Pain

CHARLOTTE, N.C. – Children and adolescents without a history of headache may develop prolonged headaches after sustaining a concussion, according to research presented at the annual meeting of the Child Neurology Society. The headache may be migraine, chronic daily headache, tension-type headache, or a combination of these headaches.

“We strongly recommend that individuals who develop persistent headache after a concussion be evaluated and treated by a neurologist with experience in administering treatment for headache,” said Marcus Barissi, Weller Scholar at the Cleveland Clinic, and colleagues. “Using this approach, we hope that their prolonged headaches will be lessened.”
 

Few studies have examined prolonged pediatric postconcussion headache

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that between 1.6 million and 3.8 million concussions occur annually during athletic and recreational activities in the United States. About 90% of concussions affect children or adolescents. The symptom most often reported after concussion is headache.

Few studies have focused on new persistent postconcussion headache (NPPCH) in children. Mr. Barissi and colleagues did not find any previous study that had examined prolonged headache following concussion in patients without prior chronic headache. They sought to ascertain the prognosis of patients with NPPCH and no history of prior headache, to describe this clinical entity, and to identify beneficial treatment methods.

The investigators retrospectively reviewed charts for approximately 2,000 patients who presented to the Cleveland Clinic pediatric neurology department between June 2017 and August 2018 for headaches. They identified 259 patients who received a diagnosis of concussion, 69 (27%) of whom had headaches for longer than 2 months after injury.

Mr. Barissi and colleagues emailed these patients, and 33 (48%) of them agreed to complete a questionnaire and participate in a 10-minute phone interview. Thirty-one patients (43%) could not be contacted, and eight (11%) declined to participate. All participants confirmed that they had not had consistent headache before the concussion and that chronic headache had arisen after concussion. To determine participants’ medical outcomes, the researchers compared participants’ initial assessment data with posttreatment data collected during the interview process.
 

Healthy behaviors increased after concussion

Of the 69 eligible participants, 38 (55%) were female. The population’s median age was 17. Twenty-eight (85%) of the 33 patients who completed the questionnaire considered the information and treatment that they had received to be beneficial. Twenty-five (78%) patients continued to have headache after several months, despite treatment.

Participants had withstood a mean of 1.72 concussions, and the mean age at first injury was 12.49 years. The most common cause of injury was a fall for males (36%) and an automobile accident for females (18%).

Forty-eight patients (70%) reported having two types of headache. Fifty-two patients (75%) had migraines, and 65 (94%) had chronic daily headache or tension-type headache. Forty-eight (70%) participants had a family history of headache.

In all, 64 patients (93%) had used a headache medication. The most common headache medications used were amitriptyline, topiramate, and cyproheptadine. Few patients were still taking these medications at several months after evaluation. The most common nonprescription medications used were Migravent (i.e., magnesium, riboflavin, coenzyme Q10, and butterbur), ondansetron, and melatonin. Furthermore, 61 patients (88%) participated in nonmedicinal therapy such as physical therapy, chiropractic therapy, and acupuncture.

After evaluation, patients engaged in several healthy behaviors (e.g., adequate exercise, proper use of over-the-counter medications, and drinking sufficient water) more frequently, but did not get adequate sleep. Sixty-five participants (94%) had undergone CT or MRI imaging, but the results did not improve understanding of headache etiology or treatment. Many patients missed several days of school, but average attendance improved after months of treatment.
 

Long-term outcomes

Thirty-one survey respondents (94%) reported that their emotional, cognitive, sleep, and somatic postconcussion symptoms had resolved. Nevertheless, a majority of participants still had headache. “The persistence of postconcussion symptoms is uncommon, but lasting headache is not,” said the researchers. “If patients are not properly educated, conditions may deteriorate, extending the duration of disability.” A longer study with a larger sample size could provide valuable information, said the researchers. Future work should examine objectively the efficacy of various medications used to treat NPPCH and determine the best methods of treatment for this syndrome, which “can cause prolonged pain, suffering, and lack of function,” they concluded.

The investigators did not report any study funding or disclosures.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Barissi M et al. CNS 2019, Abstract 95.

CHARLOTTE, N.C. – Children and adolescents without a history of headache may develop prolonged headaches after sustaining a concussion, according to research presented at the annual meeting of the Child Neurology Society. The headache may be migraine, chronic daily headache, tension-type headache, or a combination of these headaches.

“We strongly recommend that individuals who develop persistent headache after a concussion be evaluated and treated by a neurologist with experience in administering treatment for headache,” said Marcus Barissi, Weller Scholar at the Cleveland Clinic, and colleagues. “Using this approach, we hope that their prolonged headaches will be lessened.”
 

Few studies have examined prolonged pediatric postconcussion headache

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that between 1.6 million and 3.8 million concussions occur annually during athletic and recreational activities in the United States. About 90% of concussions affect children or adolescents. The symptom most often reported after concussion is headache.

Few studies have focused on new persistent postconcussion headache (NPPCH) in children. Mr. Barissi and colleagues did not find any previous study that had examined prolonged headache following concussion in patients without prior chronic headache. They sought to ascertain the prognosis of patients with NPPCH and no history of prior headache, to describe this clinical entity, and to identify beneficial treatment methods.

The investigators retrospectively reviewed charts for approximately 2,000 patients who presented to the Cleveland Clinic pediatric neurology department between June 2017 and August 2018 for headaches. They identified 259 patients who received a diagnosis of concussion, 69 (27%) of whom had headaches for longer than 2 months after injury.

Mr. Barissi and colleagues emailed these patients, and 33 (48%) of them agreed to complete a questionnaire and participate in a 10-minute phone interview. Thirty-one patients (43%) could not be contacted, and eight (11%) declined to participate. All participants confirmed that they had not had consistent headache before the concussion and that chronic headache had arisen after concussion. To determine participants’ medical outcomes, the researchers compared participants’ initial assessment data with posttreatment data collected during the interview process.
 

Healthy behaviors increased after concussion

Of the 69 eligible participants, 38 (55%) were female. The population’s median age was 17. Twenty-eight (85%) of the 33 patients who completed the questionnaire considered the information and treatment that they had received to be beneficial. Twenty-five (78%) patients continued to have headache after several months, despite treatment.

Participants had withstood a mean of 1.72 concussions, and the mean age at first injury was 12.49 years. The most common cause of injury was a fall for males (36%) and an automobile accident for females (18%).

Forty-eight patients (70%) reported having two types of headache. Fifty-two patients (75%) had migraines, and 65 (94%) had chronic daily headache or tension-type headache. Forty-eight (70%) participants had a family history of headache.

In all, 64 patients (93%) had used a headache medication. The most common headache medications used were amitriptyline, topiramate, and cyproheptadine. Few patients were still taking these medications at several months after evaluation. The most common nonprescription medications used were Migravent (i.e., magnesium, riboflavin, coenzyme Q10, and butterbur), ondansetron, and melatonin. Furthermore, 61 patients (88%) participated in nonmedicinal therapy such as physical therapy, chiropractic therapy, and acupuncture.

After evaluation, patients engaged in several healthy behaviors (e.g., adequate exercise, proper use of over-the-counter medications, and drinking sufficient water) more frequently, but did not get adequate sleep. Sixty-five participants (94%) had undergone CT or MRI imaging, but the results did not improve understanding of headache etiology or treatment. Many patients missed several days of school, but average attendance improved after months of treatment.
 

Long-term outcomes

Thirty-one survey respondents (94%) reported that their emotional, cognitive, sleep, and somatic postconcussion symptoms had resolved. Nevertheless, a majority of participants still had headache. “The persistence of postconcussion symptoms is uncommon, but lasting headache is not,” said the researchers. “If patients are not properly educated, conditions may deteriorate, extending the duration of disability.” A longer study with a larger sample size could provide valuable information, said the researchers. Future work should examine objectively the efficacy of various medications used to treat NPPCH and determine the best methods of treatment for this syndrome, which “can cause prolonged pain, suffering, and lack of function,” they concluded.

The investigators did not report any study funding or disclosures.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Barissi M et al. CNS 2019, Abstract 95.

CHARLOTTE, N.C. – Children and adolescents without a history of headache may develop prolonged headaches after sustaining a concussion, according to research presented at the annual meeting of the Child Neurology Society. The headache may be migraine, chronic daily headache, tension-type headache, or a combination of these headaches.

“We strongly recommend that individuals who develop persistent headache after a concussion be evaluated and treated by a neurologist with experience in administering treatment for headache,” said Marcus Barissi, Weller Scholar at the Cleveland Clinic, and colleagues. “Using this approach, we hope that their prolonged headaches will be lessened.”
 

Few studies have examined prolonged pediatric postconcussion headache

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that between 1.6 million and 3.8 million concussions occur annually during athletic and recreational activities in the United States. About 90% of concussions affect children or adolescents. The symptom most often reported after concussion is headache.

Few studies have focused on new persistent postconcussion headache (NPPCH) in children. Mr. Barissi and colleagues did not find any previous study that had examined prolonged headache following concussion in patients without prior chronic headache. They sought to ascertain the prognosis of patients with NPPCH and no history of prior headache, to describe this clinical entity, and to identify beneficial treatment methods.

The investigators retrospectively reviewed charts for approximately 2,000 patients who presented to the Cleveland Clinic pediatric neurology department between June 2017 and August 2018 for headaches. They identified 259 patients who received a diagnosis of concussion, 69 (27%) of whom had headaches for longer than 2 months after injury.

Mr. Barissi and colleagues emailed these patients, and 33 (48%) of them agreed to complete a questionnaire and participate in a 10-minute phone interview. Thirty-one patients (43%) could not be contacted, and eight (11%) declined to participate. All participants confirmed that they had not had consistent headache before the concussion and that chronic headache had arisen after concussion. To determine participants’ medical outcomes, the researchers compared participants’ initial assessment data with posttreatment data collected during the interview process.
 

Healthy behaviors increased after concussion

Of the 69 eligible participants, 38 (55%) were female. The population’s median age was 17. Twenty-eight (85%) of the 33 patients who completed the questionnaire considered the information and treatment that they had received to be beneficial. Twenty-five (78%) patients continued to have headache after several months, despite treatment.

