Opioid versus opioid-free analgesia after surgical discharge: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: Excessive opioid prescribing after surgery has contributed to the current opioid crisis; however, the value of prescribing opioids at surgical discharge remains uncertain. We aimed to estimate the extent to which opioid prescribing after discharge affects self-reported pain intensity and adverse events in comparison with an opioid-free analgesic regimen. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Scopus, AMED, Biosis, and CINAHL from Jan 1, 1990, until July 8, 2021. We included multidose randomised controlled trials comparing opioid versus opioid-free analgesia in patients aged 15 years or older, discharged after undergoing a surgical procedure according to the Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the Enumeration of Mortality and Morbidity definition (minor, moderate, major, and major complex). We screened articles, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias (Cochrane's risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials) in duplicate. The primary outcomes of interest were self-reported pain intensity on day 1 after discharge (standardised to 0-10 cm visual analogue scale) and vomiting up to 30 days. Pain intensity at further timepoints, pain interference, other adverse events, risk of dissatisfaction, and health-care reutilisation were also assessed. We did random-effects meta-analyses and appraised evidence certainty using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations scoring system. The review was registered with PROSPERO (ID CRD42020153050). FINDINGS: 47 trials (n=6607 patients) were included. 30 (64%) trials involved elective minor procedures (63% dental procedures) and 17 (36%) trials involved procedures of moderate extent (47% orthopaedic and 29% general surgery procedures). Compared with opioid-free analgesia, opioid prescribing did not reduce pain on the first day after discharge (weighted mean difference 0·01cm, 95% CI -0·26 to 0·27; moderate certainty) or at other postoperative timepoints (moderate-to-very-low certainty). Opioid prescribing was associated with increased risk of vomiting (relative risk 4·50, 95% CI 1·93 to 10·51; high certainty) and other adverse events, including nausea, constipation, dizziness, and drowsiness (high-to-moderate certainty). Opioids did not affect other outcomes. INTERPRETATION: Findings from this meta-analysis support that opioid prescribing at surgical discharge does not reduce pain intensity but does increase adverse events. Evidence relied on trials focused on elective surgeries of minor and moderate extent, suggesting that clinicians can consider prescribing opioid-free analgesia in these surgical settings. Data were largely derived from low-quality trials, and none involved patients having major or major-complex procedures. Given these limitations, there is a great need to advance the quality and scope of research in this field. FUNDING: The Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

Impact of enhanced recovery pathways on patient-reported outcomes after abdominal surgery: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence supports that enhanced recovery pathways (ERPs) reduce length of stay and complications; however, these measures may not reflect the perspective of patients who are the main stakeholders in the recovery process. This systematic review aimed to appraise the evidence regarding the impact of ERPs on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after abdominal surgery. METHODS: Five databases (Medline, Embase, Biosis, Cochrane, and Web of Science) were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) addressing the impact of ERPs on PROs after abdominal surgery. We focused on distinct periods of recovery: early (within 7 days postoperatively) and late (beyond 7 days). Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane's RoB 2.0. Results were appraised descriptively as heterogeneity hindered meta-analysis. Certainty of evidence was evaluated using GRADE. RESULTS: Fifty-six RCTs were identified [colorectal (n = 18), hepatopancreaticobiliary (HPB) (n = 11), upper gastrointestinal (UGI) (n = 10), gynecological (n = 7), urological (n = 7), general surgery (n = 3)]. Most trials had 'some concerns' (n = 30) or 'high' (n = 25) risk of bias. In the early postoperative period, ERPs improved patient-reported general health (colorectal, HPB, UGI, urological; very low to low certainty), physical health (colorectal, gynecological; very low to low certainty), mental health (colorectal, gynecological; very low certainty), pain (all specialties; very low to moderate certainty), and fatigue (colorectal; low certainty). In the late postoperative period, ERPs improved general health (HPB, UGI, urological; very low certainty), physical health (UGI, gynecological, urological; very low to low certainty), mental health (UGI, gynecological, urological; very low certainty), social health (gynecological; very low certainty), pain (gynecological, urological; very low certainty), and fatigue (gynecological; very low certainty). CONCLUSION: This review supports that ERPs may have a positive impact on patient-reported postoperative health status (i.e., general, physical, mental, and social health) and symptom experience (i.e., pain and fatigue) after abdominal surgery; however, data were largely derived from low-quality trials. Although these findings contribute important knowledge to inform evidence-based ERP implementation, there remains a great need to improve PRO assessment in studies focused on postoperative recovery.

