Epidemiology of Chronic Pain in the Latium Region, Italy: A Cross-Sectional Study on the Clinical Characteristics of Patients Attending Pain Clinics.

In Italy, chronic pain affects more than a quarter of the population, whereas the average European prevalence is 21%. This high prevalence might be due to the high percentage of Italian people who do not receive treatment, even after the passing of law 38/2010 (the right to access pain management in Italy), which created a regional network for the diagnosis and treatment of noncancer chronic pain. Italian epidemiologic studies on chronic pain are scanty, and this observational, multicenter, cross-sectional study is the first to investigate the clinical characteristics of patients who attended the pain management clinics in the Latium Region, Italy, for the management of their noncancer chronic pain. A total of 1,606 patients (mean age 56.8 years, standard deviation ± 11.4), 67% women, were analyzed. Severe pain was present in 54% of the sample. Women experienced pain and had it in two or more sites more often than men (57% vs. 50%, p = .02; and 55.2% vs. 45.9%, p < .001, respectively). Chronic pain was musculoskeletal (45%), mixed (34%), and neuropathic (21%). In more than 60% of the cases, chronic pain was continuous, and in 20% it had lasted for more than 48 months; long-lasting pain was often neuropathic. Low back (33.4%) and lower limbs (28.2%) were the main locations. Severe intensity of pain was statistically significantly associated with female gender (odds ratio [OR] 1.39; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-1.84); with International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, codes for chronic pain syndrome (OR 2.14; 95% CI 1.55-2.95); and with continuous pain (OR 2.02; 95% CI 1.54-2.66). Neuropathic pain and mixed pain were significantly associated with number of sites, and a trend seemed to be present (OR 2.11 and 3.02 for 2 and 3 + sites; 95% CI 1.59-2.79 and 2.00-4.55, respectively).

Single-port robotic-assisted adrenalectomy: feasibility, safety, and cost-effectiveness.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The introduction of robotic surgery offers patients and surgeons new options for adrenalectomy. Whereas multiport adrenalectomies have been safely performed using the robot, we describe our experience with the novel technique of single-port robotic-assisted adrenalectomy. METHODS: We performed a matched-cohort study comparing 16 single-port robotic-assisted adrenalectomies with 16 patients from a pool of 148 laparoscopic adrenalectomies, matched for age, gender, operative side, pathology, and body mass index. All were operated on by 1 surgeon. RESULTS: The pathology included aldosteronoma in 44% of patients, adrenocorticotropic hormone-dependent Cushing syndrome (bilateral adrenalectomy) in 19%, pheochromocytoma in 13%, and other pathology in 24%. The operative time was 183 ± 33 minutes for single-port robotic-assisted adrenalectomy and 173 ± 40 minutes for laparoscopic adrenalectomy (P = .58). The total time in the operating room was 246 ± 33 minutes for single-port robotic-assisted adrenalectomy and 240 ± 39 minutes for laparoscopic adrenalectomy (P = .57). There was 1 conversion to open adrenalectomy (6%) in each group, both because of bleeding on the right side during bilateral adrenalectomy. Two right-sided single-port robotic-assisted adrenalectomy patients required conversion to laparoscopic adrenalectomy, one because of poor visualization. There were no deaths. Complications occurred in 2 patients in each group (intensive care unit admission, prolonged ileus). Both groups had similar pain scores (mean of 3.7 on a scale from 1 to 10) on postoperative day 1, and patients in the single-port robotic-assisted adrenalectomy group used less narcotic pain medication in the first 24 hours after surgery (43 mg vs 84 mg in laparoscopic adrenalectomy group, P < .001). The differences between the single-port robotic-assisted adrenalectomy group and laparoscopic adrenalectomy group in length of stay (2.3 ± 0.5 days vs 3.1 ± 0.9 days, P = .23), percentage of patients discharged on postoperative day 1 (56% vs 31%, P = .10), and hospital cost (16% lower in single-port robotic-assisted adrenalectomy group, P = .17) did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: Single-port robotic adrenalectomy is feasible; patients require less narcotic pain medication whereas costs appear equivalent compared with laparoscopic adrenalectomy.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of routine frozen-section analysis of breast margins compared with reoperation for positive margins.

BACKGROUND: Negative margins are associated with decreased local recurrence after lumpectomy for breast cancer. A 2nd operation for re-excision of positive margins is required with rates varying from 15 to 50%. At our institution we routinely use frozen-section analysis of all margins to minimize rates of 2nd operations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost/benefit of routine frozen-section analysis. METHODS: A decision tree was built to compare 2 strategies: (A) lumpectomy without frozen section and a 2nd operation for positive margin(s) versus (B) lumpectomy with intraoperative frozen-section analysis and a 2nd operation for positive margin(s). For strategy A the rate of positive margins and reoperation were varied from 15 to 50%. For strategy B, a 2nd operation rate of 3% was used. Review of our institutional experience demonstrates an intraoperative re-excision of at least 1 margin in 57% of cases performed with frozen-section support. RESULTS: The cost to provider (i.e., institution) per patient resected to negative margins for strategy A ranged from $4835 to $6306. Average weighted cost of strategy B was $5708. Strategy B was less expensive when the reoperation rate was above 36%. The cost to payor (i.e., Medicare) for strategy A ranged from $3577 to $4665. Average weighted cost for strategy B was $3913. Strategy B was less expensive when the re-excision rate was above 26%. CONCLUSION: Routine use of frozen-section analysis of lumpectomy margins decreases reoperation rates for margin control; therefore, the cost to provider and payor can be cost effective.

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 -- a British case history for legislation on bioethical issues.

Dr. Virginia Bolton, Sir John Osborn, and Denise Servante present an account of the process whereby legislation was enacted in Britain. Each is a member of PROGRESS (the Campaign for Research into Human Reproduction), which was established in 1985 to present the case regulating research using human embryos to the British parliament and public.