MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384200002 · doi:10.1503/cjs.006922

Rectus sheath catheters reduce opiate use in pancreaticoduodenectomy: a pre- and postintervention cohort study

2023· article· en· W4384200002 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Patrick Tapley, Martin Van der Vyver, Natalie G. Coburn, Julie Hallet, Calvin Law, Rachel Roke, Paul J. Karanicolas

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Surgery · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook HospitalUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersPfizerAmgen
KeywordsMedicineHydromorphoneAnesthesiaOpiateRetrospective cohort studyMorphinePancreaticoduodenectomyAnalgesicVisual analogue scaleAdverse effectRopivacaineSurgeryOpioidInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Pancreaticoduodenectomy is the only curative option for patients with pancreatic cancer; however, pain remains a considerable problem postoperatively. With many centres moving away from using epidural analgesia, there is the need to evaluate alternative opiate sparing techniques for postoperative analgesia. We sought to determine if rectus sheath catheters (RSCs) had an opiate sparing and analgesic effect compared with standard care alone (opiate analgesia). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective pre- and postintervention cohort study of patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy at a single tertiary academic hospital in Toronto, Canada, between April 2018 and December 2019. All patients undergoing a pancreaticoduodenectomy were eligible for inclusion. Among the 101 patients identified, 84 (61 control, 23 RSCs) were analyzed after exclusion criteria were applied (epidural analgesia, admission to intensive care intubated or reintubated within the first 96 hours). The pre-intervention group received a semi-standardized course of analgesics, including intravenous hydromorphone, acetaminophen, ketamine, with or without nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory, and with or without intravenous lidocaine; the latter 2 drugs were at the individual anesthesiologist and surgeon's preference. For the postintervention group, the same course of analgesics were used, with the addition of RSCs. These were inserted at the end of the operation, with a loading dose of ropivacaine administered and followed by a programmed intermittent bolus regime for 72-96 hours. The primary outcome measure was total postoperative opiate consumption (oral morphine equivalents). Secondary outcomes included pain scores (numeric rating scale) and treatment-related adverse effects. RESULTS: = 0.01). The RSC group used significantly less opiates at each time point from 24 hours postoperatively, with no significant difference in pain scores between the groups and no significant catheter-related complications. CONCLUSION: The use of RSCs was associated with significant reductions in postoperative opiate consumption. Given the ease of placement and management, with minimal complications, RSCs should be incorporated into a course of postoperative multimodal analgesia. A large scale randomized controlled trial should be conducted to further investigate these findings.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.225 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of SurgerySame topicAnesthesia and Pain ManagementFrench-language works237,207