Scoping review of frailty in vascular surgery.

OBJECTIVE: This review sought to describe the current state of knowledge of the impact of frailty on perioperative clinical outcomes in patients undergoing vascular interventions. METHODS: A scoping review of the literature from both PubMed and Ovid Embase databases was conducted to identify relevant English- and French-language articles published from inception to May 31, 2018. Patients undergoing vascular surgery interventions were included. RESULTS: Twenty-three studies have addressed the prevalence or prognostic impact of frailty in patients undergoing vascular surgery procedures. The prevalence of frailty ranged from 20% to 60%, and notably 14 different frailty assessments were used in these studies. Frailty was associated with increased comorbid status, prolonged length of stay, discharge to assisted living facility, loss of independence, postoperative morbidity, and all-cause mortality. CONCLUSIONS: There are a variety of heterogeneous tools to measure frailty in patients undergoing vascular surgery interventions. The prevalence of frailty varies by the scale used to measure it, as does its predictive value. Clinicians and surgeons should be sensitized to the importance of assessing frailty preoperatively in older adults undergoing vascular surgery and using it to assist in the decision-making process and allocation of surgical resources.

Preoperative Exercise Rehabilitation in Cardiac and Vascular Interventions.

BACKGROUND: Exercise-based interventions have become part of the standard of care in rehabilitation programs for cardiovascular risk reduction and the promotion of a healthy lifestyle. The systematic review describes the current state of knowledge of the effects of preoperative exercise training (prehabilitation) on perioperative clinical outcomes in patients undergoing cardiac and vascular interventions. METHODS: Studies were systematically searched within 14 databases from inception to October 2016. Only studies that assessed a preoperative exercise program in adult patients undergoing cardiac or vascular interventions with clinical or patient-centered endpoints were included in the review. Two independent reviewers selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed quality using Cochrane Collaboration's tool for RCTs11111111111111111 and ROBINS-I tool for nonrandomized studies. RESULTS: Nine studies met our inclusion criteria and were stratified for qualitative analyses by cardiac (n = 7) and vascular (n = 2) procedures. Prehabilitation was associated with decreased length of stay, reduced postoperative complications, improved objective physical functioning, and improved subjective quality of life (SF-36 physical and mental health domains) measures in patients undergoing cardiac and vascular procedures. Given the amount of heterogeneity that was present in the designs, populations, and comparators among the included studies, we were unable to statistically pool data across trials. CONCLUSIONS: Our qualitative findings suggest that prehabilitation may improve clinical outcomes, physical performance, and health-related quality-of-life measures in patients undergoing cardiac and vascular surgery procedures.

Preventing opioid prescription after major surgery: a scoping review of opioid-free analgesia.

BACKGROUND: Excessive opioid prescribing after surgery has been recognised as a contributor to the current crisis of opioid addiction and overdose. Clinicians may potentially tackle this crisis by using opioid-free postoperative analgesia; however, the scientific literature addressing this approach is sparse and heterogeneous, thereby limiting robust conclusions. A scoping review was conducted to systematically map the extent, range, and nature of the literature addressing postoperative opioid-free analgesia. METHODS: Eight bibliographic databases were searched for studies addressing opioid-free analgesia after a major surgery. We extracted the study characteristics, including design, country, year, surgical procedure(s), and interventions. Results were organised thematically according to surgical specialty and targeted phase of recovery: in hospital (early recovery, ≤24 h after operation; intermediate recovery, >24 h) and post-discharge (late recovery). Reporting was according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement for scoping reviews. RESULTS: We identified 424 studies addressing postoperative opioid-free analgesia. The number of studies conducted in countries where the opioid crisis is primarily focused was remarkably low (USA, n=11 [3%]; Canada, n=5 [1%]). Many RCTs compared opioid-free vs opioid analgesia during hospital stay (n=117), but few targeted analgesia post-discharge (n=8). Studies were predominantly focused on procedures in orthopaedic, general, and gynaecological/obstetric surgery. Limited attention has been directed towards non-pharmacological pain interventions. We did not identify knowledge synthesis studies (i.e. systematic reviews and meta-analyses) focused on the comparative effectiveness of opioid-free vs opioid analgesia. CONCLUSIONS: Opioids remain a mainstay analgesic for managing pain after surgery, but alternative analgesia strategies should not be overlooked. This scoping review indicates numerous opportunities for future research targeting opioid-free postoperative analgesia. REVIEW REGISTRATION: http://www.researchregistry.com; ID: reviewregistry576.

