Cost of sterility: probe covers should not be mandated for single-shot peripheral nerve blocks.

Ultrasound guidance has become ubiquitous with regional anesthesia, but little consistency exists on necessary ultrasound probe hygiene and sterility barriers. Fear of possible infection has led to calls for universal use of sterile ultrasound probe covers. Available data seems to suggest that single-shot peripheral nerve blocks have a low infectious risk. The widespread use of single-use disposable probe covers would carry an associated cost, increased environmental impact, and little evidence to suggest that they are effective at preventing infection if proper technique is used. While various parties have labeled single-shot nerve blocks as a sterile procedure, in practice, it is a clean technique. In this article, we argue that mandating the use of probe covers is unnecessary and that it should be left to the anesthesiologist to determine what type of anti-infection equipment is necessary for single-shot nerve blocks based on their practice situation and expertize.

Anesthesia start time documentation accuracy where peripheral nerve block is the primary anesthetic.

INTRODUCTION: When used as the primary anesthetic, nerve blocks are not billed as separate procedures. In this scenario, the anesthesia start (AStart) time should include the block procedural time. We measured how often AStart time was documented before the nerve block was placed in the preoperative area, and compared cases where a block team performed the nerve block and cases where the intraoperative anesthesia attending supervised the nerve block. We hypothesized that the involvement of a regional anesthesia team would lead to more accurate documentation of AStart. We also estimated the lost revenue due to inaccurate start time documentation. METHODS: The study population were patients undergoing surgery with a peripheral nerve block as the primary anesthetic. For this analysis, AStart occurring less than 10 min before the in-operating room time was defined as potentially inaccurate. Lost potential revenue was estimated by taking the difference between the documented time of local anesthetic administration and the documented AStart time. RESULTS: A total of 745 cases were analyzed. Overall, 439 cases (58%) cases were identified as having potentially inaccurate start times. There were higher rates of inaccurate AStart documentation by the block team (316/482, 65.5%) compared with blocks supervised by the in-room anesthesia attendings (123/263, 46.7%, p<0.001). Overall, the estimated loss in billable revenue during the study period was a total of $70 265. CONCLUSIONS: The performance of primary regional anesthesia procedure by a block team increased the incidence of inaccurate documentation and uncaptured potential revenue. There is need for education about accurate nerve block documentation for anesthesiologists, especially when separate teams are used.

Substrate binding and inhibition of the anion exchanger 1 transporter.

Anion exchanger 1 (AE1), a member of the solute carrier (SLC) family, is the primary bicarbonate transporter in erythrocytes, regulating pH levels and CO2 transport between lungs and tissues. Previous studies characterized its role in erythrocyte structure and provided insight into transport regulation. However, key questions remain regarding substrate binding and transport, mechanisms of drug inhibition and modulation by membrane components. Here we present seven cryo-EM structures in apo, bicarbonate-bound and inhibitor-bound states. These, combined with uptake and computational studies, reveal important molecular features of substrate recognition and transport, and illuminate sterol binding sites, to elucidate distinct inhibitory mechanisms of research chemicals and prescription drugs. We further probe the substrate binding site via structure-based ligand screening, identifying an AE1 inhibitor. Together, our findings provide insight into mechanisms of solute carrier transport and inhibition.

Chronic post amputation pain: pathophysiology and prevention options for a heterogenous phenomenon.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Chronic postamputation pain (cPAP) remains a clinical challenge, and current understanding places a high emphasis on prevention strategies. Unfortunately, there is still no evidence-based regimen to reliably prevent chronic pain after amputation. RECENT FINDINGS: Risk factors for the development of phantom limb pain have been proposed. Analgesic preventive interventions are numerous and no silver bullet has been found. Novel techniques such as neuromodulation and cryoablation have been proposed. Surgical techniques focusing on reimplantation of the injured nerve might reduce the incidence of phantom limb pain after surgery. SUMMARY: Phantom limb pain is a multifactorial process involving profound functional and structural changes in the peripheral and central nervous system. These changes interact with individual medical, psychosocial and genetic patient risk factors. The patient collective of amputees is very heterogeneous. Available evidence suggests that efforts should focus on prevention of phantom limb pain, since treatment is notoriously difficult. Questions as yet unanswered include the evidence-base of specific analgesic interventions, their optimal "window of opportunity" where they may be most effective, and whether patient stratification according to biopsychosocial risk factors can help guide preventive therapy.

Transgender and Nonbinary Patients and Perioperative Scoring Systems: It Is Time for Inclusion.