Participants had withstood a mean of 1.72 concussions, and the mean age at first injury was 12.49 years. The most common cause of injury was a fall for males (36%) and an automobile accident for females (18%).

Forty-eight patients (70%) reported having two types of headache. Fifty-two patients (75%) had migraines, and 65 (94%) had chronic daily headache or tension-type headache. Forty-eight (70%) participants had a family history of headache.

In all, 64 patients (93%) had used a headache medication. The most common headache medications used were amitriptyline, topiramate, and cyproheptadine. Few patients were still taking these medications at several months after evaluation. The most common nonprescription medications used were Migravent (i.e., magnesium, riboflavin, coenzyme Q10, and butterbur), ondansetron, and melatonin. Furthermore, 61 patients (88%) participated in nonmedicinal therapy such as physical therapy, chiropractic therapy, and acupuncture.

After evaluation, patients engaged in several healthy behaviors (e.g., adequate exercise, proper use of over-the-counter medications, and drinking sufficient water) more frequently, but did not get adequate sleep. Sixty-five participants (94%) had undergone CT or MRI imaging, but the results did not improve understanding of headache etiology or treatment. Many patients missed several days of school, but average attendance improved after months of treatment.
 

Long-term outcomes

Thirty-one survey respondents (94%) reported that their emotional, cognitive, sleep, and somatic postconcussion symptoms had resolved. Nevertheless, a majority of participants still had headache. “The persistence of postconcussion symptoms is uncommon, but lasting headache is not,” said the researchers. “If patients are not properly educated, conditions may deteriorate, extending the duration of disability.” A longer study with a larger sample size could provide valuable information, said the researchers. Future work should examine objectively the efficacy of various medications used to treat NPPCH and determine the best methods of treatment for this syndrome, which “can cause prolonged pain, suffering, and lack of function,” they concluded.

The investigators did not report any study funding or disclosures.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Barissi M et al. CNS 2019, Abstract 95.

The Food and Drug Administration has cleared adalimumab-afzb (Abrilada) as the fifth approved Humira biosimilar and the 25th approved biosimilar drug overall, the agency said in a Nov. 15 announcement.

Olivier Le Moal/Getty Images

According to a press release from Pfizer, approval for Abrilada was based on review of a comprehensive data package demonstrating biosimilarity of the drug to the reference product. This included data from a clinical comparative study, which found no clinically meaningful difference between Abrilada and the reference in terms of efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity in patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA). In addition to RA, Abrilada is indicated for juvenile idiopathic arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, adult Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis, and plaque psoriasis.

Common adverse events in adalimumab clinical trials included infection, injection-site reactions, headache, and rash.

Pfizer said that it “is working to make Abrilada available to U.S. patients as soon as feasible based on the terms of our agreement with AbbVie [the manufacturer of Humira]. Our current plans are to launch in 2023.”

[email protected]

The Food and Drug Administration has cleared adalimumab-afzb (Abrilada) as the fifth approved Humira biosimilar and the 25th approved biosimilar drug overall, the agency said in a Nov. 15 announcement.

Olivier Le Moal/Getty Images

According to a press release from Pfizer, approval for Abrilada was based on review of a comprehensive data package demonstrating biosimilarity of the drug to the reference product. This included data from a clinical comparative study, which found no clinically meaningful difference between Abrilada and the reference in terms of efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity in patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA). In addition to RA, Abrilada is indicated for juvenile idiopathic arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, adult Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis, and plaque psoriasis.

Common adverse events in adalimumab clinical trials included infection, injection-site reactions, headache, and rash.

Pfizer said that it “is working to make Abrilada available to U.S. patients as soon as feasible based on the terms of our agreement with AbbVie [the manufacturer of Humira]. Our current plans are to launch in 2023.”

[email protected]

The Food and Drug Administration has cleared adalimumab-afzb (Abrilada) as the fifth approved Humira biosimilar and the 25th approved biosimilar drug overall, the agency said in a Nov. 15 announcement.

Olivier Le Moal/Getty Images

According to a press release from Pfizer, approval for Abrilada was based on review of a comprehensive data package demonstrating biosimilarity of the drug to the reference product. This included data from a clinical comparative study, which found no clinically meaningful difference between Abrilada and the reference in terms of efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity in patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA). In addition to RA, Abrilada is indicated for juvenile idiopathic arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, adult Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis, and plaque psoriasis.

Common adverse events in adalimumab clinical trials included infection, injection-site reactions, headache, and rash.

Pfizer said that it “is working to make Abrilada available to U.S. patients as soon as feasible based on the terms of our agreement with AbbVie [the manufacturer of Humira]. Our current plans are to launch in 2023.”

[email protected]

A 47-year-old woman was referred to the gynecology office by her primary care NP for surgical excision of an enlarging nodule on the right side of her mons pubis. Onset occurred about 6 months earlier. The patient reported that symptoms waxed and waned but had worsened progressively over the past 2 to 3 months, adding that the nodule hurt only occasionally. She noted that symptoms were exacerbated by exercise, specifically running. Further questioning prompted the observation that her symptoms were more noticeable at the time of menses.

The patient’s medical history was unremarkable, with no chronic conditions; her surgical history consisted of a wisdom tooth extraction. She had no known drug allergies. Her family history included cerebrovascular accident, hypertension, and arthritis. Reproductive history revealed that she was G1 P1, with a 38-week uncomplicated vaginal delivery. She experienced menarche at age 14, and her menses was regular at every 28 days. For the past 5 days, there had been no dysmenorrhea. The patient was married, exercised regularly, and did not use tobacco, alcohol, or illicit drugs.

On examination, the patient’s blood pressure was 123/73 mm Hg; heart rate, 77 beats/min; respiratory rate, 12 breaths/min; weight, 128 lb; height, 5 ft 7 in; O₂ saturation, 99% on room air; and BMI, 20. The patient was alert and oriented to person, place, and time. She was thin, appeared physically fit, and exhibited no signs of distress. Her physical exam was unremarkable, apart from a firm, minimally tender, well-circumscribed, 3.5 × 3.5–cm nodule right of midline on the mons pubis.

The patient was scheduled for outpatient surgical excision of a benign skin lesion (excluding skin tags) of the genitalia, 3.1 to 3.5 cm (CPT code 11424). During this procedure, it became evident that this was not a lipoma. The lesion was exceptionally hard, and it was difficult to discern if it was incorporated into the rectus abdominis near the point of attachment to the pubic symphysis. The lesion was unintentionally disrupted, revealing black powdery material within the capsule. The tissue was sent for a fast, frozen section that showed “soft tissue with extensive involvement by endometriosis.” The pathology report noted “[m]any endometrial glands in a background of stromal tissue. Necrosis was not a feature. No evidence of atypia.” The patient’s postoperative diagnosis was endometriosis.

DISCUSSION

Endometriosis occurs when endometrial or “endometrial-like” tissue is displaced to sites other than within the uterus. It is most frequently found on tissues close to the uterus, such as the ovaries or pelvic peritoneum. Estrogen is the driving force that feeds the endometrium, causing it to proliferate, whether inside or outside the uterus. Given this dependence on hormones, endometriosis occurs most often during a woman’s fertile years, although it can occur after menopause. Endometriosis is common, affecting at least 10% of premenopausal women; moreover, it is identified as the cause in 70% of all female chronic pelvic pain cases.^1-4

Endometriosis has certain identifiable features, such as chronic pain, dyspareunia, infertility, and menstrual and gastrointestinal symptoms. However, it is seldom diagnosed quickly; studies indicate that diagnosis can be delayed by 5 to 10 years after a patient has first sought treatment for symptoms.^2,4 Multiple factors contribute to a lag in diagnosis: Presentation is not always straightforward. There are no definitive lab values or biomarkers. Symptoms vary from patient to patient, as do clinical skills from one diagnostician to another.¹

Unlike pelvic endometriosis, inguinal endometriosis is not common; disease in this location encompasses only 0.3% to 0.6% of all diagnosed cases.^3,5-7 Since the discovery of the first known case of round ligament endometriosis in 1896, there have been only 70 cases reported in the medical literature.^6,7

If the more common form of endometriosis is frequently missed, this rarely seen variant presents an even greater diagnostic challenge. The typical presentation of inguinal endometriosis includes a firm nodule in the groin, accompanied by tenderness and swelling. A careful history will allude to pain that occurs cyclically with menses.

Cause

Among several theories about the etiology of endometriosis, the most popular has been retrograde menstruation.^1,4,5 According to this hypothesis, the flow of menstrual blood moves backward through the fallopian tubes, spilling into the pelvic cavity and carrying endometrial tissue with it. One theory purports that endometrial tissue is transplanted from the uterus to other areas of the body via the bloodstream or the lymphatics, much like a metastatic disease.^1,4 Another theory states that cells outside the uterus, which line the peritoneum, transform into endometrial cells through metaplasia.^4,5 Endometrial tissue can also be transplanted iatrogenically during surgery—for example, when endometrial tissue is displaced during a cesarean delivery, resulting in implants above the fascia and below the subcutaneous layers. Several other hypotheses concern stem-cell involvement, hormonal factors, immune system dysfunction, and genetics.^4,5 Currently, there are no definitive answers.

Location

During maturation, the parietal peritoneum develops a pouch called the processus vaginalis, which serves as a passageway for the gubernaculum to transport the round ligament running from the uterus, through the inguinal canal, and ending at the labia. After these structures reach their destination, in normal development, the processus vaginalis degenerates, closing the inguinal canal. Occasionally the processus vaginalis fails to close, allowing for a communication pathway between the peritoneal cavity and the inguinal canal. This leaves the canal vulnerable to the contents of the pelvic cavity, such as a hernia or hydrocele, and provides a clear path for endometriosis.^5-7 The implant found in the case patient was at the point where the external ring lies, just above the right pubic tubercle (see Figure 1).