Simulation platforms to assess laparoscopic suturing skills: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic suturing (LS) has become a common technique used in a variety of advanced laparoscopic procedures. However, LS is a challenging skill to master, and many trainees may not be competent in performing LS at the end of their training. The purpose of this review is to identify simulation platforms available for assessment of LS skills, and determine the characteristics of the platforms and the LS skills that are targeted. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted between January 1997 and October 2018 for full-text articles. The search was done in various databases. Only articles written in English or French were included. Additional studies were identified through reference lists. The search terms included "laparoscopic suturing" and "clinical competence." RESULTS: Sixty-two studies were selected. The majority of the simulation platforms were box trainers with inanimate tissue, and targeted basic suturing and intracorporeal knot-tying techniques. Most of the validation came from internal structure (rater reliability) and relationship to other variables (compare training levels/case experience, and various metrics). Consequences were not addressed in any of the studies. CONCLUSION: We identified many types of simulation platforms that were used for assessing LS skills, with most being for assessment of basic skills. Platforms assessing the competence of trainees for advanced LS skills were limited. Therefore, future research should focus on development of LS tasks that better reflect the needs of the trainees.

Incidence and predictors of postoperative ileus after loop ileostomy closure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Postoperative ileus (POI) is regarded as the most clinically significant morbidity following loop ileostomy closure; however, its incidence remains poorly understood. Our objective was therefore to determine the pooled incidence of POI after loop ileostomy closure and identify risk factors associated with its development. METHODS: We systematically searched MEDLINE (via Ovid and PubMed), Embase, the Cochrane Library, Biosis Previews, and Scopus to identify studies reporting the incidence of POI in patients who underwent loop ileostomy closure. Two independent reviewers extracted data and appraised study quality. Cumulative incidence proportions were pooled across studies using a random-effects meta-analytic model. RESULTS: Sixty-seven studies, including 9528 patients, met our inclusion criteria. The pooled estimate of POI was 8.0% (95% CI 6.9-9.3%; I2 = 74%). The estimated incidence varied by POI definition: studies with a robust definition of POI (n = 8) demonstrated the highest estimate of POI (12.4%, 95% CI 9.2-16.5%; I2 = 79%) while studies that did not report an explicit POI definition (n = 38) demonstrated the lowest estimate (6.7%, 95% CI 5.3-8.3%; I2 = 61%). Small bowel anastomosis technique (hand-sewn) and interval time from ileostomy creation to closure (longer time) were the factors most commonly associated with POI after loop ileostomy closure. However, most comparative studies were not powered to examine risk factors for POI. CONCLUSIONS: POI is an important complication after loop ileostomy closure, and its incidence is dependent on its definition. More research aimed at studying this complication is required to better understand risk factors for POI after loop ileostomy closure.

Assessment of surgical performance of laparoscopic benign hiatal surgery: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Operative skills correlate with patient outcomes, yet at the completion of training or after learning a new procedure, these skills are rarely formally evaluated. There is interest in the use of summative video assessment of laparoscopic benign foregut and hiatal surgery (LFS). If this is to be used to determine competency, it must meet the robust criteria established for high-stakes assessments. The purpose of this review is to identify tools that have been used to assess performance of LFS and evaluate the available validity evidence for each instrument. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted up to July 2017. Eligible studies reported data on tools used to assess performance in the operating room during LFS. Two independent reviewers considered 1084 citations for eligibility. The characteristics and testing conditions of each assessment tool were recorded. Validity evidence was evaluated using five sources of validity (content, response process, internal structure, relationship to other variables, and consequences). RESULTS: There were six separate tools identified. Two tools were generic to laparoscopy, and four were specific to LFS [two specific to Nissen fundoplication (NF), one heller myotomy (HM), and one paraesophageal hernia repair (PEH)]. Overall, only one assessment was supported by moderate evidence while the others had limited or unknown evidence. Validity evidence was based mainly on internal structure (all tools reporting reliability and item analysis) and content (two studies referencing previous papers for tool development in the context of clinical assessment, and four listing items without specifying the development procedures). There was little or no evidence supporting test response process (one study reporting rater training), relationship to other variables (two comparing scores in subjects with different clinical experience), and consequences (no studies). Two tools were identified to have evidence for video assessment, specific to NF. CONCLUSION: There is limited evidence supporting the validity of assessment tools for laparoscopic foregut surgery. This precludes their use for summative video-based assessment to verify competency. Further research is needed to develop an assessment tool designed for this purpose.

