Naloxegol and Postoperative Urinary Retention: A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Naloxegol antagonizes peripheral opioid-related side effects without preventing opioid-related analgesia. However, the effect of naloxegol on opioid-induced bladder dysfunction remains unknown. HYPOTHESIS: patients given naloxegol have lower residual bladder urine volume than those given placebo. METHODS: 136 patients scheduled for elective hip and knee surgery were randomized to oral naloxegol or placebo given the morning of surgery, and on the first two postoperative mornings. Residual urine volume was measured ultrasonographically within 30 min after voiding once in the morning and once in the afternoon for two postoperative days. Opioid-related Symptom Distress Scale (ORSDS), the need for indwelling urinary catheterization, and quality of recovery (QoR) score were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: 67 were randomized to naloxegol and 64 to placebo. We did not identify a significant effect on urine residual volume, with an estimated ratio of geometric means of 0.9 (0.3, 2.6), p = 0.84. There were no significant differences in ORSDS or QoR. There were 19 (29%) patients assigned to naloxegol who needed indwelling urination catheterization versus 7 (11%) patients in the placebo group, p = 0.012. CONCLUSIONS: Our results do not support use of naloxegol for postoperative urinary retention after hip and knee surgery.

Ethnic Differences in Analgesic Efficacy and Safety of Liposomal Bupivacaine Among Asian and Caucasian Surgical Patients: A Retrospective Matched-Cohort Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Extended-release local anesthetics allow for prolonged analgesia after a single administration. Although Asians demonstrate different pain thresholds than Caucasians, whether they have different postoperative local anesthetic analgesic effects has not been elucidated. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare the postoperative analgesic efficacy of liposomal bupivacaine on Asian and Caucasian adults, and the incidence of local anesthetic systemic toxicity (LAST) syndrome. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, assessor-blinded cohort study of adult patients who received liposomal bupivacaine for surgery between 2012 and 2018. Asians and Caucasians were matched in a 1:1 ratio by clinical characteristics and surgery type. The primary outcome was pain management, defined as average pain score and opioid consumption during the initial 72 postoperative hours. The secondary outcome was the incidence of LAST syndrome. Reviewers were blinded to the ethnicity of the patient. RESULTS: After 1:1 propensity score matching, 130 Asians and 129 Caucasians were analyzed. All confounding variables were balanced, except for higher body mass index in the Asian group. Pain scores were lower (adjusted mean difference of -0.50 [97.5% CI, -0.98, -0.01]; superiority p = 0.011) and opioid consumption was not greater (geometric means ratio, 0.61 [97.5% CI, 0.36, 1.04]; non-inferiority p ＜ 0.001) in Asian patients compared to Caucasian patients. Only one Caucasian patient was judged as having a potential case of LAST syndrome. The length of hospital stay and the incidence of additional complications were not different between the groups. CONCLUSION: Asian adults receiving liposomal bupivacaine as part of multimodal perioperative analgesia demonstrated lower pain scores compared to matching Caucasians, despite not having greater opioid consumption.

Saline versus Lactated Ringer's Solution: The Saline or Lactated Ringer's (SOLAR) Trial.

BACKGROUND: Both saline and lactated Ringer's solutions are commonly given to surgical patients. However, hyperchloremic acidosis consequent to saline administration may provoke complications. The authors therefore tested the primary hypothesis that a composite of in-hospital mortality and major postoperative complications is less common in patients given lactated Ringer's solution than normal saline. METHODS: The authors conducted an alternating cohort controlled trial in which adults having colorectal and orthopedic surgery were given either lactated Ringer's solution or normal saline in 2-week blocks between September 2015 and August 2018. The primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital mortality and major postoperative renal, respiratory, infectious, and hemorrhagic complications. The secondary outcome was postoperative acute kidney injury. RESULTS: Among 8,616 qualifying patients, 4,187 (49%) were assigned to lactated Ringer's solution, and 4,429 (51%) were assigned to saline. Each group received a median 1.9 l of fluid. The primary composite of major complications was observed in 5.8% of lactated Ringer's versus 6.1% of normal saline patients, with estimated average relative risk across the components of the composite of 1.16 (95% CI, 0.89 to 1.52; P = 0.261). The secondary outcome, postoperative acute kidney injury, Acute Kidney Injury Network stage I-III versus 0, occurred in 6.6% of lactated Ringer's patients versus 6.2% of normal saline patients, with an estimated relative risk of 1.18 (99.3% CI, 0.99 to 1.41; P = 0.009, significance criterion of 0.007). Absolute differences between the treatment groups for each outcome were less than 0.5%, an amount that is not clinically meaningful. CONCLUSIONS: In elective orthopedic and colorectal surgery patients, there was no clinically meaningful difference in postoperative complications with lactated Ringer's or saline volume replacement. Clinicians can reasonably use either solution intraoperatively.

Association of Doximity Ranking and Residency Program Characteristics Across 16 Specialty Training Programs.

