied. RESULTS: In total, 1683 of 34,521 patients were identified as cannabis users. Cannabis use was associated with increased opioid consumption, with an adjusted ratio of geometric means (95% confidence interval [CI]) of 1.30 (1.22-1.38; P < .0001) for cannabis users versus nonusers. Secondarily, (1) cannabis use was associated with increased TWA pain score, with a difference in means of 0.57 (95% CI, 0.46-0.67; P < .0001); (2) cannabis use was not associated with TWA Spo2/Fio2, with an adjusted difference in means of 0.5 (95% CI, -3.1 to 4.2; P = .76); and (3) cannabis use was not associated with a collapsed composite of pulmonary complications, with estimated odds ratio of 0.90 (95% CI, 0.71-1.13; P = .34). CONCLUSIONS: Adult cannabis users undergoing surgeries were found to have significantly higher postoperative opioid consumption and pain scores than nonusers. Cannabis use did not have a clinically meaningful association with hypoxia or composite pulmonary complications.

Tidal Volume and Positive End-expiratory Pressure and Postoperative Hypoxemia during General Anesthesia: A Single-center Multiple Crossover Factorial Cluster Trial.

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative mechanical ventilation is a major component of general anesthesia. The extent to which various intraoperative tidal volumes and positive end-expiratory pressures (PEEP) effect on postoperative hypoxia and lung injury remains unclear. We hypothesized that adults having orthopedic surgery, ventilation using different tidal volumes and PEEP levels affect the oxygenation within first hour in the postoperative care unit. METHODS: We conducted a two-by-two factorial crossover cluster trial at the Cleveland Clinic Main Campus. We enrolled patients having orthopedic surgery with general anesthesia who were assigned to factorial clusters with tidal volumes of 6 or 10 ml/kg of predicted body weight and to PEEP of 5 or 8 cm H2O in 1-week clusters. The primary outcome was the effect of tidal volume or PEEP on time-weighted average peripheral oxygen saturation measured by pulse oximetry divided by the fraction of inspired oxygen (Spo2/Fio2 ratio) during the initial postoperative hour. RESULTS: We enrolled 2,860 patients who had general anesthesia for orthopedic surgery from September 2018 through October 2020. The interaction between tidal volume and PEEP was not significant (P = 0.565). The mean ± SD time-weighted average of Spo2/Fio2 ratio was 353 ± 47 and not different in patients assigned to high and low tidal volume (estimated effect, 3.5%; 97.5% CI, -0.4% to 7.3%; P = 0.042), for those assigned to high and low PEEP (estimated effect, -0.2%; 97.5% CI, -4.0% to 3.6%; P = 0.906). We did not find significant difference in ward Spo2/Fio2 ratio, pulmonary complications, and duration of hospitalization among patients assigned to various tidal volumes and PEEP levels. CONCLUSIONS: Among adults having major orthopedic surgery, postoperative oxygenation is similar, with tidal volumes between 6 and 10 ml/kg and PEEP between 5 and 8 cm H2O. Our results suggest that any combination of tidal volumes between 6 and 10 ml/kg and PEEP between 5 versus 8 ml cm H2O can be used safely for orthopedic surgery.

Pro-Con Debate: Monitored Anesthesia Care Versus General Endotracheal Anesthesia for Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography.

Over the past several decades, anesthesia has experienced a significant growth in nonoperating room anesthesia. Gastrointestinal suites represent the largest volume location for off-site anesthesia procedures, which include complex endoscopy procedures like endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). These challenging patients and procedures necessitate a shared airway and are typically performed in the prone or semiprone position on a dedicated procedural table. In this Pro-Con commentary article, the Pro side supports the use of monitored anesthesia care (MAC), citing fewer hemodynamic perturbations, decreased side effects from inhalational agents, faster cognitive recovery, and quicker procedural times leading to improved center efficiency (ie, quicker time to discharge). Meanwhile, the Con side favors general endotracheal anesthesia (GEA) to reduce the infrequent, but well-recognized, critical events due to impaired oxygenation and/or ventilation known to occur during MAC in this setting. They also argue that procedural interruptions are more frequent during MAC as anesthesia professionals need to rescue patients from apnea with various airway maneuvers. Thus, the risk of hypoxemic episodes is minimized using GEA for ERCP. Unfortunately, neither position is supported by large randomized controlled trials. The consensus opinion of the authors is that anesthesia for ERCP should be provided by a qualified anesthesia professional who weighs the risks and benefits of each technique for a given patient and clinical circumstance. This Pro-Con article highlights the many challenges anesthesia professionals face during ERCPs and encourages thoughtful, individualized anesthetic plans over knee-jerk decisions. Both sides agree that an anesthetic technique administered by a qualified anesthesia professional is favored over an endoscopist-directed sedation approach.