General Versus Neuraxial Anesthesia for Appendectomy: A Multicenter International Study.

BACKGROUND: In resource-limited countries, open appendectomy is still performed under general anesthesia (GA) or neuraxial anesthesia (NA). We sought to compare the postoperative outcomes of appendectomy under NA versus GA. METHODS: We conducted a post hoc analysis of the International Patterns of Opioid Prescribing (iPOP) multicenter study. All patients ≥ 16 years-old who underwent an open appendectomy between October 2016 and March 2017 in one of the 14 participating hospitals were included. Patients were stratified into two groups: NA-defined as spinal or epidural-and GA. All-cause morbidity, hospital length of stay (LOS), and pain severity were assessed using univariate analysis followed by multivariable logistic regression adjusting for the following preoperative characteristics: age, gender, body mass index (BMI), smoking, history of opioid use, emergency status, and country. RESULTS: A total of 655 patients were included, 353 of which were in the NA group and 302 in the GA group. The countries operating under NA were Colombia (39%), Thailand (31%), China (23%), and Brazil (7%). Overall, NA patients were younger (mean age (SD): 34.5 (14.4) vs. 40.7 (17.9), p-value < 0.001) and had a lower BMI (mean (SD): 23.5 (3.8) vs. 24.3 (5.2), p-value = 0.040) than GA patients. On multivariable analysis, NA was independently associated with less postoperative complications (OR, 95% CI: 0.30 [0.10-0.94]) and shorter hospital LOS (LOS > 3 days, OR, 95% CI: 0.47 [0.32-0.68]) compared to GA. There was no difference in postoperative pain severity between the two techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Open appendectomy performed under NA is associated with improved outcomes compared to that performed under GA. Further randomized controlled studies should examine the safety and value of NA in lower abdominal surgery.

Opioids After Surgery in the United States Versus the Rest of the World: The International Patterns of Opioid Prescribing (iPOP) Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVE: The International Patterns of Opioid Prescribing study compares postoperative opioid prescribing patterns in the United States (US) versus the rest of the world. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The US is in the middle of an unprecedented opioid epidemic. Diversion of unused opioids contributes to the opioid epidemic. METHODS: Patients ≥16 years old undergoing appendectomy, cholecystectomy, or inguinal hernia repair in 14 hospitals from 8 countries during a 6-month period were included. Medical records were systematically reviewed to identify: (1) preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative characteristics, (2) opioid intake within 3 months preoperatively, (3) opioid prescription upon discharge, and (4) opioid refills within 3 months postoperatively. The median/range and mean/standard deviation of number of pills and OME were compared between the US and non-US patients. RESULTS: A total of 4690 patients were included. The mean age was 49 years, 47% were female, and 4% had opioid use history. Ninety-one percent of US patients were prescribed opioids, compared to 5% of non-US patients (P < 0.001). The median number of opioid pills and OME prescribed were 20 (0-135) and 150 (0-1680) mg for US versus 0 (0-50) and 0 (0-600) mg for non-US patients, respectively (both P < 0.001). The mean number of opioid pills and OME prescribed were 23.1 ±â€Š13.9 in US and 183.5 ±â€Š133.7 mg versus 0.8 ±â€Š3.9 and 4.6 ±â€Š27.7 mg in non-US patients, respectively (both P < 0.001). Opioid refill rates were 4.7% for US and 1.0% non-US patients (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: US physicians prescribe alarmingly high amounts of opioid medications postoperatively. Further efforts should focus on limiting opioid prescribing and emphasize non-opioid alternatives in the US.