Antipsychotics for the treatment of sympathomimetic toxicity: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Benzodiazepines are often recommended first-line for management of cocaine and amphetamine toxicity while antipsychotic treatment is discouraged due to the potential for lowering seizure threshold, prolonging the QT interval, and decreasing heat dissipation. We performed a systematic review including animal and human studies to elucidate the efficacy and safety of antipsychotics in managing sympathomimetic toxicity specifically evaluating the effect of treatment on mortality, seizures, hyperthermia, and cardiovascular effects. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, BIOSIS Previews, Web of Science, Scopus, CENTRAL and gray literature from inception to 31 May 2017 to answer: Can antipsychotics be used safely and effectively to treat cocaine or amphetamine toxicity? Citations were screened by title and abstract. Additional citations were identified with citation tracking. Data were extracted from full-texts. RESULTS: 6539 citations were identified; 250 full-text articles were assessed. Citation tracking identified 2336 citations; 155 full texts were reviewed. Seventy-three papers were included in this review. In 96 subjects with cocaine toxicity treated with an antipsychotic, there were three deaths, two cardiac arrests, two seizures, and one episode of hyperthermia. In 330 subjects with amphetamine toxicity treated with an antipsychotic, there were two episodes of coma and QT prolongation and one episode of each: hypotension, NMS, cardiac arrest, and death. CONCLUSION: This systematic review represents an exhaustive compilation of the available evidence. There is neither a clear benefit of antipsychotics over benzodiazepines nor a definitive signal of harm noted. We encourage clinicians to adapt treatment based on specific circumstances and characteristics of their individual patients.

How Do We Value Postoperative Recovery?: A Systematic Review of the Measurement Properties of Patient-reported Outcomes After Abdominal Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To appraise the level of evidence supporting the measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in the context of postoperative recovery after abdominal surgery. BACKGROUND: There is growing interest in using PROMs to support value-based care in abdominal surgery; however, to draw valid conclusions regarding patient-reported outcomes data, PROMs with robust measurement properties are required. METHODS: Eight databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Biosis, PsycINFO, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science) were searched for studies focused on the measurement properties of PROMs in the context of recovery after abdominal surgery. The methodological quality of individual studies was evaluated using the consensus-based COSMIN checklist. Evidence supporting the measurement properties of each PROM was synthetized according to standardized criteria and compared against the International Society of Quality of Life Research minimum standards for the selection of PROMs for outcomes research. RESULTS: We identified 35 studies evaluating 22 PROMs [12 focused on nonspecific surgical populations (55%), 4 focused on abdominal surgery (18%), and 6 generic PROMs (27%)]. The great majority of the studies (74%) received only poor or fair quality ratings. Measurement properties of PROMs were predominantly supported by limited or unknown evidence. None of the PROMs fulfilled International Society of Quality of Life Research's minimum standards, hindering specific recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: There is very limited evidence supporting the measurement properties of existing PROMs used in the context of recovery after abdominal surgery. This precludes the use of these PROMs to support value-based surgical care. Further research is required to bridge this major knowledge gap. REVIEW REGISTRATION: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO): CRD42014014349.

Development of a patient-reported outcome measure of recovery after abdominal surgery: a hypothesized conceptual framework.

BACKGROUND: We initiated a research program to develop a novel patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) to assess postoperative recovery from the perspective of abdominal surgery patients. In light of FDA recommendations, the first stage of our program aimed to, based on previous literature and expert input, develop a hypothesized conceptual framework portraying the health domains that are potentially relevant to the process of recovery after abdominal surgery. METHODS: This study was conducted in three phases: (1) systematic review to identify PROMs with measurement properties appraised in the context of recovery after abdominal surgery, (2) content analysis to categorize the health domains covered by the PROMs according to the ICF, and (3) two-round Delphi study to gain expert input regarding which of these health domains are relevant to the process of recovery. Participants were experts in perioperative care identified through two major surgical societies (35 invited). RESULTS: The systematic review identified 19 PROMs covering 66 ICF domains. 23 experts (66%) participated in the Delphi process. After Round 2, experts agreed that 22 health domains (8 body functions, 14 activities and participation) are potentially relevant to the process of recovery after abdominal surgery. These domains were organized into a diagram, representing our hypothesized conceptual framework. CONCLUSIONS: This hypothesized conceptual framework is an important first step in our research program and will be further refined based on in-depth qualitative interviews with patients. The sound methodological approach used to derive this framework may be valuable for studies aimed to develop PROMs according to FDA standards.

