Introduction
The management of acute postoperative pain remains a significant challenge for physicians. Poorly controlled postoperative pain is associated with poorer overall outcomes.
Methods
...Between April and May 2017, physicians from an online database who regularly prescribe intravenous (IV) medications for acute postoperative pain completed a 47-question survey on topics such as patient demographics, IV analgesia preferences, factors that influence prescribing decisions, and the challenges and unmet needs for the treatment of acute postoperative pain.
Results
Of 501 surveyed physicians, 55% practiced in community hospitals, 60% had been in practice for > 10 years, and 60% were surgeons. The three categories of IV pain medications most likely to be prescribed to patients with moderate-to-severe pain immediately after surgery were morphine, hydromorphone, or fentanyl (95.8% of respondents); COX-2 inhibitors or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (73.7%); and acetaminophen (60.5%). Past clinical experience (81.6%), surgery type (78.2%), and onset of analgesia (67.1%) were practice-related factors that most determined their medication choice. Key patient-related risk factors, such as avoidance of medication-related adverse events (AEs), each influenced prescription decisions in > 75.0% of physicians. Nausea and vomiting were among the most common challenges associated with postoperative pain management (76.2 and 60.3%, respectively), and avoidance of analgesic medication-related AEs was among the three most influential patient-related factors that determined prescribing decision (75%). Physicians reported the top unmet need for acute pain management in patients experiencing moderate-to-severe postoperative pain was more medications with fewer side effects (i.e., nausea, vomiting, and respiratory depression; 80.7%).
Conclusions
Opioids remain an integral component of multimodal acute analgesic therapy for acute postoperative pain in hospitalized patients. The use of all IV analgesic medications is limited by concerns over AEs, particularly with opioids and in high-risk patients. There remains a key unmet need for effective analgesic medications that are associated with a lower risk of AEs.
Funding
Trevena, Inc.
Introduction
Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is a common consequence of opioid use for chronic pain. OIC creates problems for patients independent of their pain syndromes, in addition to ...threatening pain treatment effectiveness. Healthcare practitioners need to be alert to how patients talk about OIC so that it is not missed. Using a survey mechanism, we sought patient expressions of the personal impact OIC imposes on how they are able to live their lives and on meanings that symptom relief would produce.
Methods
We used an online survey asking adults with OIC about quality of life implications of OIC and focused on open-ended text responses to questions about personal impacts of straining and meanings attached to OIC symptom relief. Participants were from the US, Canada, UK, Germany, Sweden, and Norway.
Results
A survey of 513 people with OIC produced 280 text responses concerning the impacts of straining on quality of life and 469 text responses on the meaning OIC symptom relief would confer. Text responses about the quality of life impacts of straining often included explicit descriptions conveying physical, psychological, or practical problems. Text responses about the meaning conferred from OIC symptom relief primarily concentrated around freedom from the constraints that OIC can impose.
Conclusions
Patients are willing and able to comment on the problems OIC cause them, using a variety of terms and phrases. Their comments concerning impacts on their lives will often refer to physical consequences, psychological effects, or practical implications. These insights provide healthcare practitioners guidance on how to engage patients about OIC.
Lack of a reproducible animal model has hampered progress in understanding hepatic veno‐occlusive disease (HVOD). This article characterizes a reproducible model of HVOD. Rats gavaged with ...monocrotaline, 160 mg/kg, were killed between days 1 and 10. Sections were evaluated by light microscopy with a standardized scoring system, by immunoperoxidase staining with ED‐1 (monocytes, macrophages) and ED‐2 (Kupffer cells) antibodies, and by transmission (TEM) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). On days 1 and 2, the earliest manifestations were progressive injury to the sinusoidal wall with loss of sinusoidal lining cells, sinusoidal hemorrhage, and mild damage to central vein (CV) endothelium. On days 3 through 5 (“early HVOD”), there was centrilobular coagulative necrosis, severe injury to sinusoids, severe sinusoidal hemorrhage, and severe CV endothelial damage; inflammation with ED‐1–positive cells was most marked on these days. Days 6 and 7 (“late HVOD”) were characterized by subendothelial and advential fibrosis of CVs, damage of the CV endothelium with subendothelial hemorrhage, and some restoration of the sinusoidal wall. Between days 8 and 10, sections showed interindividual variation ranging from mild, residual fibrosis to severe, late HVOD. From days 1 through 10, ED‐2–positive cells were decreased in number, and the number of ED‐1–positive cells was increased. Sinusoidal damage is the earliest change in HVOD. Coagulative necrosis follows sinusoidal injury and resolves with improvement in sinusoidal endothelial cell (SEC) morphology. Moderate‐to‐severe CV fibrosis occurs after reappearance of sinusoidal lining cells and resolution of hepatocyte necrosis. The inflammatory response within the lobule and CVs is a result of recruitment of monocytes, whereas Kupffer cells are decreased in number.
To present a large case series of epithelial ingrowth or implantation following endothelial keratoplasty (EK) with the purpose of identifying the common causes as well as the various clinical ...presentations. We aim to determine the typical clinical course and the most effective treatment for this rare but serious complication.
