Comparison of Intensive Insulin Versus Oral Regimens on Early Glycemic Control Following Kidney Transplant.

Introduction: Insulin is commonly prescribed to manage early post-kidney transplant hyperglycemia due to its flexibility. Studies comparing the effectiveness of oral therapies on glycemic outcomes remain limited. Project aims: The purpose of this program evaluation was to analyze our experience using oral antiglycemic agents immediately post-kidney transplant, compared to patients managed with insulin monotherapy. Design: This was a single-center, retrospective review of adult kidney transplant recipients with new or worsening hyperglycemia between 01/2014-05/2020. Patients were excluded if they had a prior or combined organ transplant, type 1 diabetes, or were previously on intensive insulin. Patients discharged on oral medications were 1:1 matched to patients receiving intensive insulin based on pre-specified clinical parameters. The primary endpoint was the number of diabetes-related readmissions within 6-months of transplant. Key secondary endpoints included mean serum glucose and hemoglobin A1c levels. Results: Thirty patients prescribed oral therapies were successfully matched to patients receiving intensive insulin. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups, except for more whites in the insulin group. There were no differences in diabetes-related (6.7% vs 3.3%; P = 1.00) or all-cause readmissions within 6-months. Mean serum glucose (P = .99) and hemoglobin A1c (P = .49) levels were also similar between patients receiving oral agents and insulin. However, 7 patients in the oral group were eventually converted to standing insulin. Conclusion: Our experience suggested that the early use of oral antiglycemics post-kidney transplant in select patients can result in similar outcomes relative to insulin. Meticulous follow-up is necessary as one-quarter of patients may require conversion to insulin within 1-month.

Impact of Intravenous Methadone Administered Intraoperatively on Postoperative Opioid Utilization.

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown that intravenous methadone intraoperatively can reduce opioid usage postoperatively. OBJECTIVE: This study's purpose was to evaluate the effect of intravenous methadone on postoperative opioid use. METHODS: A prospective, single-center observational study was conducted to evaluate patients who received intravenous methadone intraoperatively. A control group was identified by matching procedure, gender, and age in a 1:3 ratio of methadone to control. Exclusion criteria included patients less than 18 years old or on methadone maintenance therapy. The primary outcome was morphine milligram equivalents (MME) administered 24h postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included MME administered 48h and 72h postoperatively, discharge prescription MME, daily mean postoperative pain scores, and length of hospital stay. A subgroup analysis was performed comparing opioid-naïve patients. RESULTS: A total of 240 patients were included in the analysis. At 24h, postoperative MME was increased in the methadone group (142.6 vs 84.5; P = 0.0026). Postoperative MME was also increased in the methadone group at 48h and 72h. Daily pain scores were similar between both groups at all time intervals. Discharge prescription MME was reduced in the methadone group compared with controls, but not statistically significant. A subgroup analysis of opioid-naïve patients showed a significant reduction in MME at 48h (P = 0.0240) and daily pain scores at 24h (P = 0.0366) in the methadone group. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Intravenous methadone intraoperatively did not show a significant reduction in postoperative opioid use and discharge prescription MMEs when comparing all patients; however, benefit was seen when examining opioid-naïve patients.