Endometriosis implants can occur anywhere along the round ligament in either the intrapelvic or extrapelvic segments. Implants have also been found in the wall of a hernia sac, the wall of a Nuck canal hydrocele, or even in the subcutaneous tissue surrounding the inguinal canal.³ Interestingly, inguinal endometriosis occurs more often in the right side (up to 94% of cases) than in the left side, as was the case with our patient.^5-7 The reason for this predominance has not been established, although there are several theories, including one that suggests the left side is afforded protection by the sigmoid colon.^5-7

Laboratory diagnosis

Imaging, such as ultrasound and MRI, offers some diagnostic benefit, although its usefulness is most often realized in the pelvis. Pelvic ultrasound can be used to identify ovarian endometriomas.¹ MRI can help rule out, locate, or sometimes determine the degree of deep infiltrating endometriosis, which is an indispensable tool for surgical planning.^5,7 Unfortunately, the diagnostic accuracy for extra-pelvic lesions is variable; neither modality is particularly useful in identifying superficial lesions, which comprises most cases.

Ultrasound of the groin can be employed to evaluate for hernia; if a hernia has been excluded, histologic confirmation can be obtained via fine-needle aspiration of nodule contents.^5,7 One caveat is that these tests are helpful only if the clinician suspects the diagnosis and orders them. The definitive diagnostic test remains direct visualization, which requires laparoscopy.^1,5

Differential diagnosis

Lipoma was a favored diagnosis in this case because of the palpable, well-circumscribed borders, nontender on exam; intermittent, minimal tenderness; and no evidence of erythema or color change. A second possibility was an enlarged lymph node, which was less likely due to the location, large size, and sudden onset without any accompanying symptoms of infection or chronic illness. Finally, an inguinal hernia was least likely, again because of well-defined borders, no history of a lump in the area, a nodule that was not reducible, only minimal tenderness, and no color changes on the skin.

Management

Definitive treatment for inguinal endometriosis entails complete surgical excision.^5-7 The provider should be prepared to repair a defect after the excision; there is potential for a substantial defect that might require mesh. Additionally, a herniorrhaphy may be indicated if there is a coexisting hernia.⁵ The risk for recurrent disease in the inguinal canal after treatment is uncommon, unless the excision was not complete.³

There is an association between inguinal and pelvic endometriosis but not a direct correlation. Data on concomitant pelvic and inguinal endometriosis have been variable. In one case series of 9 patients diagnosed with inguinal endometriosis, none had a history of pelvic endometriosis, and only 1 was subsequently diagnosed with pelvic endometriosis.⁷ An increased association was noted for patients with implants found on the proximal segment of the round ligament.⁷ However, implants on the extrapelvic segment were not likely to represent pelvic disease but rather isolated lesions in the canal.⁷ For those with pelvic endometriosis, complications and recurrence are likely, resulting in the need for long-term treatment.

There is some debate in the literature whether to proceed with laparoscopy once inguinal endometriosis has been identified. Diagnostic laparoscopy to evaluate the pelvis is indicated for symptomatic patients or for cases in which an indirect inguinal hernia is suspected.⁵ Laparoscopy can offer the benefit of both a diagnostic tool and a mechanism for treatment. However, this is an invasive procedure that also incurs risks. The medical provider, in discussion with the patient, must weigh the risks against the benefits of an invasive procedure before determining how to proceed.

The lesion was excised completely. Since the patient had been entirely asymptomatic until age 47, and the risks of a potentially unnecessary surgery outweighed the theoretical benefits, the decision was made not to perform a diagnostic laparoscopy to investigate for pelvic endometriosis. The patient made a complete and uneventful recovery. No further treatment was initiated. She continues to be asymptomatic, denying any menstrual complaints, dyspareunia, or further problems with the groin.

CONCLUSION

This case describes a satellite lesion of endometrial tissue found in an unusual location, in a patient with no history, no risk factors, and no symptoms. The final diagnosis had been omitted from the differential—perhaps because the patient initially associated her symptoms with exercise and mentioned the correlation to her menstrual cycle as an afterthought. Fortunately, the correct diagnosis was made and the appropriate treatment provided.

There are numerous presentations of endometriosis; extrapelvic lesions can have very different, often vague, presentations when compared to the familiar symptoms of pelvic disease. Unfortunately, diagnosis is often delayed. Obscure presentations, in unusual sites, can further impede both speed and accuracy of diagnosis. To date, there are no lab tests or biomarkers to aid diagnosis; imaging studies are inconsistent. Until more accurate diagnostic tools become available, the diagnosis remains dependent on history taking, physical exam, and the clinical judgment of the provider. The astute clinician will recognize the catamenial pattern and consider endometriosis as part of the differential.

A 47-year-old woman was referred to the gynecology office by her primary care NP for surgical excision of an enlarging nodule on the right side of her mons pubis. Onset occurred about 6 months earlier. The patient reported that symptoms waxed and waned but had worsened progressively over the past 2 to 3 months, adding that the nodule hurt only occasionally. She noted that symptoms were exacerbated by exercise, specifically running. Further questioning prompted the observation that her symptoms were more noticeable at the time of menses.

The patient’s medical history was unremarkable, with no chronic conditions; her surgical history consisted of a wisdom tooth extraction. She had no known drug allergies. Her family history included cerebrovascular accident, hypertension, and arthritis. Reproductive history revealed that she was G1 P1, with a 38-week uncomplicated vaginal delivery. She experienced menarche at age 14, and her menses was regular at every 28 days. For the past 5 days, there had been no dysmenorrhea. The patient was married, exercised regularly, and did not use tobacco, alcohol, or illicit drugs.

On examination, the patient’s blood pressure was 123/73 mm Hg; heart rate, 77 beats/min; respiratory rate, 12 breaths/min; weight, 128 lb; height, 5 ft 7 in; O₂ saturation, 99% on room air; and BMI, 20. The patient was alert and oriented to person, place, and time. She was thin, appeared physically fit, and exhibited no signs of distress. Her physical exam was unremarkable, apart from a firm, minimally tender, well-circumscribed, 3.5 × 3.5–cm nodule right of midline on the mons pubis.

The patient was scheduled for outpatient surgical excision of a benign skin lesion (excluding skin tags) of the genitalia, 3.1 to 3.5 cm (CPT code 11424). During this procedure, it became evident that this was not a lipoma. The lesion was exceptionally hard, and it was difficult to discern if it was incorporated into the rectus abdominis near the point of attachment to the pubic symphysis. The lesion was unintentionally disrupted, revealing black powdery material within the capsule. The tissue was sent for a fast, frozen section that showed “soft tissue with extensive involvement by endometriosis.” The pathology report noted “[m]any endometrial glands in a background of stromal tissue. Necrosis was not a feature. No evidence of atypia.” The patient’s postoperative diagnosis was endometriosis.

DISCUSSION

Endometriosis occurs when endometrial or “endometrial-like” tissue is displaced to sites other than within the uterus. It is most frequently found on tissues close to the uterus, such as the ovaries or pelvic peritoneum. Estrogen is the driving force that feeds the endometrium, causing it to proliferate, whether inside or outside the uterus. Given this dependence on hormones, endometriosis occurs most often during a woman’s fertile years, although it can occur after menopause. Endometriosis is common, affecting at least 10% of premenopausal women; moreover, it is identified as the cause in 70% of all female chronic pelvic pain cases.^1-4

Endometriosis has certain identifiable features, such as chronic pain, dyspareunia, infertility, and menstrual and gastrointestinal symptoms. However, it is seldom diagnosed quickly; studies indicate that diagnosis can be delayed by 5 to 10 years after a patient has first sought treatment for symptoms.^2,4 Multiple factors contribute to a lag in diagnosis: Presentation is not always straightforward. There are no definitive lab values or biomarkers. Symptoms vary from patient to patient, as do clinical skills from one diagnostician to another.¹

Unlike pelvic endometriosis, inguinal endometriosis is not common; disease in this location encompasses only 0.3% to 0.6% of all diagnosed cases.^3,5-7 Since the discovery of the first known case of round ligament endometriosis in 1896, there have been only 70 cases reported in the medical literature.^6,7

If the more common form of endometriosis is frequently missed, this rarely seen variant presents an even greater diagnostic challenge. The typical presentation of inguinal endometriosis includes a firm nodule in the groin, accompanied by tenderness and swelling. A careful history will allude to pain that occurs cyclically with menses.

Cause

Among several theories about the etiology of endometriosis, the most popular has been retrograde menstruation.^1,4,5 According to this hypothesis, the flow of menstrual blood moves backward through the fallopian tubes, spilling into the pelvic cavity and carrying endometrial tissue with it. One theory purports that endometrial tissue is transplanted from the uterus to other areas of the body via the bloodstream or the lymphatics, much like a metastatic disease.^1,4 Another theory states that cells outside the uterus, which line the peritoneum, transform into endometrial cells through metaplasia.^4,5 Endometrial tissue can also be transplanted iatrogenically during surgery—for example, when endometrial tissue is displaced during a cesarean delivery, resulting in implants above the fascia and below the subcutaneous layers. Several other hypotheses concern stem-cell involvement, hormonal factors, immune system dysfunction, and genetics.^4,5 Currently, there are no definitive answers.

Location

During maturation, the parietal peritoneum develops a pouch called the processus vaginalis, which serves as a passageway for the gubernaculum to transport the round ligament running from the uterus, through the inguinal canal, and ending at the labia. After these structures reach their destination, in normal development, the processus vaginalis degenerates, closing the inguinal canal. Occasionally the processus vaginalis fails to close, allowing for a communication pathway between the peritoneal cavity and the inguinal canal. This leaves the canal vulnerable to the contents of the pelvic cavity, such as a hernia or hydrocele, and provides a clear path for endometriosis.^5-7 The implant found in the case patient was at the point where the external ring lies, just above the right pubic tubercle (see Figure 1).

Endometriosis implants can occur anywhere along the round ligament in either the intrapelvic or extrapelvic segments. Implants have also been found in the wall of a hernia sac, the wall of a Nuck canal hydrocele, or even in the subcutaneous tissue surrounding the inguinal canal.³ Interestingly, inguinal endometriosis occurs more often in the right side (up to 94% of cases) than in the left side, as was the case with our patient.^5-7 The reason for this predominance has not been established, although there are several theories, including one that suggests the left side is afforded protection by the sigmoid colon.^5-7

Laboratory diagnosis

Imaging, such as ultrasound and MRI, offers some diagnostic benefit, although its usefulness is most often realized in the pelvis. Pelvic ultrasound can be used to identify ovarian endometriomas.¹ MRI can help rule out, locate, or sometimes determine the degree of deep infiltrating endometriosis, which is an indispensable tool for surgical planning.^5,7 Unfortunately, the diagnostic accuracy for extra-pelvic lesions is variable; neither modality is particularly useful in identifying superficial lesions, which comprises most cases.

