An international multidisciplinary consensus statement on the prevention of opioid-related harm in adult surgical patients.

This international multidisciplinary consensus statement was developed to provide balanced guidance on the safe peri-operative use of opioids in adults. An international panel of healthcare professionals evaluated the literature relating to postoperative opioid-related harm, including persistent postoperative opioid use; opioid-induced ventilatory impairment; non-medical opioid use; opioid diversion and dependence; and driving under the influence of prescription opioids. Recommended strategies to reduce harm include pre-operative assessment of the risk of persistent postoperative opioid use; use of an assessment of patient function rather than unidimensional pain scores alone to guide adequacy of analgesia; avoidance of long-acting (modified-release and transdermal patches) opioid formulations and combination analgesics; limiting the number of tablets prescribed at discharge; providing deprescribing advice; avoidance of automatic prescription refills; safe disposal of unused medicines; reducing the risk of opioid diversion; and better education of healthcare professionals, patients and carers. This consensus statement provides a framework for better prescribing practices that could help reduce the risk of postoperative opioid-related harm in adults.

Safety guideline: neurological monitoring associated with obstetric neuraxial block 2020: A joint guideline by the Association of Anaesthetists and the Obstetric Anaesthetists' Association.

Serious neurological lesions such as vertebral canal haematoma are rare after obstetric regional analgesia/anaesthesia, but early detection may be crucial to avoid permanent damage. This may be hampered by the variable and sometimes prolonged recovery following 'normal' neuraxial block, such that an underlying lesion may easily be missed. These guidelines make recommendations for the monitoring of recovery from obstetric neuraxial block, and escalation should recovery be delayed or new symptoms develop, with the aim of preventing serious neurological morbidity.

Pre-operative fasting in adults and children: clinical practice and guidelines.

It is widely recognised that prolonged fasting for elective surgery in both children and adults serves no purpose, adversely affects patient well-being and can be detrimental. Although advised fasting times for solids remain unchanged, there is good evidence to support a 1-h fast for children, with no increase in risk of pulmonary aspiration. In adults, a major focus has been the introduction of carbohydrate loading before anaesthesia, so that patients arrive for surgery not only hydrated but also in a more normal metabolic state. The latter attenuates some of the physiological responses to surgery, such as insulin resistance. As in children, there is no increase in risk of pulmonary aspiration. Further data are required to guide best practice in patients with diabetes.

Guidelines for Perioperative Care in Elective Colorectal Surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society Recommendations: 2018.

BACKGROUND: This is the fourth updated Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society guideline presenting a consensus for optimal perioperative care in colorectal surgery and providing graded recommendations for each ERAS item within the ERAS® protocol. METHODS: A wide database search on English literature publications was performed. Studies on each item within the protocol were selected with particular attention paid to meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials and large prospective cohorts and examined, reviewed and graded according to Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. RESULTS: All recommendations on ERAS® protocol items are based on best available evidence; good-quality trials; meta-analyses of good-quality trials; or large cohort studies. The level of evidence for the use of each item is presented accordingly. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence base and recommendation for items within the multimodal perioperative care pathway are presented by the ERAS® Society in this comprehensive consensus review.

Randomized clinical trial investigating the stress response from two different methods of analgesia after laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

BACKGROUND: One of the key elements of managed recovery is thought to be suppression of the neuroendocrine response using regional analgesics. This may be superfluous in laparoscopic colorectal surgery with small wounds. This trial assessed the effects of spinal analgesia versus intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) on neuroendocrine responses in that setting. METHODS: A randomized clinical trial was conducted with participation of patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery within a managed recovery programme. Consenting patients were allocated randomly to spinal analgesia or morphine PCA as primary postoperative analgesia. The primary outcome was interleukin (IL) 6 levels; secondary outcomes were levels of cortisol, glucose, insulin and other cytokines, pain scores, morphine use and length of hospital stay. Stress response analysis was conducted before operation, and 3, 6, 12, 24 and 48 h after surgery. RESULTS: Of 143 eligible patients, 133 were randomized and 120 completed the study. Baseline patient characteristics were similar in the two groups. There were no significant differences in median levels of insulin, IL-2, IL-4, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IL-12, interferon γ, tumour necrosis factor α or vascular endothelial growth factor between the spinal analgesia and PCA groups at any time point. Three hours after surgery (but at no other time point) median (i.q.r.) levels of cortisol (468 (329-678) versus 701 (429-820) nmol/l; P = 0.004) and glucose (6.1 (5.4-7.5) versus 7.0 (6.0-7.7) mmol/l; P = 0.012) were lower in the spinal analgesia group than in the PCA group. Median (i.q.r.) levels of total intravenous morphine were lower in the spinal analgesia group (10.0 (3.3-15.8) versus 45.5 (34.0-60.5) mg; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Spinal analgesia reduced early neuroendocrine responses and overall parenteral morphine use. REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01128088 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Retrospective analysis of the effect of postoperative analgesia on survival in patients after laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Surgical excision of colorectal cancer can reduce immune function during the postoperative period, which may affect long-term survival. There is evidence that regional analgesia may attenuate the immunosuppressive effect of surgery. Opioid analgesia also suppresses cell-mediated immunity, notably natural killer cell activity. Therefore, using either epidural or spinal analgesia rather than systemic opioids during the postoperative period could affect long-term survival and disease recurrence. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of a prospective database of all patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal resection for adenocarcinoma between October 2003 and December 2010 was performed. Patients received either an epidural, spinal block, or a morphine patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) for their primary postoperative analgesia. Overall survival and disease-free survival were analysed. RESULTS: A total of 457 laparoscopic colorectal resections were performed during the period analysed; 424 cases were suitable for analysis (epidural=107, spinal=144, and PCA=173). There was no significant difference between the groups for age, gender, conversion rate, operation performed, TNM stage, tumour differentiation, extramural venous, or lymphovascular invasion. The epidural group had significantly more ASA category III patients (P=0.006). The median length of stay was significantly longer in the epidural group at 5 days compared with 3 days for spinal and PCA (P<0.0005). There was no significant difference in overall survival (P=0.622) or disease-free survival (P=0.490) at 5 yr between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, there appears to be no significant advantage to be gained in overall or disease-free survival with the use of regional analgesia compared with opioid analgesia after laparoscopic colorectal resection.