Effectiveness of Telementoring in Surgery Compared With On-site Mentoring: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Mentorship is important but may not be feasible for distance learning. To bridge this gap, telementoring has emerged. The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of telementoring compared with on-site mentoring. METHODS: A search was done up to March 2015. Studies were included if they used telementoring between surgeons during a clinical encounter and if they compared on-site mentoring and telementoring. RESULTS: A total of 11 studies were included. All reported no difference in complication rates, and 9 (82%) reported similar operative times; 4 (36%) reported technical issues, which was 3% of the total number of cases in the 11 studies. No study reported on higher levels of evidence for effectiveness of telementoring as an educational intervention. CONCLUSION: Studies reported that telementoring is associated with similar complication rates and operative times compared with on-site mentoring. However, the level of evidence to support the effectiveness of telementoring as a training tool is limited. There is a need for studies that provide evidence for the equivalence of the effectiveness of telementoring as an educational intervention in comparison with on-site mentoring.

Derivation and validation of clinical phenotypes for COPD: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The traditional classification of COPD, which relies solely on spirometry, fails to account for the complexity and heterogeneity of the disease. Phenotyping is a method that attempts to derive a single or combination of disease attributes that are associated with clinically meaningful outcomes. Deriving phenotypes entails the use of cluster analyses, and helps individualize patient management by identifying groups of individuals with similar characteristics. We aimed to systematically review the literature for studies that had derived such phenotypes using unsupervised methods. METHODS: Two independent reviewers systematically searched multiple databases for studies that performed validated statistical analyses, free of definitive pre-determined hypotheses, to derive phenotypes among patients with COPD. Data were extracted independently. RESULTS: 9156 citations were retrieved, of which, 8 studies were included. The number of subjects ranged from 213 to 1543. Most studies appeared to be biased: patients were more likely males, with severe disease, and recruited in tertiary care settings. Statistical methods used to derive phenotypes varied by study. The number of phenotypes identified ranged from 2 to 5. Two phenotypes, with poor longitudinal health outcomes, were common across multiple studies: young patients with severe respiratory disease, few cardiovascular co-morbidities, poor nutritional status and poor health status, and a phenotype of older patients with moderate respiratory disease, obesity, cardiovascular and metabolic co-morbidities. CONCLUSIONS: The recognition that two phenotypes of COPD were often reported may have clinical implications for altering the course of the disease. This review also provided important information on limitations of phenotype studies in COPD and the need for improvement in future studies.

A systematic review of economic evaluations of enhanced recovery pathways for colorectal surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review of economic evaluations of enhanced recovery pathways (ERP) for colorectal surgery. BACKGROUND: Although there is extensive literature investigating the clinical effectiveness of ERP, little is known regarding its cost-effectiveness. METHODS: A systematic literature search identified all relevant articles published between 1997 and 2012 that performed an economic evaluation of ERP for colorectal surgery. Studies were included only if their ERP included all 5 of the key components (patient information, preservation of GI function, minimization of organ dysfunction, active pain control, and promotion of patient autonomy). Quality assessment was performed using the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria instrument (scored 0-19; high quality ≥ 12). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated if sufficient data were provided, using difference in length of stay and overall complication rates as effectiveness measures. RESULTS: Of a total of 263 unique records identified (253 from databases and 10 from other sources), 10 studies met our inclusion criteria and were included for full qualitative synthesis. Overall quality was poor (mean quality 7.8). Eight reported lower costs for ERP. The majority (8 of 10) of studies were performed from an institutional perspective and therefore did not include costs related to changes in productivity and other indirect costs (eg, caregiver burden). Five studies provided enough information to calculate ICERs, of which ERP was dominant (less costly and more effective) in all cases for reduction in length of stay and was dominant or potentially cost-effective in 4 and questionable (no difference in costs nor effectiveness) in 1 for reduction in overall complications. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of the current evidence is limited but tends to support the cost-effectiveness of ERP. There is need for well-designed trials to determine the cost-effectiveness of ERP from both the institutional and societal perspectives.