Ultrasound of the groin can be employed to evaluate for hernia; if a hernia has been excluded, histologic confirmation can be obtained via fine-needle aspiration of nodule contents.^5,7 One caveat is that these tests are helpful only if the clinician suspects the diagnosis and orders them. The definitive diagnostic test remains direct visualization, which requires laparoscopy.^1,5

Differential diagnosis

Lipoma was a favored diagnosis in this case because of the palpable, well-circumscribed borders, nontender on exam; intermittent, minimal tenderness; and no evidence of erythema or color change. A second possibility was an enlarged lymph node, which was less likely due to the location, large size, and sudden onset without any accompanying symptoms of infection or chronic illness. Finally, an inguinal hernia was least likely, again because of well-defined borders, no history of a lump in the area, a nodule that was not reducible, only minimal tenderness, and no color changes on the skin.

Management

Definitive treatment for inguinal endometriosis entails complete surgical excision.^5-7 The provider should be prepared to repair a defect after the excision; there is potential for a substantial defect that might require mesh. Additionally, a herniorrhaphy may be indicated if there is a coexisting hernia.⁵ The risk for recurrent disease in the inguinal canal after treatment is uncommon, unless the excision was not complete.³

There is an association between inguinal and pelvic endometriosis but not a direct correlation. Data on concomitant pelvic and inguinal endometriosis have been variable. In one case series of 9 patients diagnosed with inguinal endometriosis, none had a history of pelvic endometriosis, and only 1 was subsequently diagnosed with pelvic endometriosis.⁷ An increased association was noted for patients with implants found on the proximal segment of the round ligament.⁷ However, implants on the extrapelvic segment were not likely to represent pelvic disease but rather isolated lesions in the canal.⁷ For those with pelvic endometriosis, complications and recurrence are likely, resulting in the need for long-term treatment.

There is some debate in the literature whether to proceed with laparoscopy once inguinal endometriosis has been identified. Diagnostic laparoscopy to evaluate the pelvis is indicated for symptomatic patients or for cases in which an indirect inguinal hernia is suspected.⁵ Laparoscopy can offer the benefit of both a diagnostic tool and a mechanism for treatment. However, this is an invasive procedure that also incurs risks. The medical provider, in discussion with the patient, must weigh the risks against the benefits of an invasive procedure before determining how to proceed.

The lesion was excised completely. Since the patient had been entirely asymptomatic until age 47, and the risks of a potentially unnecessary surgery outweighed the theoretical benefits, the decision was made not to perform a diagnostic laparoscopy to investigate for pelvic endometriosis. The patient made a complete and uneventful recovery. No further treatment was initiated. She continues to be asymptomatic, denying any menstrual complaints, dyspareunia, or further problems with the groin.

CONCLUSION

This case describes a satellite lesion of endometrial tissue found in an unusual location, in a patient with no history, no risk factors, and no symptoms. The final diagnosis had been omitted from the differential—perhaps because the patient initially associated her symptoms with exercise and mentioned the correlation to her menstrual cycle as an afterthought. Fortunately, the correct diagnosis was made and the appropriate treatment provided.

There are numerous presentations of endometriosis; extrapelvic lesions can have very different, often vague, presentations when compared to the familiar symptoms of pelvic disease. Unfortunately, diagnosis is often delayed. Obscure presentations, in unusual sites, can further impede both speed and accuracy of diagnosis. To date, there are no lab tests or biomarkers to aid diagnosis; imaging studies are inconsistent. Until more accurate diagnostic tools become available, the diagnosis remains dependent on history taking, physical exam, and the clinical judgment of the provider. The astute clinician will recognize the catamenial pattern and consider endometriosis as part of the differential.

A 47-year-old woman was referred to the gynecology office by her primary care NP for surgical excision of an enlarging nodule on the right side of her mons pubis. Onset occurred about 6 months earlier. The patient reported that symptoms waxed and waned but had worsened progressively over the past 2 to 3 months, adding that the nodule hurt only occasionally. She noted that symptoms were exacerbated by exercise, specifically running. Further questioning prompted the observation that her symptoms were more noticeable at the time of menses.

The patient’s medical history was unremarkable, with no chronic conditions; her surgical history consisted of a wisdom tooth extraction. She had no known drug allergies. Her family history included cerebrovascular accident, hypertension, and arthritis. Reproductive history revealed that she was G1 P1, with a 38-week uncomplicated vaginal delivery. She experienced menarche at age 14, and her menses was regular at every 28 days. For the past 5 days, there had been no dysmenorrhea. The patient was married, exercised regularly, and did not use tobacco, alcohol, or illicit drugs.

On examination, the patient’s blood pressure was 123/73 mm Hg; heart rate, 77 beats/min; respiratory rate, 12 breaths/min; weight, 128 lb; height, 5 ft 7 in; O₂ saturation, 99% on room air; and BMI, 20. The patient was alert and oriented to person, place, and time. She was thin, appeared physically fit, and exhibited no signs of distress. Her physical exam was unremarkable, apart from a firm, minimally tender, well-circumscribed, 3.5 × 3.5–cm nodule right of midline on the mons pubis.

The patient was scheduled for outpatient surgical excision of a benign skin lesion (excluding skin tags) of the genitalia, 3.1 to 3.5 cm (CPT code 11424). During this procedure, it became evident that this was not a lipoma. The lesion was exceptionally hard, and it was difficult to discern if it was incorporated into the rectus abdominis near the point of attachment to the pubic symphysis. The lesion was unintentionally disrupted, revealing black powdery material within the capsule. The tissue was sent for a fast, frozen section that showed “soft tissue with extensive involvement by endometriosis.” The pathology report noted “[m]any endometrial glands in a background of stromal tissue. Necrosis was not a feature. No evidence of atypia.” The patient’s postoperative diagnosis was endometriosis.

DISCUSSION

Endometriosis occurs when endometrial or “endometrial-like” tissue is displaced to sites other than within the uterus. It is most frequently found on tissues close to the uterus, such as the ovaries or pelvic peritoneum. Estrogen is the driving force that feeds the endometrium, causing it to proliferate, whether inside or outside the uterus. Given this dependence on hormones, endometriosis occurs most often during a woman’s fertile years, although it can occur after menopause. Endometriosis is common, affecting at least 10% of premenopausal women; moreover, it is identified as the cause in 70% of all female chronic pelvic pain cases.^1-4

Endometriosis has certain identifiable features, such as chronic pain, dyspareunia, infertility, and menstrual and gastrointestinal symptoms. However, it is seldom diagnosed quickly; studies indicate that diagnosis can be delayed by 5 to 10 years after a patient has first sought treatment for symptoms.^2,4 Multiple factors contribute to a lag in diagnosis: Presentation is not always straightforward. There are no definitive lab values or biomarkers. Symptoms vary from patient to patient, as do clinical skills from one diagnostician to another.¹

Unlike pelvic endometriosis, inguinal endometriosis is not common; disease in this location encompasses only 0.3% to 0.6% of all diagnosed cases.^3,5-7 Since the discovery of the first known case of round ligament endometriosis in 1896, there have been only 70 cases reported in the medical literature.^6,7

If the more common form of endometriosis is frequently missed, this rarely seen variant presents an even greater diagnostic challenge. The typical presentation of inguinal endometriosis includes a firm nodule in the groin, accompanied by tenderness and swelling. A careful history will allude to pain that occurs cyclically with menses.

Cause

Among several theories about the etiology of endometriosis, the most popular has been retrograde menstruation.^1,4,5 According to this hypothesis, the flow of menstrual blood moves backward through the fallopian tubes, spilling into the pelvic cavity and carrying endometrial tissue with it. One theory purports that endometrial tissue is transplanted from the uterus to other areas of the body via the bloodstream or the lymphatics, much like a metastatic disease.^1,4 Another theory states that cells outside the uterus, which line the peritoneum, transform into endometrial cells through metaplasia.^4,5 Endometrial tissue can also be transplanted iatrogenically during surgery—for example, when endometrial tissue is displaced during a cesarean delivery, resulting in implants above the fascia and below the subcutaneous layers. Several other hypotheses concern stem-cell involvement, hormonal factors, immune system dysfunction, and genetics.^4,5 Currently, there are no definitive answers.

Location

During maturation, the parietal peritoneum develops a pouch called the processus vaginalis, which serves as a passageway for the gubernaculum to transport the round ligament running from the uterus, through the inguinal canal, and ending at the labia. After these structures reach their destination, in normal development, the processus vaginalis degenerates, closing the inguinal canal. Occasionally the processus vaginalis fails to close, allowing for a communication pathway between the peritoneal cavity and the inguinal canal. This leaves the canal vulnerable to the contents of the pelvic cavity, such as a hernia or hydrocele, and provides a clear path for endometriosis.^5-7 The implant found in the case patient was at the point where the external ring lies, just above the right pubic tubercle (see Figure 1).

Endometriosis implants can occur anywhere along the round ligament in either the intrapelvic or extrapelvic segments. Implants have also been found in the wall of a hernia sac, the wall of a Nuck canal hydrocele, or even in the subcutaneous tissue surrounding the inguinal canal.³ Interestingly, inguinal endometriosis occurs more often in the right side (up to 94% of cases) than in the left side, as was the case with our patient.^5-7 The reason for this predominance has not been established, although there are several theories, including one that suggests the left side is afforded protection by the sigmoid colon.^5-7

Laboratory diagnosis

Imaging, such as ultrasound and MRI, offers some diagnostic benefit, although its usefulness is most often realized in the pelvis. Pelvic ultrasound can be used to identify ovarian endometriomas.¹ MRI can help rule out, locate, or sometimes determine the degree of deep infiltrating endometriosis, which is an indispensable tool for surgical planning.^5,7 Unfortunately, the diagnostic accuracy for extra-pelvic lesions is variable; neither modality is particularly useful in identifying superficial lesions, which comprises most cases.

