Opioid prescribing practices in breast oncologic surgery-A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: In breast oncologic surgery, 75% of patients receive a postoperative opioid prescription at discharge, and 10%-20% will develop persistent opioid use. To inform future institutional guidelines, the objective of this study was to determine baseline opioid prescribing patterns in a single high-volume, referral-based breast center. We hypothesized that opioid prescribing practices varied between procedures and operating surgeons. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of all women undergoing breast cancer surgery between January and December 2019. Opioid prescriptions at discharge were converted to morphine milligram equivalents (MME). The primary outcome of interest was MME prescribed at discharge. Multiple linear regression was used to identify factors independently associated with MME prescribed. RESULTS: 392 patients met inclusion criteria; 68.3% underwent partial mastectomy. Median age was 61 (interquartile range [IQR] 51-70). Median MME prescribed at discharge was 112.5 (IQR 75-150); 83.9% of patients were prescribed co-analgesia. The prescriber was a trainee in 37.7% of cases. 15 patients (3.8%) required opioid renewal. On multivariate analysis, axillary procedure was associated with increased MME (ß = 17, 95% CI 5.5-28 and ß = 32, 95% CI 17-47, for sentinel node and axillary dissection, respectively). However, the factor with the greatest impact on MME was operating surgeon (ß = 72, 95% CI 58-87). Residents prescribed less MME compared to attending surgeons (ß = 11, 95% CI -22; -0.06). CONCLUSION: In a tertiary care center, the operating surgeon had the greatest influence on opioid prescribing practices, and trainees tended to prescribe less MME. These findings support the need for a standardized approach to optimize prescribing and reduce opioid-related harms after oncologic breast surgery.

The impact of post-operative enteral nutrition on duodenal injury outcomes: A post hoc analysis of an EAST multicenter trial.

BACKGROUND: Leak following surgical repair of traumatic duodenal injuries results in prolonged hospitalization and oftentimes nil per os(NPO) treatment. Parenteral nutrition(PN) has known morbidity; however, duodenal leak(DL) patients often have complex injuries and hospital courses resulting in barriers to enteral nutrition(EN). We hypothesized EN alone would be associated with 1)shorter duration until leak closure and 2)less infectious complications and shorter hospital length of stay(HLOS) compared to PN. METHODS: This was a post-hoc analysis of a retrospective, multicenter study from 35 Level-1 trauma centers, including patients >14 years-old who underwent surgery for duodenal injuries(1/2010-12/2020) and endured post-operative DL. The study compared nutrition strategies: EN vs PN vs EN + PN using Chi-Square and Kruskal-Wallis tests; if significance was found pairwise comparison or Dunn's test were performed. RESULTS: There were 113 patients with DL: 43 EN, 22 PN, and 48 EN + PN. Patients were young(median age 28 years-old) males(83.2%) with penetrating injuries(81.4%). There was no difference in injury severity or critical illness among the groups, however there were more pancreatic injuries among PN groups. EN patients had less days NPO compared to both PN groups(12 days[IQR23] vs 40[54] vs 33[32],p = <0.001). Time until leak closure was less in EN patients when comparing the three groups(7 days[IQR14.5] vs 15[20.5] vs 25.5[55.8],p = 0.008). EN patients had less intra-abdominal abscesses, bacteremia, and days with drains than the PN groups(all p < 0.05). HLOS was shorter among EN patients vs both PN groups(27 days[24] vs 44[62] vs 45[31],p = 0.001). When controlling for predictors of leak, regression analysis demonstrated EN was associated with shorter HLOS(ß -24.9, 95%CI -39.0 to -10.7,p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: EN was associated with a shorter duration until leak closure, less infectious complications, and shorter length of stay. Contrary to some conventional thought, PN was not associated with decreased time until leak closure. We therefore suggest EN should be the preferred choice of nutrition in patients with duodenal leaks whenever feasible. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.