Supply of opioids and information provided to patients after surgery in an Australian hospital: A cross-sectional study.

Opioids are commonly prescribed to manage pain after surgery. However, excessive supply on discharge can increase patients' risk of persistent opioid use and contribute to the reservoir of unused opioids in the community that may be misused. This study aimed to evaluate the use of opioids in Australian surgical patients after discharge and patient satisfaction with the provision of opioid information after discharge. This prospective cohort study was conducted at a tertiary referral and teaching hospital. Surgical patients were called 7-28 days after discharge to identify their opioid use and the information that they received after discharge. In total, 66 patients responded. Most patients underwent orthopaedic surgery (45.5%; 30/66). The median days of opioids supplied on discharge was 5 (IQR 3-5). In total, 40.9% (27/66) of patients had >50% of their opioids remaining. Patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery were less likely to have >50% of their opioids remaining (P = 0.045), whilst patients undergoing urological or renal surgeries were significantly more likely (P = 0.009). Most patients recalled receiving information about their opioids (89.4%; 59/66). However, the majority (51.5%; 34/66) did not recall receiving any information about the signs of opioid toxicity and interactions between opioids and alcohol. In conclusion, around 40% of patients had more than half of their opioid supply remaining after they ceased taking their opioid. Although most patients recalled receiving information about their opioids, more than half did not recall receiving any information about the signs of opioid toxicity or interactions between opioids and alcohol.

Postoperative use of slow-release opioids: The impact of the Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists/Faculty of Pain Medicine position statement on clinical practice.

Dose titration with immediate-release opioids is currently recommended for acute pain. The Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists and the Faculty of Pain Medicine released a statement in March 2018 supporting their use in the treatment of opioid-naïve patients; however, the impact of this statement on clinical practice is currently unknown. This retrospective cohort study was conducted to compare opioid prescribing patterns before and after the release of the recommendations. Data were collected on 184 patients (2017, n = 78; 2018, n = 106) admitted to the Prince of Wales Hospital in November 2017 and 2018, which consisted of demographic data, opioid prescriptions and discharge opioid information. The main outcome is the number of prescriptions of slow-release opioids in 2017 versus 2018 after the recommendations were published. Confounding factors were accounted for using logistic and multiple regression as appropriate. There was a 29% decrease in slow-release opioid prescriptions during hospitalisation (n = 31, 40% versus n = 12, 11%; P < 0.001) and 17% decrease at discharge (n = 20, 26% versus n = 9, 9%; P = 0.02) post-publication. After adjusting for confounders, the odds of slow-release opioids being prescribed postoperatively and at discharge reduced by 86% and 88%, respectively (postoperative period: odds ratio 0.14, P < 0.05; discharge: odds ratio 0.12, P < 0.05). In addition, orthopaedic patients were more likely to receive slow-release opioids, consistent with existing literature. As the use of slow-release opioids has been associated with increased harm and protracted opioid use compared to immediate-release opioids, it is hoped that wider dissemination of these recommendations and a change in prescribing practice can be a step towards overcoming the opioid crisis.

Ablation of Complex Fractionated Electrograms Improves Outcome in Persistent Atrial Fibrillation of Over 2 Year's Duration.

AIM: There is controversy and sparse data on whether substrate based techniques in addition to pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) confer benefit in the catheter ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation (AF), especially if long standing. We performed an observational study to assess whether substrate based ablation improved freedom from atrial arrhythmia. METHODS: A total of 286 patients undergoing first ablation procedures for persistent AF with PVI only(n = 79), PVI plus linear ablation(n = 85), or PVI plus complex fractionated electrogram (CFAE) and linear ablation(n = 107) were followed. Primary end point was freedom from atrial arrhythmia at one year. RESULTS: Mean duration of pre-procedure time in AF was 28+/-27 months.There were no differences in baseline characteristics between groups except a higher proportion of patients with a severely dilated LA in those receiving PVI+CFAEs+lines. Freedom from atrial arrhythmia was higher with a PVI+CFAE+lines strategy then for PVI alone (HR 1.56, 95% CI: 1.04-2.34, p=0.032) but was not higher with PVI+lines. Benefit of substrate modification was conferred for preprocedure times in AF of over 30 months. The occurrence of atrial tachycardia was higher when lines were added to the ablation strategy (HR 0.08, 95% CI: 0.01-0.59, p=0.014). Freedom from atrial arrhythmia at 1 year was higher with lower patient age, use of general anaesthetic (GA), normal or mildly dilated left atrium and decreasing time in AF. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with long standing persistent AF of over 30 months duration,CFAE ablation resulted in improved freedom from atrial arrhythmia. Increased freedom from atrial arrhythmia occurs in patients who are younger and have smaller atria, and with GA procedures. Linear ablation did not improve outcome and resulted in a higher incidence of atrial tachycardia.