Ultrasound of the groin can be employed to evaluate for hernia; if a hernia has been excluded, histologic confirmation can be obtained via fine-needle aspiration of nodule contents.^5,7 One caveat is that these tests are helpful only if the clinician suspects the diagnosis and orders them. The definitive diagnostic test remains direct visualization, which requires laparoscopy.^1,5

Differential diagnosis

Lipoma was a favored diagnosis in this case because of the palpable, well-circumscribed borders, nontender on exam; intermittent, minimal tenderness; and no evidence of erythema or color change. A second possibility was an enlarged lymph node, which was less likely due to the location, large size, and sudden onset without any accompanying symptoms of infection or chronic illness. Finally, an inguinal hernia was least likely, again because of well-defined borders, no history of a lump in the area, a nodule that was not reducible, only minimal tenderness, and no color changes on the skin.

Management

Definitive treatment for inguinal endometriosis entails complete surgical excision.^5-7 The provider should be prepared to repair a defect after the excision; there is potential for a substantial defect that might require mesh. Additionally, a herniorrhaphy may be indicated if there is a coexisting hernia.⁵ The risk for recurrent disease in the inguinal canal after treatment is uncommon, unless the excision was not complete.³

There is an association between inguinal and pelvic endometriosis but not a direct correlation. Data on concomitant pelvic and inguinal endometriosis have been variable. In one case series of 9 patients diagnosed with inguinal endometriosis, none had a history of pelvic endometriosis, and only 1 was subsequently diagnosed with pelvic endometriosis.⁷ An increased association was noted for patients with implants found on the proximal segment of the round ligament.⁷ However, implants on the extrapelvic segment were not likely to represent pelvic disease but rather isolated lesions in the canal.⁷ For those with pelvic endometriosis, complications and recurrence are likely, resulting in the need for long-term treatment.

There is some debate in the literature whether to proceed with laparoscopy once inguinal endometriosis has been identified. Diagnostic laparoscopy to evaluate the pelvis is indicated for symptomatic patients or for cases in which an indirect inguinal hernia is suspected.⁵ Laparoscopy can offer the benefit of both a diagnostic tool and a mechanism for treatment. However, this is an invasive procedure that also incurs risks. The medical provider, in discussion with the patient, must weigh the risks against the benefits of an invasive procedure before determining how to proceed.

The lesion was excised completely. Since the patient had been entirely asymptomatic until age 47, and the risks of a potentially unnecessary surgery outweighed the theoretical benefits, the decision was made not to perform a diagnostic laparoscopy to investigate for pelvic endometriosis. The patient made a complete and uneventful recovery. No further treatment was initiated. She continues to be asymptomatic, denying any menstrual complaints, dyspareunia, or further problems with the groin.

CONCLUSION

This case describes a satellite lesion of endometrial tissue found in an unusual location, in a patient with no history, no risk factors, and no symptoms. The final diagnosis had been omitted from the differential—perhaps because the patient initially associated her symptoms with exercise and mentioned the correlation to her menstrual cycle as an afterthought. Fortunately, the correct diagnosis was made and the appropriate treatment provided.

There are numerous presentations of endometriosis; extrapelvic lesions can have very different, often vague, presentations when compared to the familiar symptoms of pelvic disease. Unfortunately, diagnosis is often delayed. Obscure presentations, in unusual sites, can further impede both speed and accuracy of diagnosis. To date, there are no lab tests or biomarkers to aid diagnosis; imaging studies are inconsistent. Until more accurate diagnostic tools become available, the diagnosis remains dependent on history taking, physical exam, and the clinical judgment of the provider. The astute clinician will recognize the catamenial pattern and consider endometriosis as part of the differential.

There is not much common ground between Republicans and Democrats these days, but both sides strongly supported the use of medical marijuana in a recent survey by the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Overall support of medical marijuana among all 4,001 respondents was higher (84%) for use among cancer patients, but 76% also supported its use for any medical reason, according to data from the survey conducted for ASCO by the Harris Poll.

The differences in support between Republicans and Democrats were significant, but both parties were over 80% for marijuana use by cancer patients and over 70% for use for any medical reason. In both cases, the independents in between mirrored the overall population, with support at 84% and 76%, respectively, ASCO said.

Support for medical marijuana also was consistent based on the respondents’ cancer experience. For use by cancer patients, those who were current or previous patients were at 84%, caregivers (those providing unpaid care to an immediate family member or loved one with cancer) and other family members/loved ones were both at 87%, and those with no cancer experiences were at 82%, the survey results showed.

Use of marijuana for any medical reason was supported by 72% of current/previous patients, 79% of family members and loved ones, 80% of caregivers, and 74% of those with no cancer experience, ASCO reported.

In a question asked only of current or previous patients, 62% said that they are/were open to use of marijuana to alleviate cancer-related pain, nausea, or other symptoms, and 60% said that they wished they had more information about the benefits of medical marijuana use, according to the results of the survey, which was conducted online from July 9 to Aug. 10, 2019.

[email protected]

There is not much common ground between Republicans and Democrats these days, but both sides strongly supported the use of medical marijuana in a recent survey by the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Overall support of medical marijuana among all 4,001 respondents was higher (84%) for use among cancer patients, but 76% also supported its use for any medical reason, according to data from the survey conducted for ASCO by the Harris Poll.

The differences in support between Republicans and Democrats were significant, but both parties were over 80% for marijuana use by cancer patients and over 70% for use for any medical reason. In both cases, the independents in between mirrored the overall population, with support at 84% and 76%, respectively, ASCO said.

Support for medical marijuana also was consistent based on the respondents’ cancer experience. For use by cancer patients, those who were current or previous patients were at 84%, caregivers (those providing unpaid care to an immediate family member or loved one with cancer) and other family members/loved ones were both at 87%, and those with no cancer experiences were at 82%, the survey results showed.

Use of marijuana for any medical reason was supported by 72% of current/previous patients, 79% of family members and loved ones, 80% of caregivers, and 74% of those with no cancer experience, ASCO reported.

In a question asked only of current or previous patients, 62% said that they are/were open to use of marijuana to alleviate cancer-related pain, nausea, or other symptoms, and 60% said that they wished they had more information about the benefits of medical marijuana use, according to the results of the survey, which was conducted online from July 9 to Aug. 10, 2019.

[email protected]

There is not much common ground between Republicans and Democrats these days, but both sides strongly supported the use of medical marijuana in a recent survey by the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Overall support of medical marijuana among all 4,001 respondents was higher (84%) for use among cancer patients, but 76% also supported its use for any medical reason, according to data from the survey conducted for ASCO by the Harris Poll.

The differences in support between Republicans and Democrats were significant, but both parties were over 80% for marijuana use by cancer patients and over 70% for use for any medical reason. In both cases, the independents in between mirrored the overall population, with support at 84% and 76%, respectively, ASCO said.

Support for medical marijuana also was consistent based on the respondents’ cancer experience. For use by cancer patients, those who were current or previous patients were at 84%, caregivers (those providing unpaid care to an immediate family member or loved one with cancer) and other family members/loved ones were both at 87%, and those with no cancer experiences were at 82%, the survey results showed.

Use of marijuana for any medical reason was supported by 72% of current/previous patients, 79% of family members and loved ones, 80% of caregivers, and 74% of those with no cancer experience, ASCO reported.

In a question asked only of current or previous patients, 62% said that they are/were open to use of marijuana to alleviate cancer-related pain, nausea, or other symptoms, and 60% said that they wished they had more information about the benefits of medical marijuana use, according to the results of the survey, which was conducted online from July 9 to Aug. 10, 2019.

[email protected]

VANCOUVER – Two new randomized trials demonstrate that pain following minimally invasive gynecologic surgery can be successfully managed using reduced opioid prescriptions.

Ingram Publishing/Thinkstock

In each case, patients were randomized to receive higher or lower numbers of oxycodone tablets. In both trials, the lower amount was five 5-mg oxycodone tablets. The work should reassure surgeons who wish to change their prescribing patterns, but may worry about patient dissatisfaction, at least in the context of prolapse repair and benign minor gynecologic laparoscopy, which were the focus of the two studies.

The ob.gyn. literature cites rates of 4%-6% of persistent opioid use after surgery on opioid-naive patients, and that’s a risk that needs to be addressed. “If we look at this as a risk factor of our surgical process, this is much higher than any other risk in patients undergoing surgery, and it’s not something we routinely talk to patients about,” Kari Plewniak, MD, an ob.gyn. at Montefiore Medical Center, New York, said during her presentation on pain control during benign gynecologic laparoscopy at the meeting sponsored by AAGL.

The trials provide some welcome guidance. “They provide pretty concrete guidelines with strong evidence of safety, so this is really helpful,” said Sean Dowdy, MD, chair of gynecologic oncology at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., while speaking as a discussant for the presentations.

Emily Davidson, MD, and associates at the Cleveland Clinic conducted a single-institution, noninferiority trial of standard- versus reduced-prescription opioids in 116 women undergoing prolapse repair. Half were randomized to receive 28 tablets of 5 mg oxycodone (routine arm) and half were prescribed just 5 tablets (reduced arm). All patients also received multimodal pain therapy featuring acetaminophen and ibuprofen. The mean age of patients was 62 years, 91% were white, and 84% were post menopausal. The most common surgery was hysterectomy combined with native tissue repair (60.2%), followed by vaginal colpopexy (15.3%), hysteropexy (15.3%), and sacrocolpopexy (9.3%).

At their postsurgical visit, patients were asked about their satisfaction with their postoperative pain management; 93% in the reduced arm reported that they were very satisfied or somewhat satisfied, as did 93% in the routine arm, which met the standard for noninferiority with a 15% margin. About 15% of patients in the reduced arm used more opioids than originally prescribed, compared with 2% of patients in the routine arm (P less than .01). The reduced arm had an average of 4 unused opioid tablets, compared with 26 in the routine arm. On average, the reduced arm used one tablet, compared with three in the routine arm (P = .03).

The researchers suggested that clinicians should consider prescribing 5-10 tablets for most patients, and all patients should receive multimodal pain management.

The noninferiority nature of the design was welcome, according to Dr. Dowdy. “I think we need to do more noninferiority trial designs because it allows us to make more observations about other parts of the value equation, so if we have two interventions that are equivalent, we can pick the one that has the best patient experience and the lowest cost, so it simplifies a lot of our management.”

