Perioperative Gabapentin Does Not Reduce Postoperative Delirium in Older Surgical Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pain and opioid use are associated with postoperative delirium. We designed a single-center, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-arm, double-blinded trial to determine whether perioperative administration of gabapentin reduced postoperative delirium after noncardiac surgery. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive placebo (N = 347) or gabapentin 900 mg (N = 350) administered preoperatively and for the first 3 postoperative days. The primary outcome was postoperative delirium as measured by the Confusion Assessment Method. Secondary outcomes were postoperative pain, opioid use, and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: Data for 697 patients were included, with a mean ± SD age of 72 ± 6 yr. The overall incidence of postoperative delirium in any of the first 3 days was 22.4% (24.0% in the gabapentin and 20.8% in the placebo groups; the difference was 3.20%; 95% CI, 3.22% to 9.72%; P = 0.30). The incidence of delirium did not differ between the two groups when stratified by surgery type, anesthesia type, or preoperative risk status. Gabapentin was shown to be opioid sparing, with lower doses for the intervention group versus the control group. For example, the morphine equivalents for the gabapentin-treated group, median 6.7 mg (25th, 75th quartiles: 1.3, 20.0 mg), versus control group, median 6.7 mg (25th, 75th quartiles: 2.7, 24.8 mg), differed on the first postoperative day (P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Although postoperative opioid use was reduced, perioperative administration of gabapentin did not result in a reduction of postoperative delirium or hospital length of stay.

The temporal relationship between early postoperative delirium and postoperative cognitive dysfunction in older patients: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative delirium and cognitive dysfunction are frequent phenomena in older patients; however, few studies have examined the temporal relationship between these two conditions in the early postoperative period. Therefore, this study aimed to determine if postoperative delirium and postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) coexist after major noncardiac surgery. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of patients who were ≥ 65 yr of age undergoing noncardiac surgery. Patients were evaluated preoperatively and for two days postoperatively for delirium and POCD. Delirium was determined using the Confusion Assessment Method, and POCD was measured by three cognitive tests addressing changes in executive function, memory, attention, and concentration. For each postoperative day, patients' neurologic status was categorized into three mutually exclusive categories: delirium, POCD, or neither condition. RESULTS: Four hundred sixty-one patients aged ≥ 65 yr of age were studied, and 421 patients with complete postoperative cognitive testing were reported. Eighty percent of patients experienced either delirium or POCD on the first day after surgery. Seventy percent of patients who had delirium on the first postoperative day also had delirium on the second postoperative day. Sixty-three percent of patients who had POCD on postoperative day one continued to have POCD on the next day. Sixteen percent of patients with delirium on day one were non-delirious on day two but met criteria for POCD on day two. Conversely, 15% of patients with POCD on day one became delirious on day two. Only 13% of patients did not experience delirium or POCD on either day after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Eighty percent of surgical patients experienced some form of cognitive dysfunction the day after surgery, and few recovered by the second day after surgery.

Current Practices and the Provider Perspectives on Inconclusive Genetic Test Results for Osteogenesis Imperfecta in Children with Unexplained Fractures: ELSI Implications.

Genetic testing can be used to determine if unexplained fractures in children could have resulted from a predisposition to bone fractures, e.g., osteogenesis imperfecta. However, uncertainty is introduced if a variant of unknown significance (VUS) is identified. Proper interpretation of VUS in these situations is critical because of its influence on clinical care and in court rulings. This study sought to understand how VUS are interpreted and used by practitioners when there is a differential diagnosis including both osteogenesis imperfecta and non-accidental injury.A 15-question survey was emailed to physicians who requested analysis of two genes, COL1A1 and COL1A2, from the University of Washington from 2005-2013 for patient cases involving suspicion of child abuse.Among the 89 participants, responses differed about when genetic testing should be ordered for osteogenesis imperfecta, who should be consulted about utilization of VUS test results, follow-up procedures, and who should receive the VUS results.There are no clear guidelines for how to interpret and follow up on VUS. In the legal setting, misinterpreted VUS could lead to unintended consequences and deleterious ramifications for family members. The need for better practice guidelines to help promote more equitable handling of these sensitive legal cases is clear.