A systematic review of synthetic and biologic materials for abdominal wall reinforcement in contaminated fields.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend the use of bioprosthetics for abdominal wall reinforcement in contaminated fields, but the evidence supporting the use of biologic over synthetic non-absorbable prosthetics for this indication is poor. Therefore, the objective was to perform a systematic review of outcomes after synthetic non-absorbable and biologic prosthetics for ventral hernia repair or prophylaxis in contaminated fields. METHODS: The systematic literature search identified all articles published up to 2013 that reported outcomes after abdominal wall reinforcement using synthetic non-absorbable or biologic prosthetics in contaminated fields. Studies were included if they included at least 10 cases (excluding inguinal and parastomal hernias). Quality assessment was performed using the MINORS instrument. The main outcomes measures were the incidence of wound infection and hernia at follow-up. Weighted pooled proportions were calculated using a random effects model. RESULTS: A total of 32 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included for synthesis. Mean sample size was 41.4 (range 10-190), and duration of follow-up was >1 year in 72 % of studies. Overall quality was low (mean 6.2, range 1-12). Pooled wound infection rates were 31.6 % (95 % CI 14.5-48.7) with biologic and 6.4 % (95 % CI 3.4-9.4) with synthetic non-absorbable prosthetics in clean-contaminated cases, with similar hernia rates. In contaminated and/or dirty fields, wound infection rates were similar, but pooled hernia rates were 27.2 % (95 % CI 9.5-44.9) with biologic and 3.2 % (95 % CI 0.0-11.0) with synthetic non-absorbable. Other outcomes were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence is limited, but does not support the superiority of biologic over synthetic non-absorbable prosthetics in contaminated fields.

The association of alvimopan treatment with postoperative outcomes after abdominal surgery: A systematic review across different surgical procedures and contexts of perioperative care.

BACKGROUND: Alvimopan is a Food and Drug Administration-approved treatment to accelerate gastrointestinal recovery after abdominal surgery; however, benefits may vary across different procedures and contexts of care. The purpose of this study is to summarize the evidence regarding the effect of alvimopan on postoperative outcomes after abdominal surgery. METHODS: Major databases (Medline, Embase, Biosis, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Scopus) were searched for randomized controlled trials and nonrandomized studies comparing alvimopan versus control. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane's risk of bias tool 2.0 (for randomized controlled trials) and Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies-of Intervention tool (for nonrandomized studies). Results were appraised descriptively as heterogeneity in reporting and risk of bias hindered meta-analysis. Quality of evidence across different surgical procedures and contexts of care (ie, open versus minimally invasive surgery, traditional care versus enhanced recovery pathway) was evaluated using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. RESULTS: Nine randomized controlled trials and 35 nonrandomized studies were identified. Evidence of low to moderate certainty supports that alvimopan reduces length of stay and improves gastrointestinal recovery after open bowel resection and open radical cystectomy. Limited evidence supports alvimopan for surgeries not listed in Food and Drug Administration labels (ie, total abdominal hysterectomy and retroperitoneal lymph node dissection). Similar effects were observed in traditional and enhanced recovery pathway settings, but enhanced recovery pathway elements varied across studies. There is very low certainty of evidence supporting alvimopan for patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery. CONCLUSION: Evidence supports that alvimopan improves outcomes after open bowel resection and open radical cystectomy. Benefits for patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery and treated in contemporary enhanced recovery pathway settings remain uncertain. These findings contribute important new knowledge to inform evidence-based alvimopan prescribing.

