RESUMEN
Introduction: Anterior Cruciate Ligament tears are common after a non-contact injury and several thousand reconstructions (ACLR) occur yearly in the United States. Multimodal pain management has evolved greatly to include nerve blocks to minimize physical therapy losses post-operatively, pericapsular and wound injections, and other adjunctive measures. However, there is a surprisingly high use of opioid use after ACLR. Objective: The purpose of present investigation is to summarize the current state of knowledge regarding opioid use after ACLR and to synthesize the literature regarding the use of liposomal bupivacaine and its potential to reduce post-operative opioid use in ACLR patients. Methods: The literature search was performed in Mendeley. Search fields were varied until redundant. All articles were screened by title and abstract and a preliminary decision to include an article was made. A full-text screening was performed on the selected articles. Any question regarding the inclusion of an article was discussed by three authors until an agreement was reached. Results: Eighteen articles summarized the literature around the opioid epidemic in ACL surgery and the current context of multimodal pain strategies in ACLR. Five primary articles directly studied the use of liposomal bupivacaine as compared to reasonable control options. There remains to be over prescription of opioids within orthopedic surgery. Patient and prescriber education are effective methods at decreasing opioid prescriptions. Many opioid pills prescribed for ACLR are not used for the correct purpose. Several risk factors have been identified for opioid overuse in ACLR: American Society of Anesthesiologists score, concurrent meniscal/cartilage injury, preoperative opioid use, age < 50, COPD, and substance abuse disorder. Liposomal bupivacaine is effective in decreasing post-operative opioid use and reducing post-operative pain scores as compared to traditional bupivacaine. LB may also be effective as a nerve block, though the data on this is more limited and the effects on post-operative therapy need to be weighed against the potential therapeutic benefit. LB is associated with significantly greater costs than traditional bupivacaine. Discussion: The role for opioid medications in ACLR should continue to decrease over time. Liposomal bupivacaine is a powerful tool that can reduce post-operative opioid consumption in ACLR.
RESUMEN
Since the publication of this article [1], it has come to the attention of the authors that information for one of the authors was not included in the competing interests section. Craig Richie has declared potential competing interests with the following companies; Janssen, Eisai, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Roche Diagnostics, Boeringher Ingleheim, Novartis, AC Immune, Ixico, Aridhia, Amgen, Berry Consultants, Lundbeck, Sanofi, Quintiles (IQVIA) and Takeda. The full competing interests section for this article can be found below.
RESUMEN
CONTEXT: This commentary discusses the implications of disease-modifying treatments for Alzheimer's disease which seem likely to appear in the next few years and results from a meeting of British experts in neurodegenerative diseases in Edinburgh. The availability of such treatments would help change public and professional attitudes and accelerate engagement with the prodromal and preclinical populations who might benefit from them. However, this would require an updated understanding of Alzheimer's disease, namely the important distinction between Alzheimer's disease and Alzheimer's dementia. CONSENSUS: Since treatments are likely to be most effective in the early stages, identification of clinically relevant brain changes (for example, amyloid burden using imaging or cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers) will be crucial. While current biomarkers could be useful in identifying eligibility for new therapies, trial data are not available to aid decisions about stopping or continuing treatment in clinical practice. Therefore, effective monitoring of safety and effectiveness when these treatments are introduced into clinical practice will be necessary to inform wide-scale use. Equity of access is key but there is a tension between universal access for everyone with a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease and specifying an eligible population most likely to respond. We propose the resources necessary for an optimal care pathway as well as the necessary education and training for primary and secondary care. CONCLUSION: The majority of current services in the UK and elsewhere would not be able to accommodate the specialist investigations required to select patients and prescribe these therapies. Therefore, a stepped approach would be necessary: from innovating sentinel clinical-academic centres that already have capacity to deliver the necessary phase IV trials, through early adoption in a hub and spoke model, to nationwide adoption for true equity of access. The optimism generated by recent and anticipated developments in the understanding and treatment of Alzheimer's disease presents a great opportunity to innovate and adapt our services to incorporate the next exciting development in the field of dementia.