This Viewpoint advocates for inclusion of nonbinary and transgender reporting in medical research and practice.

There remains a role for neuraxial anesthesia for hip fracture surgery in the post-REGAIN era.

Two recent, large-scale, randomized controlled trials comparing neuraxial anesthesia with general anesthesia for patients undergoing surgical fixation of a hip fracture have sparked interest in the comparison of general and neuraxial anesthesia. These studies both reported non-superiority between general and neuraxial anesthesia in this patient cohort, yet they have limitations, like their sample size and use of composite outcomes. We worry that that if there is a perception among surgeons, nurses, patients and anesthesiologists that general and spinal anesthesia are equivalent (which is not what the authors of the studies conclude), it may become difficult to argue for the resources and training to provide neuraxial anesthesia to this patient population. In this daring discourse, we argue that despite the recent trials, there remain benefits of neuraxial anesthesia for patients who have suffered hip fractures and that abandoning offering neuraxial anesthesia to these patients would be an error.

Opioid sparing effects of intravenous and oral acetaminophen in hip fracture patients: A population-based study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Acetaminophen (APAP) and intravenous acetaminophen (IVAPAP) has been proposed as a part of many opioid-sparing multimodal analgesic pathways. The aim of this analysis was to compare the effectiveness of IVAPAP with oral APAP on opioid utilization and opioid-related adverse effects. DESIGN: Retrospective study of population-based database. PATIENTS: The Premier Healthcare database was queried patients undergoing surgery for a primary diagnosis of hip fracture from 2011 to 2019 yielding 245,976 patients. Primary exposure was use of IVAPAP or oral APAP on the day of surgery. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome of interest was opioid utilization over the hospital stay, secondary outcomes included opioid-related adverse effects, length, and costs of hospital stay. Mixed effect models measured the association of IVPAP and APAP and outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: In the study population 30.67% (75,445) received at least 1 dose of IVAPAP on the day of surgery. Upon adjusting for relevant covariates, patients who received IVPAP on the day of surgery had slightly higher opioid use standardized by length of hospital stay (2.8% CI: 2%, 3.6%; p < .001), higher hospital cost (2.7% CI: 2.1%, 3.4%), and higher odds of naloxone use (1.18, CI: 1.1, 1.27; p < .001) when compared with patients who received oral APAP. CONCLUSIONS: In this population, IVAPAP use on the day of surgery failed to reduce opioid use or associated opioid related adverse effects when compared with oral APAP. IVAPAP was associated with increased overall costs, opioid requirements, and naloxone use. These results do not support the use of IV over oral APAP routinely for hip fracture surgery patients.

Rebound Pain After Peripheral Nerve Blockade-Bad Timing or Rude Awakening?

Patients who have perioperatively benefited from regional anesthesia frequently report moderate to severe pain when the nerve block effects fade away. Over the past years, the term "rebound pain" has been introduced, suggesting a specific pathologic process. It is debated whether significant pain on block resolution reflects a separate and distinct pathologic mechanism potentially involving proinflammatory and neurotoxic effects of local anesthetics, or is simply caused by the recovery of sensory function at a timepoint when nociceptive stimuli are still intense, and moderate to severe pain should be anticipated. In that latter case, the phenomenon referred to as rebound pain could be considered a failure of pain management providers to devise an adequate analgesia plan. Whatever the ultimate designation, management of rebound pain should be proactive, by implementing multimodal analgesia, or tailoring the blockade to the expected trajectory of postoperative pain and managing patient expectations accordingly. Until we know more about the etiology and impact of this phenomenon, the authors suggest a more neutral designation such as "pain on block resolution."

Intraoperative Methadone and Short Stay Spine Surgery: Possible Barriers to Implementation and Future Opportunities.

The frequency of shorter stay spine surgery is increasing. Acute pain is a common barrier to discharge following spine surgery. Long-acting opioid medications like methadone have the potential to provide sustained analgesia when given intraoperatively. Methadone has been effectively used in complex spine surgery, cardiac surgery, and more recently applied to ambulatory procedures. In this article, we summarize the pertinent available literature on the use of intraoperative methadone for spine surgery as well as the recent data on intraoperative methadone for ambulatory surgery. The aim of this perspectives article is to describe the potential opportunities for applying intraoperative methadone to shorter stay spine surgery as well as barriers to more widespread use. While there are currently no trials that have specifically studied methadone for shorter stay spine surgery specifically to date, it is a promising area for future research.