Dataset Information

Opioid analgesia and severity of acute pancreatitis: An international multicentre cohort study on pain management in acute pancreatitis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The effect of analgesic modalities on short-term outcomes in acute pancreatitis remains unknown. However, preclinical models have raised safety concerns regarding opioid use in patients with acute pancreatitis.

Objective

This study aimed to assess the association between analgesics, particularly opioids, and severity and mortality in hospitalised patients with acute pancreatitis.

Methods

This prospective multicentre cohort study recruited consecutive patients admitted with a first episode of acute pancreatitis between April 1 and 30 June 2022, with a 1-month follow-up. Data on aetiology, clinical course, and analgesic treatment were collected. The primary outcome was the association between opioid analgesia and acute pancreatitis severity, which was analysed using univariate and multivariate analyses.

Results

Among a total of 1768 patients, included from 118 centres across 27 countries, 1036 (59%) had opioids administered on admission day, and 167 (9%) received opioids after admission day. On univariate analysis, moderately severe or severe acute pancreatitis was associated with male sex, Asian ethnicity, alcohol aetiology, comorbidity, predicted severe acute pancreatitis, higher pain scores, longer pain duration and opioid treatment (all p < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, comorbidity, alcohol aetiology, longer pain duration and higher pain scores increased the risk of moderately severe or severe acute pancreatitis (all p < 0.001). Furthermore, opioids administered after admission day (but not on admission day) doubled the risk of moderately severe or severe disease (OR 2.07 (95% CI, 1.29-3.33); p = 0.003). Opioid treatment for 6 days or more was an independent risk factor for moderately severe or severe acute pancreatitis (OR 3.21 (95% CI, 2.16-4.79; p < 0.001). On univariate analysis, longer opioid duration was associated with mortality.

Conclusion

Opioid treatment increased the risk of more severe acute pancreatitis only when administered after admission day or for 6 days or more. Future randomised studies should re-evaluate whether opioids might be safe in acute pancreatitis.

SUBMITTER: Pandanaboyana S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC11017759 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Opioid analgesia and severity of acute pancreatitis: An international multicentre cohort study on pain management in acute pancreatitis.

Pandanaboyana Sanjay S Knoph Cecilie Siggaard CS Olesen Søren Schou SS Jones Michael M Lucocq James J Samanta Jayanta J Talukdar Rupjyoti R Capurso Gabriele G de-Madaria Enrique E Yadav Dhiraj D Siriwardena Ajith K AK Windsor John J Drewes Asbjørn Mohr AM Nayar Manu M

United European gastroenterology journal 20240304 3

<h4>Background</h4>The effect of analgesic modalities on short-term outcomes in acute pancreatitis remains unknown. However, preclinical models have raised safety concerns regarding opioid use in patients with acute pancreatitis.<h4>Objective</h4>This study aimed to assess the association between analgesics, particularly opioids, and severity and mortality in hospitalised patients with acute pancreatitis.<h4>Methods</h4>This prospective multicentre cohort study recruited consecutive patients adm ...[more]

PMID: 38439202

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThis is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 4, 2006. Patients may control postoperative pain by self administration of intravenous opioids using devices designed for this purpose (patient controlled analgesia or PCA). A 1992 meta-analysis by Ballantyne et al found a strong patient preference for PCA over non-patient controlled analgesia, but disclosed no differences in analgesic consumption or length of postoperative hospital stay. Although Ballantyne's meta-analysis found that PCA did have a small but statistically significant benefit upon pain intensity, a 2001 review by Walder et al did not find statistically significant differences in pain intensity or pain relief between PCA and groups treated with non-patient controlled analgesia.ObjectivesTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of patient controlled intravenous opioid analgesia (termed PCA in this review) versus non-patient controlled opioid analgesia of as-needed opioid analgesia for postoperative pain relief.Search methodsWe ran the search for the previous review in November 2004. For this update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2014, Issue 12), MEDLINE (1966 to 28 January 2015), and EMBASE (1980 to 28 January 2015) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in any language, and reference lists of reviews and retrieved articles.Selection criteriaWe selected RCTs that assessed pain intensity as a primary or secondary outcome. These studies compared PCA without a continuous background infusion with non-patient controlled opioid analgesic regimens. We excluded studies that explicitly stated they involved patients with chronic pain.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently extracted data, which included demographic variables, type of surgery, interventions, efficacy, and adverse events. We graded each included study for methodological quality by assessing risk of bias and employed the GRADE approach to assess the overall quality of the evidence. We performed meta-analysis of outcomes that included pain intensity assessed by a 0 to 100 visual analog scale (VAS), opioid consumption, patient satisfaction, length of stay, and adverse events.Main resultsForty-nine studies with 1725 participants receiving PCA and 1687 participants assigned to a control group met the inclusion criteria. The original review included 55 studies with 2023 patients receiving PCA and 1838 patients assigned to a control group. There were fewer included studies in our updated review due to the revised exclusion criteria. For the primary outcome, participants receiving PCA had lower VAS pain intensity scores versus non-patient controlled analgesia over most time intervals, e.g., scores over 0 to 24 hours were nine points lower (95% confidence interval (CI) -13 to -5, moderate quality evidence) and over 0 to 48 hours were 10 points lower (95% CI -12 to -7, low quality evidence). Among the secondary outcomes, participants were more satisfied with PCA (81% versus 61%, P value = 0.002) and consumed higher amounts of opioids than controls (0 to 24 hours, 7 mg more of intravenous morphine equivalents, 95% CI 1 mg to 13 mg). Those receiving PCA had a higher incidence of pruritus (15% versus 8%, P value = 0.01) but had a similar incidence of other adverse events. There was no difference in the length of hospital stay.Authors' conclusionsSince the last version of this review, we have found new studies providing additional information. We reanalyzed the data but the results did not substantially alter any of our previously published conclusions. This review provides moderate to low quality evidence that PCA is an efficacious alternative to non-patient controlled systemic analgesia for postoperative pain control.