BACKGROUND: Residency program prestige is an important variable medical students consider when creating their rank list. Doximity Residency Navigator is a ranking system that previous reports have shown significantly influences medical student application decisions. Doximity's use of peer nomination as a central component of its methodology for determining program rank has drawn criticism for its lack of objectivity. Doximity has not published information regarding how peer nomination and more objective measures are statistically weighted in reputation calculation. OBJECTIVE: This study assesses whether a strong negative correlation exists between residency program size and Doximity ranking. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of Doximity residency rankings from the 2018-2019 academic year was conducted. Data extracted from Doximity included program rank, size, and age. Data were additionally collected from the Blue Ridge Institute for Medical Research, National Institutes of Health, funding in 2018 and the US News & World Report Best Medical Schools 2019-2020. A multivariable linear regression model was used that included Doximity ranking as the outcome variable and residency program size as the predictor variable with adjustment for the aforementioned variables. RESULTS: Sixteen of the 28 specialties on Doximity were included in the analysis, representing 3388 unique residency programs. After adjustment for covariates, residency program size was a significant predictor of Doximity ranking (ß = -1.84; 95% CI -2.01 to -1.66, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: These findings support the critique that the Doximity reputation ranking system may favor larger residency programs. More transparency for Doximity reputation ranking algorithm is warranted.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Early Stage Testicular Cancer: AUA Guideline.

PURPOSE: Testis cancer is the most common solid malignancy in young males. The purpose of this guideline is to provide a useful reference on the effective evidence-based treatment of early stage testicular cancer. METHODS: The systematic review utilized to inform this guideline was conducted by a methodology team at the Johns Hopkins University Evidence-based Practice Center. The methodology team searched using PubMed®, Embase®, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) from January 1980 through August 2018. The evidence review team also reviewed relevant systematic reviews and references provided by the panel to identify articles that may have been missed by the database searches. RESULTS: When sufficient evidence existed, the body of evidence was assigned a strength rating of A (high), B (moderate), or C (low). Such evidence-based statements are provided as Strong, Moderate, or Conditional Recommendations. In instances of insufficient evidence, additional guidance is provided as Clinical Principles and Expert Opinions. CONCLUSIONS: This guideline attempts to improve a clinician's ability to evaluate and treat patients with testicular cancer, but higher quality evidence in future trials will be essential to improve level of care for these patients.

Intraoperative Hyperoxia Does Not Reduce Postoperative Pain: Subanalysis of an Alternating Cohort Trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pain is common and promotes opioid use. Surgical wounds are hypoxic because normal perfusion is impaired. Local wound ischemia and acidosis promote incisional pain. Some evidence suggests that improving oxygen supply to surgical wounds might reduce pain. We therefore tested the hypothesis that supplemental (80% inspired) intraoperative oxygen reduces postoperative pain and opioid consumption. METHODS: We conducted a post hoc analysis of a large, single-center alternating cohort trial allocating surgical patients having general anesthesia for colorectal surgery to either 30% or 80% intraoperative oxygen concentration in 2-week blocks for a total of 39 months. Irrespective of allocation, patients were given sufficient oxygen to maintain saturation ≥95%. Patients who had regional anesthesia or nerve blocks were excluded. The primary outcome was pain and opioid consumption during the initial 2 postoperative hours, analyzed jointly. The secondary outcome was pain and opioid consumption over the subsequent 24 postoperative hours. Subgroup analyses of the primary outcome were conducted for open versus laparoscopic procedures and for patients with versus without chronic pain. RESULTS: A total of 4702 cases were eligible for analysis: 2415 were assigned to 80% oxygen and 2287 to 30% oxygen. The groups were well balanced on potential confounding factors. Average pain scores and opioid consumption were similar between the groups (mean difference in pain scores, -0.01 [97.5% CI, -0.16 to 0.14; P = .45], median difference in opioid consumption, 0.0 [97.5% CI, 0 to 0] mg morphine equivalents; P = .82). There were also no significant differences in the secondary outcome or subgroup analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Supplemental intraoperative oxygen does not reduce acute postoperative pain or reduce opioid consumption.

Incidence of adverse events attributable to bupivacaine liposome injectable suspension or plain bupivacaine for postoperative pain in pediatric surgical patients: A retrospective matched cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: Surgical wound infiltration with local anesthetics is common as part of multimodal analgesia and enhanced recovery pathways in pediatric surgical patients. Liposomal bupivacaine can provide up to 92 hours of pain relief, and was approved by the U.S Food and Drug Administration for local infiltration in adults. It is also commonly used by pediatric surgeons, but its safety profile in this age group has not been described. AIMS: The aim of this study was to describe the incidence of local anesthetic systemic toxicity syndrome in pediatric surgical patients receiving liposomal bupivacaine compared to plain bupivacaine for surgical wound infiltration. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, single center, assessor blinded cohort study of pediatric surgical inpatients having open or laparoscopic surgery in the Cleveland Clinic between 2013 and 2017 and receiving wound infiltration with local anesthetics. We compared the incidence of local anesthetic systemic toxicity among those who received any dose of liposomal bupivacaine and those who received plain bupivacaine. Groups were matched 1:2 according to procedure type, age, and physical status score. Local anesthetic systemic toxicity was primarily defined as at least two signs or symptoms possibly related to anesthetic toxicity, as judged by two independent adjudicators blinded to the type of local anesthetic. A sensitivity analysis compared the incidence of a single sign/symptom possibly related to anesthetic toxicity. RESULTS: A total of 924 surgical cases were included in the final analysis (356 liposomal bupivacaine and 568 plain bupivacaine cases). The primary outcome did not occur in any patient. The sensitivity analysis found three cases in the liposomal bupivacaine group and two cases in the plain bupivacaine group having a single sign/symptom possibly related to local anesthetic administration (relative risk 2.4, 95% CI 0.4-14.0, P = 0.38). CONCLUSION: In a cohort of pediatric surgical patients receiving wound infiltration with either plain or liposomal bupivacaine, we identified no cases of local anesthetic systemic toxicity syndrome, and only few patients with any sign or symptom that could potentially be related to local anesthetic toxicity.