This is a retrospective study of 13 patients who developed epithelial ingrowth or implantation post-EK. Slit lamp photographs were independently examined along with other diagnostic imaging and histopathology to confirm the diagnosis. Patient medical records including operative reports were reviewed to determine the number of surgeries that occurred before EK and details of surgical technique, for example, whether venting incisions were performed. Records from follow-up visits were reviewed to determine the natural progression and management of these cases. The literature was reviewed and a meta-analysis was performed.
The patients were divided into 5 groups according to the type of epithelial presentation. Eight patients had involvement within the interface away from the visual axis. One patient had ingrowth in the interface within the visual axis, 2 had retrocorneal involvement, and 1 had anterior chamber involvement. One had both retrocorneal and anterior chamber involvement. Venting incisions were performed in 8 patients, but only 1 had ingrowth related to the venting incision. Nine patients were observed without evidence of significant progression. Four patients had surgical treatment to remove the epithelium.
Epithelial ingrowth or implantation occurs most commonly within the interface away from the visual axis and typically does not progress. The presentation of a homogeneous gray-white interface opacity is characteristic. Ingrowth can result from venting incisions, but rarely does. Other causes are eccentric trephination or loose donor or host epithelium being dragged into the eye at the time of surgery.
Background
Thyroid dysfunction and hypertension (HTN) have been sporadically reported with sunitinib (SUN) and sorafenib (SOR). Determination of the side effect incidence will enhance monitoring and ...management recommendations.
Methods
An observational cohort study was performed using deidentified pharmacy claims data from a 3‐year period to evaluate patients prescribed SUN, SOR, or capecitabine (CAP; comparison group). The primary outcome was time to first prescription for thyroid replacement or HTN treatment. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated by Cox proportional hazards models.
Results
A total of 20,061 patients were eligible for evaluation of thyroid replacement therapy, which was initiated in 11.6% of those receiving SUN (HR, 16.77; 95% CI, 13.54–20.76), 2.6% of those receiving SOR (HR, 3.47; 95% CI, 2.46–4.98), and 1% of those receiving CAP, with median time to initiation of 4 months (range, 1–35 months). A total of 14,468 patients were eligible for evaluation of HTN therapy, which was initiated in 21% of SUN recipients (HR, 4.91; 95% CI, 4.19–5.74), 14% of SOR recipients (HR, 3.25; 95% CI, 2.69–3.91), and 5% of CAP recipients, with median time to initiation of 1 month (range, 1–18 months) for SOR and 2 months (range, 1–25 months) for SUN.
Conclusion
SUN and SOR significantly increased the risk for clinically relevant hypothyroidism; the risk was at least 4 times greater with SUN than with SOR. Patients receiving SUN and SOR had a similar elevated risk for clinically relevant HTN. These data provide robust measures of the incidence and time to onset of these clinically actionable adverse events.
Implications for Practice
The side effect profiles for novel therapies are typically used to create monitoring and management recommendations using clinical trial data from patient populations that may not represent those seen in standard clinical practice. This analysis using a large pharmacy claims database better reflects typical patients treated with sorafenib or sunitinib outside of a clinical trial. The findings of increased need for thyroid replacement in patients receiving sunitinib compared with sorafenib and a similar increase in need for hypertension therapy with both agents can be used to form clinically relevant monitoring recommendations for these agents.
Sorafenib and sunitinib significantly increased the risk for clinically relevant hypothyroidism; the risk was at least 4 times greater with SUN than with SOR. Patients receiving sunitinib and sorafenib had a similar elevated risk for clinically relevant HTN.
Introduction
While opioids have become a standard treatment option for those experiencing moderate to severe chronic pain, side effects of constipation and related symptoms have interfered with their ...usage in as many as 40–50% of treated patients. Prior research has elucidated the range of these symptoms, but no study has determined which of these symptoms patients most desire improving or whether improving constipation itself by as little as one more bowel movement per week is deemed an important change.
Methods
We conducted an online patient survey of 513 participants residing in one of six countries who reported having chronic pain, were taking opioids, and experiencing opioid-induced constipation (OIC) to address these questions.
Results
Respondents rank ordered their preferences and the following eight symptoms generated >80% endorsement as important to improve: improvement in having bowel movements without rectal pain, soft stools that are not loose or watery, regular bowel movements, a reduction in rectal straining, relief from feeling bloated, feeling less fear about having OIC when following their opioid medication regime, a desire to worry less overall about having a bowel movement, and with less ‘stomach’ area pain. When asked ‘how important is it you to have 1 more bowel movement per week”, over 90% endorsed it was ‘somewhat’, ‘very’, or ‘extremely important’ with nearly 70% (
n
= 354) endorsing the ‘extremely’ or ‘very important’ response options. In multivariate models, being in more overall pain or reporting fewer than 3 bowel movements per week were found to be independent predictors of the importance.
Conclusions
These results highlight the notable range of OIC symptoms most desired by patients to improve and demonstrate that bowel movements of only one more per week were important to register a meaningful improvement. The latter is particularly helpful for those assessing the minimal clinically important difference in treating this condition.
PDF