The other study, conducted at Montefiore Medical Center, set out to see if a similar regimen of 5 5-mg oxycodone tablets, combined with acetaminophen and ibuprofen, could adequately manage postoperative pain after minor benign gynecologic laparoscopy (excluding hysterectomy), compared with a 10-tablet regimen. All patients received 25 tablets of 600 mg ibuprofen (1 tablet every 6 hours or as needed), plus 50 tablets of 250 mg acetaminophen (1-2 tablets every 6 hours or as needed).

The median number of opioid tablets taken was 2.0 in the 5-tablet group and 2.5 in the 10-tablet group; 32% and 28% took no tablets, and 68% and 65% took three or fewer tablets in the respective groups. The median number of leftover opioid tablets was 3 in the 5-tablet group and 8 in the 10-tablet group, reported Dr. Plewniak.

The studies are a good first step, but more is needed, according to Dr. Dowdy. It’s important to begin looking at more-challenging patient groups, such as those who are not opioid naive, as well as patients taking buprenorphine. “That creates some unique challenges with postoperative pain management,” he said.

Dr. Dowdy, Dr. Davidson, and Dr. Plewniak have no relevant financial disclosures.*

* This article was updated 11/27/2019.

VANCOUVER – Two new randomized trials demonstrate that pain following minimally invasive gynecologic surgery can be successfully managed using reduced opioid prescriptions.

Ingram Publishing/Thinkstock

In each case, patients were randomized to receive higher or lower numbers of oxycodone tablets. In both trials, the lower amount was five 5-mg oxycodone tablets. The work should reassure surgeons who wish to change their prescribing patterns, but may worry about patient dissatisfaction, at least in the context of prolapse repair and benign minor gynecologic laparoscopy, which were the focus of the two studies.

The ob.gyn. literature cites rates of 4%-6% of persistent opioid use after surgery on opioid-naive patients, and that’s a risk that needs to be addressed. “If we look at this as a risk factor of our surgical process, this is much higher than any other risk in patients undergoing surgery, and it’s not something we routinely talk to patients about,” Kari Plewniak, MD, an ob.gyn. at Montefiore Medical Center, New York, said during her presentation on pain control during benign gynecologic laparoscopy at the meeting sponsored by AAGL.

The trials provide some welcome guidance. “They provide pretty concrete guidelines with strong evidence of safety, so this is really helpful,” said Sean Dowdy, MD, chair of gynecologic oncology at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., while speaking as a discussant for the presentations.

Emily Davidson, MD, and associates at the Cleveland Clinic conducted a single-institution, noninferiority trial of standard- versus reduced-prescription opioids in 116 women undergoing prolapse repair. Half were randomized to receive 28 tablets of 5 mg oxycodone (routine arm) and half were prescribed just 5 tablets (reduced arm). All patients also received multimodal pain therapy featuring acetaminophen and ibuprofen. The mean age of patients was 62 years, 91% were white, and 84% were post menopausal. The most common surgery was hysterectomy combined with native tissue repair (60.2%), followed by vaginal colpopexy (15.3%), hysteropexy (15.3%), and sacrocolpopexy (9.3%).

At their postsurgical visit, patients were asked about their satisfaction with their postoperative pain management; 93% in the reduced arm reported that they were very satisfied or somewhat satisfied, as did 93% in the routine arm, which met the standard for noninferiority with a 15% margin. About 15% of patients in the reduced arm used more opioids than originally prescribed, compared with 2% of patients in the routine arm (P less than .01). The reduced arm had an average of 4 unused opioid tablets, compared with 26 in the routine arm. On average, the reduced arm used one tablet, compared with three in the routine arm (P = .03).

The researchers suggested that clinicians should consider prescribing 5-10 tablets for most patients, and all patients should receive multimodal pain management.

The noninferiority nature of the design was welcome, according to Dr. Dowdy. “I think we need to do more noninferiority trial designs because it allows us to make more observations about other parts of the value equation, so if we have two interventions that are equivalent, we can pick the one that has the best patient experience and the lowest cost, so it simplifies a lot of our management.”

The other study, conducted at Montefiore Medical Center, set out to see if a similar regimen of 5 5-mg oxycodone tablets, combined with acetaminophen and ibuprofen, could adequately manage postoperative pain after minor benign gynecologic laparoscopy (excluding hysterectomy), compared with a 10-tablet regimen. All patients received 25 tablets of 600 mg ibuprofen (1 tablet every 6 hours or as needed), plus 50 tablets of 250 mg acetaminophen (1-2 tablets every 6 hours or as needed).

The median number of opioid tablets taken was 2.0 in the 5-tablet group and 2.5 in the 10-tablet group; 32% and 28% took no tablets, and 68% and 65% took three or fewer tablets in the respective groups. The median number of leftover opioid tablets was 3 in the 5-tablet group and 8 in the 10-tablet group, reported Dr. Plewniak.

The studies are a good first step, but more is needed, according to Dr. Dowdy. It’s important to begin looking at more-challenging patient groups, such as those who are not opioid naive, as well as patients taking buprenorphine. “That creates some unique challenges with postoperative pain management,” he said.

Dr. Dowdy, Dr. Davidson, and Dr. Plewniak have no relevant financial disclosures.*

* This article was updated 11/27/2019.

VANCOUVER – Two new randomized trials demonstrate that pain following minimally invasive gynecologic surgery can be successfully managed using reduced opioid prescriptions.

Ingram Publishing/Thinkstock

In each case, patients were randomized to receive higher or lower numbers of oxycodone tablets. In both trials, the lower amount was five 5-mg oxycodone tablets. The work should reassure surgeons who wish to change their prescribing patterns, but may worry about patient dissatisfaction, at least in the context of prolapse repair and benign minor gynecologic laparoscopy, which were the focus of the two studies.

The ob.gyn. literature cites rates of 4%-6% of persistent opioid use after surgery on opioid-naive patients, and that’s a risk that needs to be addressed. “If we look at this as a risk factor of our surgical process, this is much higher than any other risk in patients undergoing surgery, and it’s not something we routinely talk to patients about,” Kari Plewniak, MD, an ob.gyn. at Montefiore Medical Center, New York, said during her presentation on pain control during benign gynecologic laparoscopy at the meeting sponsored by AAGL.

The trials provide some welcome guidance. “They provide pretty concrete guidelines with strong evidence of safety, so this is really helpful,” said Sean Dowdy, MD, chair of gynecologic oncology at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., while speaking as a discussant for the presentations.

Emily Davidson, MD, and associates at the Cleveland Clinic conducted a single-institution, noninferiority trial of standard- versus reduced-prescription opioids in 116 women undergoing prolapse repair. Half were randomized to receive 28 tablets of 5 mg oxycodone (routine arm) and half were prescribed just 5 tablets (reduced arm). All patients also received multimodal pain therapy featuring acetaminophen and ibuprofen. The mean age of patients was 62 years, 91% were white, and 84% were post menopausal. The most common surgery was hysterectomy combined with native tissue repair (60.2%), followed by vaginal colpopexy (15.3%), hysteropexy (15.3%), and sacrocolpopexy (9.3%).

At their postsurgical visit, patients were asked about their satisfaction with their postoperative pain management; 93% in the reduced arm reported that they were very satisfied or somewhat satisfied, as did 93% in the routine arm, which met the standard for noninferiority with a 15% margin. About 15% of patients in the reduced arm used more opioids than originally prescribed, compared with 2% of patients in the routine arm (P less than .01). The reduced arm had an average of 4 unused opioid tablets, compared with 26 in the routine arm. On average, the reduced arm used one tablet, compared with three in the routine arm (P = .03).

The researchers suggested that clinicians should consider prescribing 5-10 tablets for most patients, and all patients should receive multimodal pain management.

The noninferiority nature of the design was welcome, according to Dr. Dowdy. “I think we need to do more noninferiority trial designs because it allows us to make more observations about other parts of the value equation, so if we have two interventions that are equivalent, we can pick the one that has the best patient experience and the lowest cost, so it simplifies a lot of our management.”

The other study, conducted at Montefiore Medical Center, set out to see if a similar regimen of 5 5-mg oxycodone tablets, combined with acetaminophen and ibuprofen, could adequately manage postoperative pain after minor benign gynecologic laparoscopy (excluding hysterectomy), compared with a 10-tablet regimen. All patients received 25 tablets of 600 mg ibuprofen (1 tablet every 6 hours or as needed), plus 50 tablets of 250 mg acetaminophen (1-2 tablets every 6 hours or as needed).

The median number of opioid tablets taken was 2.0 in the 5-tablet group and 2.5 in the 10-tablet group; 32% and 28% took no tablets, and 68% and 65% took three or fewer tablets in the respective groups. The median number of leftover opioid tablets was 3 in the 5-tablet group and 8 in the 10-tablet group, reported Dr. Plewniak.

The studies are a good first step, but more is needed, according to Dr. Dowdy. It’s important to begin looking at more-challenging patient groups, such as those who are not opioid naive, as well as patients taking buprenorphine. “That creates some unique challenges with postoperative pain management,” he said.

Dr. Dowdy, Dr. Davidson, and Dr. Plewniak have no relevant financial disclosures.*

* This article was updated 11/27/2019.

PORTLAND—A lot of health care providers involved in the care of patients with HIV/AIDS think physical therapists (PTs) have a very narrow role to play in chronic pain when in actuality, "we have a very big footprint," says Michael DeArman, DPT, Fellow of the American Association of Orthopedic Manual Therapists.

In his session, "Physical therapy alternatives for people living with HIV and persistent pain," he reviewed how his role in the care of patients with HIV has evolved over the years. He explained that the emphasis in physical therapy used to be on exercises that would help to maintain lean body mass, because it was a predictor of survivability and helped patients avoid opportunistic infections.

After that, the role of the PT focused largely on helping patients deal with the adverse effects of medications. DeArman explained that back in the days of azathioprine (AZT), for example, many patients developed peripheral neuropathy, lipodystrophy, and low cervical fat deposition leading to neck pain. PTs also helped patients deal with the complications of surviving with HIV, including the effects of meningitis and stroke. "But we don't see much of that anymore because the medications are so much better,” DeArman said. “That's not the profile for HIV anymore."

But now patients are dealing with chronic pain

DeArman reported that 80% to 90% of people with HIV/AIDS have chronic pain for at least 2 months, if not much longer. He said, "PT can be an alternative to opioids," and explained that his efforts are twofold. "Graded activity to slowly build peoples' ability to do aerobic exercise is a really good way to manage pain,” he said, “but the other half of it is a lot of counseling and education, talking about how pain works and doesn't work, and how what you're told and what you believe and experience and your expectations can affect the experience of pain and the level of pain at any given moment."

He remarked that now about 60% of this professional time is devoted to the counseling and educational aspects of pain and 40% to movement and exercise: "It's not really the kind of therapist I trained to be, and it's not what most people think of as physical therapy work, but it's falling in our lap."

He said that as a society, we rely heavily on more formal counseling by psychotherapists and counselors, for example, to manage depression and anxiety, but that few others in the medical realm are picking up the slack when it comes to pain education for patients with HIV.

Tools for talking

DeArman discussed some of the tools and techniques he uses when talking to patients about their pain, such as motivational interviewing and assessing readiness for change. He uses the Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ) to uncover how a patient's fear-avoidance beliefs about physical activity may be affecting their pain. He also assesses levels of catastrophization, or how seriously a patient interprets a physical symptom; a high level correlates with greater pain states. Similarly, those with low self-efficacy—feelings about how well you can control your destiny and situations—are more likely to experience chronic pain states than those with high self-efficacy.

Continue to: He said that using...

He said that using these tools has made a huge difference in the way he and others in his field approach pain and its outcomes. He says that not only are they helping people get better, but "we are giving patients a way to manage their pain before they go down the road of pharmacologic solutions."

DeArman said his main message is "to think about physical therapy for your patients with chronic pain." He pointed out that there's a new generation of PTs coming out of school that have a much better understanding of how to manage chronic pain, so "expect [this type of treatment] to be available from those PTs to whom you refer patients. Just realize it may still take a little looking to find it."

PORTLAND—A lot of health care providers involved in the care of patients with HIV/AIDS think physical therapists (PTs) have a very narrow role to play in chronic pain when in actuality, "we have a very big footprint," says Michael DeArman, DPT, Fellow of the American Association of Orthopedic Manual Therapists.

In his session, "Physical therapy alternatives for people living with HIV and persistent pain," he reviewed how his role in the care of patients with HIV has evolved over the years. He explained that the emphasis in physical therapy used to be on exercises that would help to maintain lean body mass, because it was a predictor of survivability and helped patients avoid opportunistic infections.

After that, the role of the PT focused largely on helping patients deal with the adverse effects of medications. DeArman explained that back in the days of azathioprine (AZT), for example, many patients developed peripheral neuropathy, lipodystrophy, and low cervical fat deposition leading to neck pain. PTs also helped patients deal with the complications of surviving with HIV, including the effects of meningitis and stroke. "But we don't see much of that anymore because the medications are so much better,” DeArman said. “That's not the profile for HIV anymore."

But now patients are dealing with chronic pain

DeArman reported that 80% to 90% of people with HIV/AIDS have chronic pain for at least 2 months, if not much longer. He said, "PT can be an alternative to opioids," and explained that his efforts are twofold. "Graded activity to slowly build peoples' ability to do aerobic exercise is a really good way to manage pain,” he said, “but the other half of it is a lot of counseling and education, talking about how pain works and doesn't work, and how what you're told and what you believe and experience and your expectations can affect the experience of pain and the level of pain at any given moment."

He remarked that now about 60% of this professional time is devoted to the counseling and educational aspects of pain and 40% to movement and exercise: "It's not really the kind of therapist I trained to be, and it's not what most people think of as physical therapy work, but it's falling in our lap."

He said that as a society, we rely heavily on more formal counseling by psychotherapists and counselors, for example, to manage depression and anxiety, but that few others in the medical realm are picking up the slack when it comes to pain education for patients with HIV.

Tools for talking

DeArman discussed some of the tools and techniques he uses when talking to patients about their pain, such as motivational interviewing and assessing readiness for change. He uses the Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ) to uncover how a patient's fear-avoidance beliefs about physical activity may be affecting their pain. He also assesses levels of catastrophization, or how seriously a patient interprets a physical symptom; a high level correlates with greater pain states. Similarly, those with low self-efficacy—feelings about how well you can control your destiny and situations—are more likely to experience chronic pain states than those with high self-efficacy.

Continue to: He said that using...

He said that using these tools has made a huge difference in the way he and others in his field approach pain and its outcomes. He says that not only are they helping people get better, but "we are giving patients a way to manage their pain before they go down the road of pharmacologic solutions."

DeArman said his main message is "to think about physical therapy for your patients with chronic pain." He pointed out that there's a new generation of PTs coming out of school that have a much better understanding of how to manage chronic pain, so "expect [this type of treatment] to be available from those PTs to whom you refer patients. Just realize it may still take a little looking to find it."

PORTLAND—A lot of health care providers involved in the care of patients with HIV/AIDS think physical therapists (PTs) have a very narrow role to play in chronic pain when in actuality, "we have a very big footprint," says Michael DeArman, DPT, Fellow of the American Association of Orthopedic Manual Therapists.

In his session, "Physical therapy alternatives for people living with HIV and persistent pain," he reviewed how his role in the care of patients with HIV has evolved over the years. He explained that the emphasis in physical therapy used to be on exercises that would help to maintain lean body mass, because it was a predictor of survivability and helped patients avoid opportunistic infections.

After that, the role of the PT focused largely on helping patients deal with the adverse effects of medications. DeArman explained that back in the days of azathioprine (AZT), for example, many patients developed peripheral neuropathy, lipodystrophy, and low cervical fat deposition leading to neck pain. PTs also helped patients deal with the complications of surviving with HIV, including the effects of meningitis and stroke. "But we don't see much of that anymore because the medications are so much better,” DeArman said. “That's not the profile for HIV anymore."

But now patients are dealing with chronic pain

DeArman reported that 80% to 90% of people with HIV/AIDS have chronic pain for at least 2 months, if not much longer. He said, "PT can be an alternative to opioids," and explained that his efforts are twofold. "Graded activity to slowly build peoples' ability to do aerobic exercise is a really good way to manage pain,” he said, “but the other half of it is a lot of counseling and education, talking about how pain works and doesn't work, and how what you're told and what you believe and experience and your expectations can affect the experience of pain and the level of pain at any given moment."

He remarked that now about 60% of this professional time is devoted to the counseling and educational aspects of pain and 40% to movement and exercise: "It's not really the kind of therapist I trained to be, and it's not what most people think of as physical therapy work, but it's falling in our lap."

He said that as a society, we rely heavily on more formal counseling by psychotherapists and counselors, for example, to manage depression and anxiety, but that few others in the medical realm are picking up the slack when it comes to pain education for patients with HIV.

Tools for talking

DeArman discussed some of the tools and techniques he uses when talking to patients about their pain, such as motivational interviewing and assessing readiness for change. He uses the Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ) to uncover how a patient's fear-avoidance beliefs about physical activity may be affecting their pain. He also assesses levels of catastrophization, or how seriously a patient interprets a physical symptom; a high level correlates with greater pain states. Similarly, those with low self-efficacy—feelings about how well you can control your destiny and situations—are more likely to experience chronic pain states than those with high self-efficacy.

Continue to: He said that using...

He said that using these tools has made a huge difference in the way he and others in his field approach pain and its outcomes. He says that not only are they helping people get better, but "we are giving patients a way to manage their pain before they go down the road of pharmacologic solutions."

DeArman said his main message is "to think about physical therapy for your patients with chronic pain." He pointed out that there's a new generation of PTs coming out of school that have a much better understanding of how to manage chronic pain, so "expect [this type of treatment] to be available from those PTs to whom you refer patients. Just realize it may still take a little looking to find it."

SAN FRANCISCO – Opioids may not always be necessary following elective colorectal surgery. That’s the message coming from a retrospective study of medical records at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester, which found that over half of patients never even filled out their prescription after colorectal surgery.

“We found that over half of the patients took no opioid pills after discharge, and 60% of the prescribed pills were left over,” said David Meyer, MD, during a presentation of the study at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons. Dr. Meyer is a surgical resident at the University of Massachusetts.

The team also used the results of their analysis to develop a guideline for the amount of opioid to prescribe following major colorectal surgery, with specific amounts of pills recommended based on the amount of opioid use during the last 24 hours of hospitalization.

“It shows a real interest in tailoring our postoperative care in pain management. They’re trying to find a way to hit a sweet spot to get patients the right amount of pain control,” said Jonathan Mitchem, MD, in an interview. Dr. Mitchem is an assistant professor at University of Missouri–Columbia, and comoderated the session where the research was presented.

The researchers performed a retrospective analysis of major elective colorectal procedures at their institution, including colectomy, rectal resection, and ostomy reversal. The analysis included 100 patients (55 female), with a mean age of 59 years. A total of 71% were opioid naive, meaning there was no evidence of an opioid prescription in the year prior to surgery. A total of 74% underwent a laparoscopic procedure, and 75% had a partial colectomy. The postoperative stay averaged 4.5 days.

The researchers converted in-hospital opioid use categories (IOUC) to equianalgesic 5-mg oxycodone pills (EOPs). In the last 24 hours before release, 53% of patients had no opioids at all (no IOUC, 0 EOPs), 25% received low amounts of opioids (low IOUC, 0.1-3.0 EOPs), and 22% high amounts (high IOUC, more than 3.1 EOPs). Overall, prescribed EOP was 17.5, and just 38% was consumed. These numbers were lowest in the no-IOUC group (15.7, 16%), followed by the low-IOUC group (16.0, 32%), and the high group (23.7, 79%; P less than .01).

The researchers then looked at the 85th percentile of EOPs for each group, and used that to develop a guideline for opioid prescription. For the no-IOUC group, they recommend 3 EOPs, for the low-IOUC group they recommend 12 EOPs, and for the high-IOUC group they recommend 30 EOPs.

