Evaluation of a multidisciplinary, multimodal pain management protocol following pancreas transplantation.

INTRODUCTION: Patients undergoing solid-organ transplantation demonstrate pain arising from both the surgical intervention and pre-existing comorbidities. High levels of opioid use both pre- and post-transplant are associated with unfavorable transplant outcomes. Patient education, multimodal therapy, and discharge planning have all been demonstrated to reduce opioid use after transplant. METHODS: This is a single-center, retrospective study analyzing patients before and after implementation of a multimodal, multidisciplinary pain management protocol. Morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) use during the index transplant hospitalization and the need for opioids at discharge was compared between the pre- and post-protocol groups. RESULTS: A total of 52 patients were included in the study, 31 in the pre and 21 in the post-protocol groups. Inpatient MME use was reduced from 135.5 to 67.5 MMEs after protocol implementation. Additionally, the number of patients discharged on opioids following transplant decreased from 90.3% to 47.6%. Pain scores, length of stay (LOS), and return of bowel function was not different between groups. CONCLUSION: The implementation of a multimodal, multidisciplinary pain management protocol significantly decreased opioid use during the post-surgical hospitalization and in the 6 months following transplantation. A combination of non-opioid analgesics, patient education, and discharge planning can be beneficial elements in pancreas transplant pain management.

Evaluation of cytomegalovirus "Blips" in high-risk kidney/kidney-pancreas transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality after solid organ transplantation. While guidelines suggest using highly sensitive QNAT assays for CMV detection, there is no defined viral load to guide initiation of preemptive therapy. This study evaluates the progression to quantifiable CMV (DNAemia) following a CMV "blip" in high-risk (D+/R) kidney/kidney-pancreas (KP) transplant recipients. METHODS: This is a single center, retrospective study. A CMV "blip" was defined as the first positive QNAT assay below the level of quantification (<1.37 × 102 IU/ml or <200 viral copies). Subsequent CMV QNAT assays were followed to assess the progression from blip to CMV DNAemia for 1 year following transplant. RESULTS: A total of 134 patients were included in the study. Fifty-three (39.6%) patients had their first positive CMV QNAT value below the level of quantification, a "CMV blip." Of these 53 patients, 69.8% (n = 37) progressed to DNAemia while 30.2% (n = 16) did not. The median time from transplant to the first CMV blip was 68 (46-97) days and most patients with viral blips (71.1%) were on prophylaxis. No differences in patient characteristics were found among those who progressed from blip to DNAemia and those who only had a blip. CONCLUSIONS: In CMV high-risk kidney/KP transplant recipients, CMV blips progressed to CMV DNAemia in the majority of cases. This progression typically occurred 2-3 weeks following the initial blip. CMV blips are common early posttransplant despite prophylaxis and likely represent an early marker of CMV infection.

Hepatitis C and Treatment in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease.

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is associated with increased mortality and morbidity in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). The early detection and treatment of Hepatitis C associated with kidney disease is paramount to preventing the progressive loss of kidney function. HCV treatment until the advent of direct acting anti-viral agents (DAAs) was limited to interferon and ribavirin. Interferon and ribavirin treatment resulted in only modest success but with frequent adverse events and poor tolerability. Furthermore, interferon and ribavirin could not be used in certain patient populations including those with advanced CKD, were on dialysis, or those who have received a kidney transplant. DAAs have now made treatment possible in these sub-groups with a sustained viral response (SVR) of 90-100% and minimal side effects. DAAs have helped increase transplant rates by allowing for the use of HCV positive kidneys in recipients who are HCV negative. Although the choice of DAAs should be carefully considered and based on patient characteristics, concomitant medications, and HCV genotype.

Evaluation of the Brief Alcohol Withdrawal Scale Protocol at an Academic Medical Center.

OBJECTIVES: The standard of care for treatment of alcohol withdrawal is symptom-triggered dosing of benzodiazepines using a withdrawal scale. Abbreviated scales are desired for clinician efficiency. The objective of this study was to evaluate the use of the 5-item Brief Alcohol Withdrawal Scale (BAWS) protocol. METHODS: This single-center, retrospective, observational, cohort study assessed patients ordered the BAWS protocol between August 1, 2016 and July 31, 2017. Data were collected on benzodiazepine exposure, duration of treatment, withdrawal severity, agitation, over-sedation, and delirium while being treated for alcohol withdrawal. Comparisons were made to analyze predetermined patient subgroups. RESULTS: Seven hundred ninety-nine patients were initiated on the BAWS protocol. Patients received a median (IQR) of 0 (0-4) lorazepam equivalents (LEs) and were on the BAWS protocol for a median (IQR) of 44.9 (22.4-77.2) hours. Of the patients that received benzodiazepines while on the BAWS protocol, a median (IQR) of 4 (2-11) LEs were given. Seventeen (2.1%) patients had severe withdrawal. Days of agitation, over-sedation, and delirium were minimal, with the median (IQR) of 0 (0-0). Few patients received adjunctive medications for symptom management. Intensive care unit (ICU) patients had more severe withdrawal than non-ICU patients, but received the same cumulative benzodiazepine dose. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients on the BAWS protocol received little-to-no benzodiazepines; severe withdrawal, agitation, delirium, or over-sedation were uncommon. This is the first evaluation of the BAWS protocol on a diverse population of hospitalized patients.