Implementation and Effectiveness of Coaching for Surgeons in Practice - A Mixed Studies Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: Despite recent changes to medical education, surgical training remains largely based on the apprenticeship model. However, after completing training, there are few structured learning opportunities available for surgeons in practice to refine their skills or acquire new skills. Personalized observation with feedback is rarely a feature of traditional continuing medical education learning. Coaching has recently been proposed as a modality to meet these educational gaps; however, data are limited, and few coaching programs presently exist. The purpose of this study is to summarize the characteristics of coaching programs for surgeons in practice including participant satisfaction, program outcomes, and barriers to implementation, in the published literature. METHODS: A mixed studies systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines to identify all original studies describing or investigating coaching for practicing surgeons up to 06/2019. Quantitative analysis was used to summarize numerical data, and qualitative analysis using grounded theory methodology for descriptive data was used to summarize the results into themes across studies. RESULTS: After identification of articles, 27 were included in the final synthesis. Twenty-six articles described execution of a coaching program. Programs varied widely with 18/26 focusing on teaching new skills, and the remainder on refinement of skills. Thematic analysis identified 2 major data categories that guided deeper analysis: outcomes of and barriers to coaching. Of the 16 (62%) programs that reported outcomes of coaching, 42% to 100% of participants reported changes in clinical practice directly associated with coaching. Positive satisfaction after completion of a program was reported by 82% to 100% of participants. Reported barriers to participating in a coaching program emerged along 3 main themes: logistical constraints, surgical culture, and perceived lack of need. CONCLUSIONS: Coaching for surgeons in practice is highly rated by participants and often results in clinical practice changes, while cultural and logistical issues were identified as barriers to implementation. A better understanding of these factors is required to guide coaching program development and implementation.

Systematic review of microRNA biomarkers in acute coronary syndrome and stable coronary artery disease.

The aim of this systematic review was to assess dysregulated miRNA biomarkers in coronary artery disease (CAD). Dysregulated microRNA (miRNAs) have been shown to be linked to cardiovascular pathologies including CAD and may have utility as diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers. We compared miRNAs identified in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) compared with stable CAD and control populations. We conducted a systematic search of controlled vocabulary and free text terms related to ACS, stable CAD and miRNA in Biosis Previews (OvidSP), The Cochrane Library (Wiley), Embase (OvidSP), Global Health (OvidSP), Medline (PubMed and OvidSP), Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics), and ClinicalTrials.gov which yielded 7370 articles. Of these, 140 original articles were appropriate for data extraction. The most frequently reported miRNAs in any CAD (miR-1, miR-133a, miR-208a/b, and miR-499) are expressed abundantly in the heart and play crucial roles in cardiac physiology. In studies comparing ACS cases with stable CAD patients, miR-21, miR-208a/b, miR-133a/b, miR-30 family, miR-19, and miR-20 were most frequently reported to be dysregulated in ACS. While a number of miRNAs feature consistently across studies in their expression in both ACS and stable CAD, when compared with controls, certain miRNAs were reported as biomarkers specifically in ACS (miR-499, miR-1, miR-133a/b, and miR-208a/b) and stable CAD (miR-215, miR-487a, and miR-502). Thus, miR-21, miR-133, and miR-499 appear to have the most potential as biomarkers to differentiate the diagnosis of ACS from stable CAD, especially miR-499 which showed a correlation between the level of their concentration gradient and myocardial damage. Although these miRNAs are potential diagnostic biomarkers, these findings should be interpreted with caution as the majority of studies conducted predefined candidate-driven assessments of a limited number of miRNAs (PROSPERO registration: CRD42017079744).

Opioid versus opioid-free analgesia after surgical discharge: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Excessive prescribing after surgery has contributed to a public health crisis of opioid addiction and overdose in North America. However, the value of prescribing opioids to manage postoperative pain after surgical discharge remains unclear. We propose a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the extent to which opioid analgesia impact postoperative pain intensity and adverse events in comparison to opioid-free analgesia in patients discharged after surgery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Major electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, AMED, BIOSIS, CINAHL and PsycINFO) will be searched for multi-dose randomised-trials examining the comparative effectiveness of opioid versus opioid-free analgesia after surgical discharge. Studies published from January 1990 to July 2019 will be targeted, with no language restrictions. The search will be re-run before manuscript submission to include most recent literature. We will consider studies involving patients undergoing minor and major surgery. Teams of reviewers will, independently and in duplicate, assess eligibility, extract data and evaluate risk of bias. Our main outcomes of interest are pain intensity and postoperative vomiting. Study results will be pooled using random effects models. When trials report outcomes for a common domain (eg, pain intensity) using different scales, we will convert effect sizes to a common standard metric (eg, Visual Analogue Scale). Minimally important clinical differences reported in previous literature will be considered when interpreting results. Subgroup analyses defined a priori will be conducted to explore heterogeneity. Risk of bias will be assessed according to the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias Tool 2.0. The quality of evidence for all outcomes will be evaluated using the GRADE rating system. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required since this is a systematic review of published studies. Our results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant conferences. Further knowledge dissemination will be sought via public and patient organisations focussed on pain and opioid-related harms.