Continuous and minimally-interrupted direct oral anticoagulant are both safe compared with vitamin K antagonist for atrial fibrillation ablation: An updated meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The appropriate and safe peri-procedural anticoagulation schedule for patients on a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) undergoing AF ablation is not known. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of both continuous and minimally-interrupted novel oral anticoagulant (DOAC) strategies compared with uninterrupted vitamin K antagonist (VKA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. METHODS: We searched electronic databases for randomized or prospective controlled observational studies comparing DOAC (continuous or interrupted) versus uninterrupted VKA. The primary endpoint was major bleeding. Secondary endpoints were total bleeding (composite of major and minor bleeding) and symptomatic thromboembolism. Data were analyzed by random-effects modeling and sensitivity analyses performed according to study design and peri-procedural DOAC schedule. RESULTS: Thirteen studies (4 randomized, 9 observational) with 5463 patients were included in final analysis (45% on DOAC). DOAC was associated with less major bleeding compared with VKA in pooled randomized studies (odds ratio [OR] 0.27, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.09-0.80, p = 0.03, I2 = 0%), however there was no difference on overall analyses (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.39-1.24, p = 0.22, I2 = 27%). When stratified by DOAC dose schedule, there was no difference in major bleeding for continuous DOAC (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.21-1.11, p = 0.09, I2 = 6%) or minimally-interrupted DOAC (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.37-1.76, p = 0.60, I2 = 43%) compared with VKA. There was no difference between DOAC and VKA for risk of total bleeding (p = 0.20) or symptomatic thromboembolism (p = 0.78). CONCLUSION: Continuous and minimally-interrupted DOAC are both safe and non-inferior peri-procedural anticoagulation strategies compared with uninterrupted VKA for AF ablation. DOAC in general is associated with reduced major bleeding as demonstrated in pooled randomized studies.

Improved outcome and cost effectiveness in ablation of persistent atrial fibrillation under general anaesthetic.

Aims: Outcome of persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation remains suboptimal. Techniques employed to reduce arrhythmia recurrence rate are more likely to be embraced if cost-effectiveness can be demonstrated. A single-centre observational study assessed whether use of general anaesthesia (GA) in persistent AF ablation improved outcome and was cost-effective. Methods and results: Two hundred and ninety two patients undergoing first ablation procedures for persistent AF under conscious sedation or GA were followed. End points were freedom from listing for repeat ablation at 18 months and freedom from recurrence of atrial arrhythmia at 1 year. Freedom from atrial arrhythmia was higher in patients who underwent ablation under GA rather than sedation (63.9% vs. 42.3%, hazard ratio (HR) 1.87, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.23-2.86, P = 0.002). Significantly fewer GA patients were listed for repeat procedures (29.2% vs. 42.7%, HR 1.62, 95% CI: 1.01-2.60, P = 0.044). Despite GA procedures costing slightly more, a saving of £177 can be made per patient in our centre for a maximum of two procedures if all persistent AF ablations are performed under GA. Conclusions: In patients with persistent AF, it is both clinical and economically more effective to perform ablation under GA rather than sedation.

Cardiac resynchronisation therapy: pacemaker versus internal cardioverter-defibrillator in patients with impaired left ventricular function.

OBJECTIVE: Studies have shown beneficial effects of cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) on mortality among patients with heart failure. However the incremental benefits in survival from CRT with a defibrillator (CRT-D) are unclear. The choice of appropriate device remains unanswered. METHOD: This is a single-centre observational study in a tertiary cardiac centre. Patients (n=500) implanted with a CRT device with pacing alone (CRT-P) (n=354) and CRT-D (n=146) were followed for at least 2 years (mean 29 months, SD 14 months). The primary end point was all-cause mortality. RESULTS: A total of 116 deaths (23.2%) were recorded: 88 (24.8%) and 28 (19.2%), in the CRT-P and CRT-D groups, respectively. At 1 year there was a trend favouring CRT-D (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.07, p=0.08) but this was attenuated by the 2nd year and became insignificant at the end of follow-up (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.170, p=0.21). There was no survival benefit from having an internal cardioverter-defibrillator if patients were deemed non-responders to CRT. 27% of the CRT-P patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy met indications for potential internal cardioverter-defibrillator implantation for primary prevention. These were older patients with poorer baseline function in comparison with CRT-D patients with devices for primary prevention. Once these differences were adjusted for, there was no difference in outcome between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: CRT-D did not offer additional survival advantage over CRT-P at longer-term follow-up, as the clinical benefit of a defibrillator attenuated with time. Further work is needed to define which subset of patients benefit from CRT-D.

Efficacy of implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy for primary and secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.

Risk stratification and effectiveness of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy are unresolved issues in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), a cardiac disease that is associated with arrhythmias and sudden death. We assessed ICD therapy in 132 patients with HCM: age at implantation was 34 +/- 17 years, and 44 (33%) patients were aged

Utility of genetic screening in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: prevalence and significance of novel and double (homozygous and heterozygous) beta-myosin mutations.

Genetic screening of the beta-myosin heavy chain gene (MYH7) was evaluated in 100 consecutive unrelated patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) and 200 normal unrelated subjects. Seventeen beta-myosin mutations were identified in 19 patients. Notably, 13, or 76%, were novel. Mutations were detected in both alleles in two patients: homozygous for Lys207Gln in one, and heterozygous for Pro211 Leu and Arg663His in another. No mutation was detected in the controls. MYH7-associated HCM was associated with more marked left atrial enlargement and syncope than non-MYH7-related HCM. Our findings indicate that: (1) screening methods should allow identification of novel mutations; and (2) more than one sarcomeric mutation may be present in a patient more commonly than is appreciated. Further studies are necessary to ascertain the clinical consequences of the novel and compound gene abnormalities, and to determine whether correlating functional domain to phenotype provides more useful information about the clinical significance of the molecular defects.