1. Oxycodone prescription after inflatable penile prosthesis has risks of persistent use: a TriNetX analysis.
- Author
-
Prebay ZJ, Foss H, Ebbott D, Li M, and Chung PH
- Subjects
- Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Analgesics, Opioid therapeutic use, Analgesics, Opioid adverse effects, Aged, Opioid-Related Disorders, Adult, Penile Implantation adverse effects, Erectile Dysfunction drug therapy, Erectile Dysfunction surgery, Retrospective Studies, Oxycodone therapeutic use, Oxycodone adverse effects, Oxycodone administration & dosage, Penile Prosthesis adverse effects
- Abstract
We sought to evaluate the impact of Oxycodone prescriptions on short-term patient outcomes and long-term Oxycodone use following inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) placement. We queried the TriNetX research database for all adult patients undergoing IPP. Cohorts included opioid naïve patients prescribed postoperative Oxycodone against propensity score-matched patients without a prescription. We compared return visits to the emergency department (ED) within 14 and 90 days of surgery, a diagnosis of opioid abuse or dependence disorder 6 months or later after surgery and persistent Oxycodone use 9-15 months after surgery. After matching, there were 2433 patients in each group. There was an increase in 90-day ED visits based on receipt of Oxycodone (6.8% of patients vs 5.0%, risk ratio (RR) 1.4 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.1, 1.7]). Groups had similar 14-day ED visits (3.7% of patients vs 2.9%, RR 1.3, 95% CI [0.95, 1.7]). Patients prescribed Oxycodone (5.1% of patients vs 2.7%, RR 1.9, 95% CI [1.4, 2.6]) were more likely to have persistent Oxycodone use at 9-15 months. There were low instances of diagnosis of opioid dependence or abuse for both groups limiting comparison. Oxycodone prescription after IPP has risks of persistent use and withholding Oxycodone does not appear to increase postoperative healthcare utilization., Competing Interests: Competing interests: PHC consults for and receives research support from Boston Scientific and Coloplast. The remaining authors declare no competing interests. Ethics approval: This study population was an entirely deidentified analysis from a third-party research database. Thus, this study was considered exempt from institutional review board approval., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF