Effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and safety of gabapentin versus placebo as an adjunct to multimodal pain regimens in surgical patients: protocol of a placebo controlled randomised controlled trial with blinding (GAP study).

INTRODUCTION: Gabapentin is an antiepileptic drug currently licensed to treat epilepsy and neuropathic pain but has been used off-label to treat acute postoperative pain. The GAP study will compare the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and safety of gabapentin as an adjunct to standard multimodal analgesia versus placebo for the management of pain after major surgery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The GAP study is a multicentre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial in patients aged 18 years and over, undergoing different types of major surgery (cardiac, thoracic or abdominal). Patients will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive either gabapentin (600 mg just before surgery and 600 mg/day for 2 days after surgery) or placebo in addition to usual pain management for each type of surgery. Patients will be followed up daily until hospital discharge and then at 4 weeks and 4 months after surgery. The primary outcome is length of hospital stay following surgery. Secondary outcomes include pain, total opioid use, adverse health events, health related quality of life and costs. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the Research Ethics Committee . Findings will be shared with participating hospitals and disseminated to the academic community through peer-reviewed publications and presentation at national and international meetings. Patients will be informed of the results through patient organisations and participant newsletters. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN63614165.

Pain and recovery are comparable after either uniportal or multiport video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy: an observation study.

OBJECTIVES: Uniportal approaches to video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) lobectomy have been described in significant series. Few comparison studies between the two techniques exist. The aim was to determine whether the uniportal technique had more favourable postoperative outcomes than the multiport technique. METHODS: All VATS lobectomies undertaken at a single university hospital during August 2012 to December 2013 were studied. Patients with preoperative opiate use or chronic pain were excluded. Patients were divided into those with uniportal and multiport approaches for analysis. All continuous data were assessed for normality, and analysed with the Mann-Whitney U-tests or t-tests as appropriate. Categorical data were analysed by Fisher's exact or χ(2) test for trend as appropriate. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-nine VATS lobectomies were completed. Six were excluded and data were incomplete for 13, leaving 110 (15 uniportal, 95 multiport) for analysis. The demographics of the two groups were similar. There was no significant difference in the Thoracoscore or American Society of Anesthesiologists grades. The median morphine use in the first 24 postoperative hours was 19 mg in the uniportal group and 23 mg in the multiport group, P = 0.84. The median visual analogue pain score in the first 24 h was 0 in the uniportal group and 0 in the multiport group, P = 0.65. There was no difference in the duration of patient-controlled analgesia (P = 0.97), chest drain duration (P = 0.67) or hospital length of stay (P = 0.54). There was no inpatient mortality and no unplanned admission to critical care in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Uniportal VATS lobectomy is safe, and there is no appreciable negative impact on the hospital stay or morbidity. Patient-reported pain and morphine use in the first 24 h was low with either technique. Larger prospective studies are needed to quantify any benefit to a particular approach for VATS lobectomy.