Project description:BackgroundAcute pancreatitis (AP) is associated with high morbidity and mortality in its most severe forms. Most patients with severe AP require intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation, frequently for more than 7 days, which is associated with the worst outcome. Recent increasing evidence from preclinical and clinical studies support the beneficial effects of epidural analgesia (EA) in AP, such as increased gut barrier function and splanchnic, pancreatic and renal perfusion, decreased liver damage and inflammatory response, and reduced mortality. Because recent studies suggest that EA might be a safe procedure in the critically ill, we sought to determine whether EA reduced AP-associated respiratory failure and other major clinical outcomes in patients with AP.Methods and analysisThe Epidural Analgesia for Pancreatitis (EPIPAN) trial is an investigator-initiated, prospective, multicentre, randomised controlled two-arm trial with assessor-blinded outcome assessment. The EPIPAN trial will randomise 148 patients with AP requiring admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) to receive EA (with patient-controlled epidural administration of ropivacaine and sufentanil) combined with standard care based on current recommendations on the treatment of AP (interventional group), or standard care alone (reference group). The primary outcome is the number of ventilator-free days at day 30. Secondary outcomes include main complications of AP (eg, organ failure and mortality, among others), levels of biological markers of systemic inflammation, epithelial lung injury, renal failure, and healthcare-associated costs.Ethics and disseminationThe study was approved by the appropriate ethics committee (CPP Sud-Est VI). Informed consent is required. If the combined application of EA and standard care proves superior to standard care alone in patients with AP in the ICU, the use of EA may become standard practice in experienced centres, thereby decreasing potential complications related to AP and its burden in critically ill patients. The results will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration numberNCT02126332.

Project description:Pancreatitis is known to be painful in humans and companion animals. However, the extent of pain in experimental mouse models of acute pancreatitis is unknown. Consequently, the severity classification of acute pancreatitis in mice is controversially discussed and standardized pain management is missing. In this study, we investigated acute Cerulein-induced pancreatitis with pain-specific and well-being orientated parameters to detect its impact on mice. Male C57BL/6J male mice were injected with Cerulein; animals that received saline injections served as control group. The animals were observed for weight change and water intake. To assess pain, behaviors like stretch-and-press and reduced rearing, the Mouse Grimace Scale, and von Frey hypersensitivity were assessed. Fecal corticosterone metabolites and burrowing behavior were assessed to detect changes in the animal's well-being. Pancreatitis severity was evaluated with amylase and lipase in the blood and pancreas histology. To investigate whether different analgesics can alleviate signs of pain, and if they influence pancreas inflammation, animals received Buprenorphine, Paracetamol in combination with Tramadol, or Metamizole in the drinking water. The calculated intake of these analgesics via drinking reached values stated to be efficient for pain alleviation. While pancreatitis did not seem to be painful, we detected acute pain from Cerulein injections that could not be alleviated by analgesics. The number of inflammatory cells in the pancreas did not differ with the analgesic administered. In conclusion: (1) Cerulein injections appear to be acutely painful but pain could not be alleviated by the tested analgesics, (2) acute pancreatitis induced by our protocol did not induce obvious signs of pain, (3) analgesic substances had no detectable influence on inflammation. Nevertheless, protocols inducing more severe or even chronic pancreatitis might evoke more pain and analgesic treatment might become imperative. Considering our results, we recommend the use of Buprenorphine via drinking water in these protocols. Further studies to search for efficient analgesics that can alleviate the acute pain induced by Cerulein injections are needed.

Project description:IntroductionMillions of Americans are affected by acute or chronic pain every year. This study investigates opioid prescription patterns for acute and chronic pain management among U.S. Medicaid patients.MethodsThe study used medical and pharmacy claims data obtained from the multistate Truven MarketScan Medicaid Database from 2013 to 2015 for Medicaid patients receiving health care. Medicaid beneficiaries who utilized an outpatient healthcare facility for back pain, neck pain (cervicalgia), joint pain (osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis), orthopedics (simple/closed fractures and muscle strains/sprains), headache (cluster headaches and migraines), dental conditions, or otorhinolaryngologic (otalgia) diagnoses, based on the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis codes, and received an opioid prescription within 14 days of diagnosis were included in this study.ResultsThere were 5,051,288 patients with 1 of the 7 diagnostic groupings; 18.8% had an opioid prescription filled within 14 days of diagnosis. Orthopedic pain (34.8%) was the primary reason for an opioid prescription, followed by dental conditions (17.3%), back pain (14.0%), and headache (12.9%). Patients receiving an opioid for conditions associated with acute pain management, such as otorhinolaryngologic (OR=1.93, 95% CI=1.85, 2.0), dental (OR=1.50, 95% CI=1.48, 1.53), or orthopedic conditions (OR=1.31, 95% CI=1.29, 1.32), were more likely to receive the prescription from an emergency department provider versus a general practitioner. However, compared with general practitioners, other providers were more likely to prescribe opioids for conditions associated with chronic pain management.ConclusionsMore than half of Medicaid beneficiaries receiving an opioid for pain management do so for orthopedic- and dental-related reasons, with emergency department providers more likely to prescribe opioids. Modifications to the guidelines addressing temporary acute pain management practices with opioids would be likely to benefit emergency department providers the most.

Dataset Information

Opioid analgesia and severity of acute pancreatitis: An international multicentre cohort study on pain management in acute pancreatitis.

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Opioid analgesia and severity of acute pancreatitis: An international multicentre cohort study on pain management in acute pancreatitis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets