Search

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recently published a 2022 guideline on opioid prescribing for acute, subacute, and chronic pain. This information is relevant to surgeons because many patients receive their first opioid prescription after surgery. When prescribing opioids, surgeons walk the line between benefit and harm. Many of the CDC recommendations mirror the AAO‐HNS Clinical Practice Guideline: Opioid Prescribing for Analgesia After Common Otolaryngology Operations. For example, opioids are not recommended as first‐line therapy for acute pain from otolaryngology—head, and neck surgery procedures. New insights include safeguards and strategies to mitigate the risk of complications in patients with chronic pain undergoing surgical procedures. Consultation with a pain specialist should be considered for patients transitioning from acute to chronic pain, cognizant of the risks of abrupt discontinuation of opioids in patients with opioid use disorder. This article summarizes key considerations for providing individualized, evidence‐based perioperative pain management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To offer pragmatic, evidence-informed advice on nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) as first-line therapy after surgery. This companion to the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery (AAO-HNS) clinical practice guideline (CPG), "Opioid Prescribing for Analgesia After Common Otolaryngology Operations," presents data on potency, bleeding risk, and adverse effects for ibuprofen, naproxen, ketorolac, meloxicam, and celecoxib.Data Sources: National Guidelines Clearinghouse, CMA Infobase, National Library of Guidelines, NICE, SIGN, New Zealand Guidelines Group, Australian National Health and Medical, Research Council, TRIP database, PubMed, Guidelines International Network, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, CINAHL, BIOSIS Previews, ISI Web of Science, AHRQ, and HSTAT.Review Methods: AAO-HNS opioid CPG literature search strategy, supplemented by PubMed/MEDLINE searches on NSAIDs, emphasizing systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials.Conclusion: NSAIDs provide highly effective analgesia for postoperative pain, particularly when combined with acetaminophen. Inconsistent use of nonopioid regimens arises from common misconceptions that NSAIDs are less potent analgesics than opioids and have an unacceptable risk of bleeding. To the contrary, multimodal analgesia (combining 500 mg acetaminophen and 200 mg ibuprofen) is significantly more effective analgesia than opioid regimens (15 mg oxycodone with acetaminophen). Furthermore, selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibition reliably circumvents antiplatelet effects.Implications For Practice: The combination of NSAIDs and acetaminophen provides more effective postoperative pain control with greater safety than opioid-based regimens. The AAO-HNS opioid prescribing CPG therefore prioritizes multimodal, nonopioid analgesia as first-line therapy, recommending that opioids be reserved for severe or refractory pain. This state-of-the-art review provides strategies for safely incorporating NSAIDs into acute postoperative pain regimens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Human papillomavirus-associated (HPV+) oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) is a unique form of head and neck cancer with improved prognosis. We assessed survival for stage I patients with low- or intermediate-risk pathologic features with surgery alone compared with surgery with adjuvant radiation (RT) or chemoradiation (CRT).Materials and Methods: We identified patients with stage I HPV+ OPSCC (after restaging with 8th edition staging system) treated with surgery alone, adjuvant RT or CRT in the National Cancer Data Base from 2010 to 2013. We compared survival for low-risk patients (≤1 metastatic lymph nodes with no adverse features) and intermediate-risk patients (2-4 metastatic lymph nodes, microscopic extranodal extension (ENE) or lymphovascular invasion).Results: We examined 1677 patients with median follow-up of 43.9 months. In the intermediate-risk group, 4-year overall survival was 94.0% with surgery alone, 91.5% with adjuvant RT and 92.0% with adjuvant CRT (p = 0.72). There were similar rates of overall survival in the low-risk group. In multivariable models accounting for clinicopathologic differences the dose of adjuvant RT was not associated with mortality. On Cox proportional hazard modeling, adjuvant RT (HR 0.94; CI 0.43-2.08) or CRT (HR 0.96; CI 0.45-2.11) did not significantly improved survival compared with surgery alone in the intermediate-risk group (reference). Similar results were seen in the low-risk group. The composite number of pathologic risk features significantly improved risk stratification.Conclusion: We provide observational evidence that adjuvant RT or CRT does not provide a survival benefit for stage I HPV+ OPSCC with low- or intermediate-risk pathologic features. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The National Quality Forum has endorsed quality-improvement measures for multiple cancer types that are being developed into actionable tools to improve cancer care. No nationally endorsed quality metrics currently exist for head and neck cancer.Methods: The authors identified patients with surgically treated, invasive, head and neck squamous cell carcinoma in the National Cancer Data Base from 2004 to 2014 and compared the rate of adherence to 5 different quality metrics and whether compliance with these quality metrics impacted overall survival. The metrics examined included negative surgical margins, neck dissection lymph node (LN) yield ≥ 18, appropriate adjuvant radiation, appropriate adjuvant chemoradiation, adjuvant therapy within 6 weeks, as well as overall quality.Results: In total, 76,853 eligible patients were identified. There was substantial variability in patient-level adherence, which was 80% for negative surgical margins, 73.1% for neck dissection LN yield, 69% for adjuvant radiation, 42.6% for adjuvant chemoradiation, and 44.5% for adjuvant therapy within 6 weeks. Risk-adjusted Cox proportional-hazard models indicated that all metrics were associated with a reduced risk of death: negative margins (hazard ratio [HR] 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-0.76), LN yield ≥ 18 (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.89-0.96), adjuvant radiation (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.64-0.70), adjuvant chemoradiation (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.79-0.88), and adjuvant therapy ≤6 weeks (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.89-0.96). Patients who received high-quality care had a 19% reduced adjusted hazard of mortality (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.79-0.83).Conclusions: Five head and neck cancer quality metrics were identified that have substantial variability in adherence and meaningfully impact overall survival. These metrics are appropriate candidates for national adoption. Cancer 2017;123:4372-81. © 2017 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives/hypothesis: Head and neck cancer patients have multiple risk factors for liver disease. However, little is known about the incidence of liver disease or the safety of surgery in these patients.Study Design: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program from 2005 to 2013.Methods: We identified patients undergoing head and neck surgery and excluded them if preoperative laboratory data were missing. Patients were classified as having liver disease if their preoperative aspartate aminotransferase-to-platelet ratio index was ≥ 0.7, and as having advanced liver disease if their Model for End-Stage Liver Disease-Sodium score was ≥ 10. We compared the rate of postoperative complications using multivariable logistic regression.Results: Among 19,138 eligible patients, the incidence of any degree of liver disease was 6.8% for aerodigestive tract surgery and 3.3% for controls. The 30-day mortality rate after major head and neck surgery, which included composite resection; free tissue transfer; and total laryngectomy with advanced, mild, and no liver disease, was 14.6%, 3.0%, and 0.9%, respectively (P < 0.001). For nonmajor surgery, the mortality rate was 3.0%, 0.3%, and 0.3%, respectively (P < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, patients with advanced liver disease experienced a six-fold higher rate of 30-day mortality (odds ratio 6.1; 95% confidence interval, 2.9-12.8).Conclusion: There is a high risk to detect liver disease in patients undergoing head and neck surgery of the aerodigestive tract. Those with advanced liver disease are at high risk for perioperative mortality, and this risk should be judiciously considered in medical/surgical decision making and postoperative care.Level Of Evidence: 2c. Laryngoscope, 127:102-109, 2017. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective In recent decades, there has been a reduction in the length of postoperative hospital stay, with a corresponding increase in discharge to postacute care. Discharge to postacute care facilities represents a meaningful patient-centered outcome; however, little has been published about this outcome after head and neck surgery. Study Design Retrospective review of national database. Setting American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program from 2011 to 2013. Subjects and Methods We compared the rate of discharge to home versus postacute care facilities in patients admitted after head and neck surgery and used multivariable logistic regression to identify predictors of discharge to postacute care. Results The overall rate of discharge to postacute care facilities after head and neck surgery (n = 15,890) was 15.7% after major surgery (including laryngectomy, composite resection, and free tissue transfer), 4.4% after moderate surgery (including regional tissue transfer, oropharyngeal or oral cavity resection, and neck dissection), and 1.1% after minor head and neck surgery (including endocrine or salivary gland surgery). On multivariable analysis, significant preoperative predictors of discharge to postacute care were advanced age, functional status, major or moderate surgical procedures, tracheostomy, advanced American Society of Anesthesiologists class, low body mass index, and dyspnea. Conclusion Our study indicates that patients undergoing major or moderate head and neck surgery, patients with reduced functional status, and patients with advanced comorbidities are at substantial risk of discharge to postacute care. The possibility of discharge to postacute care should be discussed with high-risk patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To assess the frequency and nature of postoperative complications that occur in elderly patients, as compared with younger patients, following head and neck surgery. Study Design: Cohort study of national database. Setting: American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program from 2005 to 2013. Subjects and Methods: We identified 29,891 patients who had head and neck surgery during the study period and classified them as having upper aerodigestive tract surgery (n = 8383) or endocrine/salivary gland (n = 21,508) surgery. We analyzed patients stratified by age categories: young (<65 years), intermediate age (65-75 years), and elderly (≥75 years). Risk-adjusted 30-day morbidity and mortality outcomes were compared across age categories with multivariable logistic regression models to adjust for patient characteristics, comorbidities, and surgical procedure. Results: Elderly patients had increased odds for morbidity (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 1.47, 95% CI: 1.22-1.78; OR = 1.89, 95% CI: 1.46-2.44) for upper aerodigestive tract and endocrine/salivary gland groups, respectively, versus young patients and for mortality (OR = 2.52, 95% CI: 1.26-5.06; OR = 3.73, 95% CI: 1.32-10.52). Elderly patients were more likely to develop pulmonary, urologic, and blood clotting-related complications. Elderly patients undergoing endocrine/salivary gland surgery were significantly more likely to have cardiac complications; however, this was not the case for aerodigestive tract operations. Conclusions: Head and neck surgery in the elderly carries an increased risk of certain types of postoperative complications as compared with younger patients treated similarly. Quality improvement efforts should focus on minimizing the risk of cardiac, pulmonary, and urologic complications in elderly patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]