Adverse Drug Interaction Between Kratom and Amitriptyline With Gastrointestinal and Mild Hepatic Effects.

Kratom (Mitragyna speciosa) is a tropical evergreen plant native to Southeast Asia, where it has been used historically for its various psychoactive and analgesic properties. In recent years, the popularity of kratom has surged in the United States as a supplement for treating opioid withdrawal/addiction, anxiety, depression, and chronic pain, among others. However, much of Kratom processing and sales remain largely unregulated, with little clinical research to demonstrate the effects of kratom on physiologic processes such as potential drug interactions. Here, we present a case of Kratom interaction with Amitriptyline in a patient recovering from Opioid Use Disorder.

Robotic compared with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare surgical outcome and quality of life of robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy. METHODS: For this controlled clinical trial, patients with benign indications for hysterectomy were randomized to receive either a robotic (robotic group) or conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy (conventional group). The primary end point was total operating time; secondary end points were perioperative outcome, blood loss, and the change in quality of life. RESULTS: Ninety-five patients out of 100 randomized patients completed the study. Patient age, body mass index, and uterus weight showed no significant differences between both groups. All results are given as mean (± standard deviation; median). Total operating time for the robotic group was significantly higher with 106 (± 29; 103) compared with 75 (± 21; 74) (conventional group) minutes. Blood loss, complications, analgesics use, and return to activity for both groups were comparable. The change in preoperative to postoperative quality-of-life index (quality of life measured on a linear scale from 0 to 100) was significantly higher in the robotic group, with 13 (± 10; 13) compared with 5 (± 14; 5) (conventional group). CONCLUSION: Robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy and conventional laparoscopy compare well in most surgical aspects, but the robotic procedure is associated with longer operating times. Postoperative quality-of-life index was better; however, long-term, there was no difference. However, subjective postoperative parameters such as analgesic use and return to activity showed no significant difference between both groups.

Robotic hysterectomy versus conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: outcome and cost analyses of a matched case-control study.

OBJECTIVE: Robotic surgery, with its technical advances, promises to open a new window to minimally invasive surgery in gynaecology. Feasibility and safety of this surgical innovation have been demonstrated in several studies, and now a critical analysis of these new developments regarding outcome and costs is in place. So far only a few studies compare robotic with conventional laparoscopic surgery in gynaecology. Our objective was to evaluate our initial experience performing total robot-assisted hysterectomy with the da Vinci surgical system and compare peri-operative outcome and costs with total laparoscopic hysterectomy. STUDY DESIGN: For this prospective matched case-control study at our institution, peri-operative data from our first 40 consecutive total robot-assisted hysterectomies for benign indications were recorded and matched 1:1 with total laparoscopic hysterectomies according to age, BMI and uterus weight. Surgical costs were calculated for both procedures. Surgeons' subjective impressions of robotics were evaluated with a self-developed questionnaire. RESULTS: No conversions to laparotomy or severe peri-operative complications occurred. Mean operating time was 109 (113; 50-170) min for the robotic group and 83 (80; 55-165) min for the conventional laparoscopic group. Mean postoperative hospitalisation for robotic surgery was 3.3 (3; 2-6) days versus 3.9 (4; 2-7) days for the conventional laparoscopic group. Average surgical cost of a robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy was 4067 euros compared to 2151 euros for the conventional laparoscopic procedure at our institution. For the robotic group wider range of motion of the instruments and better ergonomics were considered to be an advantage, and lack of direct access to the patient was stated as a disadvantage. CONCLUSION: Robot-assited hysterectomy is a feasible and interesting new technique with comparable outcome to total laparoscopic hysterectomy. Operating times of total laparoscopic hysterectomy seem to be achieved quickly especially for experienced laparoscopic surgeons. However, costs of robotic surgery are still higher than for conventional laparoscopy. Randomised clinical trials need to be conducted to further evaluate benefits of this new technology for patients and surgeons and analyse its cost-effectiveness in gynaecology.