The researchers examined various factors that might have influenced opioid use, correcting for whether the patient was opioid naive, case type, postoperative length of stay, and new ostomy creation. The only factor with a significant association for excessive opioid use was inflammatory bowel disease, which was linked to a nearly 900% increased risk of using more than the guideline amounts (adjusted odds ratio, 8.3; P less than .01; area under the curve, 0.85).

The study is limited by the fact that it was conducted at a single center, and that patient opioid use was self-reported. The guidelines need to be validated prospectively.

No funding information was disclosed. Dr. Meyer and Dr. Mitchem had no relevant financial disclosures.

SOURCE: Meyer D et al. Clinical Congress 2019, Abstract.

SAN FRANCISCO – Opioids may not always be necessary following elective colorectal surgery. That’s the message coming from a retrospective study of medical records at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester, which found that over half of patients never even filled out their prescription after colorectal surgery.

“We found that over half of the patients took no opioid pills after discharge, and 60% of the prescribed pills were left over,” said David Meyer, MD, during a presentation of the study at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons. Dr. Meyer is a surgical resident at the University of Massachusetts.

The team also used the results of their analysis to develop a guideline for the amount of opioid to prescribe following major colorectal surgery, with specific amounts of pills recommended based on the amount of opioid use during the last 24 hours of hospitalization.

“It shows a real interest in tailoring our postoperative care in pain management. They’re trying to find a way to hit a sweet spot to get patients the right amount of pain control,” said Jonathan Mitchem, MD, in an interview. Dr. Mitchem is an assistant professor at University of Missouri–Columbia, and comoderated the session where the research was presented.

The researchers performed a retrospective analysis of major elective colorectal procedures at their institution, including colectomy, rectal resection, and ostomy reversal. The analysis included 100 patients (55 female), with a mean age of 59 years. A total of 71% were opioid naive, meaning there was no evidence of an opioid prescription in the year prior to surgery. A total of 74% underwent a laparoscopic procedure, and 75% had a partial colectomy. The postoperative stay averaged 4.5 days.

The researchers converted in-hospital opioid use categories (IOUC) to equianalgesic 5-mg oxycodone pills (EOPs). In the last 24 hours before release, 53% of patients had no opioids at all (no IOUC, 0 EOPs), 25% received low amounts of opioids (low IOUC, 0.1-3.0 EOPs), and 22% high amounts (high IOUC, more than 3.1 EOPs). Overall, prescribed EOP was 17.5, and just 38% was consumed. These numbers were lowest in the no-IOUC group (15.7, 16%), followed by the low-IOUC group (16.0, 32%), and the high group (23.7, 79%; P less than .01).

The researchers then looked at the 85th percentile of EOPs for each group, and used that to develop a guideline for opioid prescription. For the no-IOUC group, they recommend 3 EOPs, for the low-IOUC group they recommend 12 EOPs, and for the high-IOUC group they recommend 30 EOPs.

The researchers examined various factors that might have influenced opioid use, correcting for whether the patient was opioid naive, case type, postoperative length of stay, and new ostomy creation. The only factor with a significant association for excessive opioid use was inflammatory bowel disease, which was linked to a nearly 900% increased risk of using more than the guideline amounts (adjusted odds ratio, 8.3; P less than .01; area under the curve, 0.85).

The study is limited by the fact that it was conducted at a single center, and that patient opioid use was self-reported. The guidelines need to be validated prospectively.

No funding information was disclosed. Dr. Meyer and Dr. Mitchem had no relevant financial disclosures.

SOURCE: Meyer D et al. Clinical Congress 2019, Abstract.

SAN FRANCISCO – Opioids may not always be necessary following elective colorectal surgery. That’s the message coming from a retrospective study of medical records at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester, which found that over half of patients never even filled out their prescription after colorectal surgery.

“We found that over half of the patients took no opioid pills after discharge, and 60% of the prescribed pills were left over,” said David Meyer, MD, during a presentation of the study at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons. Dr. Meyer is a surgical resident at the University of Massachusetts.

The team also used the results of their analysis to develop a guideline for the amount of opioid to prescribe following major colorectal surgery, with specific amounts of pills recommended based on the amount of opioid use during the last 24 hours of hospitalization.

“It shows a real interest in tailoring our postoperative care in pain management. They’re trying to find a way to hit a sweet spot to get patients the right amount of pain control,” said Jonathan Mitchem, MD, in an interview. Dr. Mitchem is an assistant professor at University of Missouri–Columbia, and comoderated the session where the research was presented.

The researchers performed a retrospective analysis of major elective colorectal procedures at their institution, including colectomy, rectal resection, and ostomy reversal. The analysis included 100 patients (55 female), with a mean age of 59 years. A total of 71% were opioid naive, meaning there was no evidence of an opioid prescription in the year prior to surgery. A total of 74% underwent a laparoscopic procedure, and 75% had a partial colectomy. The postoperative stay averaged 4.5 days.

The researchers converted in-hospital opioid use categories (IOUC) to equianalgesic 5-mg oxycodone pills (EOPs). In the last 24 hours before release, 53% of patients had no opioids at all (no IOUC, 0 EOPs), 25% received low amounts of opioids (low IOUC, 0.1-3.0 EOPs), and 22% high amounts (high IOUC, more than 3.1 EOPs). Overall, prescribed EOP was 17.5, and just 38% was consumed. These numbers were lowest in the no-IOUC group (15.7, 16%), followed by the low-IOUC group (16.0, 32%), and the high group (23.7, 79%; P less than .01).

The researchers then looked at the 85th percentile of EOPs for each group, and used that to develop a guideline for opioid prescription. For the no-IOUC group, they recommend 3 EOPs, for the low-IOUC group they recommend 12 EOPs, and for the high-IOUC group they recommend 30 EOPs.

The researchers examined various factors that might have influenced opioid use, correcting for whether the patient was opioid naive, case type, postoperative length of stay, and new ostomy creation. The only factor with a significant association for excessive opioid use was inflammatory bowel disease, which was linked to a nearly 900% increased risk of using more than the guideline amounts (adjusted odds ratio, 8.3; P less than .01; area under the curve, 0.85).

The study is limited by the fact that it was conducted at a single center, and that patient opioid use was self-reported. The guidelines need to be validated prospectively.

No funding information was disclosed. Dr. Meyer and Dr. Mitchem had no relevant financial disclosures.

SOURCE: Meyer D et al. Clinical Congress 2019, Abstract.

Patients with cancer who live in regions with high levels of opioid misuse may be undertreated for pain, according to investigators who studied opioid prescription patterns and cancer incidence in rural southwest Virginia.

Among 4,324 patients with cancer, only 22.16% were prescribed a Controlled Schedule II (C-II) prescription opioid medication at least 3 times in 1 year, from prescribers likely to be treating cancer pain. More than 60% of patients never received a C-II opioid prescription, reported Virginia T. LeBaron, PhD, of the University of Virginia School of Nursing in Charlottesville, and colleagues.

“A clearer view of geographic patterns and predictors of both POM [prescription opioid medication] prescribing and potential harms can inform targeted interventions and policy initiatives that achieve a balanced approach to POMs – ensuring access for patients in need while reducing risk to both patients and communities. Our research makes an important contribution by exploring how the current ‘opioid epidemic’ relates to rural patients with cancer,” they wrote. Their report is in Journal of Oncology Practice.

The investigators studied the confluence of disproportionately high cancer mortality rates and opioid fatality rates in rural southwest Virginia, in the heart of Appalachia.

They conducted a longitudinal, exploratory secondary analysis of data from the Commonwealth of Virginia All Payer Claims database to look at opioid prescribing patterns and explore whether concerns about opioid misuse could result in undertreatment of pain in cancer patients.

They looked at prescribing patterns at the patient, provider, and insurance claim levels, predictors of opioid prescription frequency, opioid-related harms and patterns related to opioid prescribing, cancer incidence, and fatalities.

They identified 4,324 patients with cancer, 958 of whom (22.16%) received a C-II opioid at least three times in any study year. The majority of patients were in the 45-64 age range, and approximately 88% were diagnosed with solid malignancies, with breast cancer and lung cancer being the most frequent diagnoses.

As noted, more than 60% of patients never received a C-II prescription.

“The large percentages of cancer patients never prescribed a C-II are concerning for a number of reasons, especially when we consider the results per year,” the investigators wrote. “First, the ‘no C-II’ patients remain over 80% of the total sample, each year, even after accounting for the upscheduling (from C-III to C-II) of commonly-prescribed hydrocodone products in 2014. Second, anecdotal data and emerging empirical evidence demonstrate that patients with legitimate pain needs, including patients with cancer, experience significant difficulty accessing POMs.”

They noted that regulations regarding opioid prescriptions have become increasingly strict since the end date of their analysis in 2015, suggesting that the number of patients with cancer who are not receiving C-II opioids today may be even higher.

They also pointed to evidence of prescription practices suggesting suboptimal pain management or potential patient harm, such as frequent prescription of opioid-acetaminophen combinations that are dose-limited due to acetaminophen toxicity; coprescription of opioids and benzodiazepines, which is not recommended under current prescribing guidelines; and infrequent use of deterrent formulations of C-II opioids such as crush-resistant tablets.

The study was supported by the University of Virginia Cancer Center, Cancer Control & Population Health Division and the Virginia Tobacco Region Revitalization Commission. The authors reported having no disclaimers or conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: LeBaron VT et al. J Oncol Pract. 2019 Nov. 4. doi: 10.1200/JOP.19.00149.

Patients with cancer who live in regions with high levels of opioid misuse may be undertreated for pain, according to investigators who studied opioid prescription patterns and cancer incidence in rural southwest Virginia.

Among 4,324 patients with cancer, only 22.16% were prescribed a Controlled Schedule II (C-II) prescription opioid medication at least 3 times in 1 year, from prescribers likely to be treating cancer pain. More than 60% of patients never received a C-II opioid prescription, reported Virginia T. LeBaron, PhD, of the University of Virginia School of Nursing in Charlottesville, and colleagues.

“A clearer view of geographic patterns and predictors of both POM [prescription opioid medication] prescribing and potential harms can inform targeted interventions and policy initiatives that achieve a balanced approach to POMs – ensuring access for patients in need while reducing risk to both patients and communities. Our research makes an important contribution by exploring how the current ‘opioid epidemic’ relates to rural patients with cancer,” they wrote. Their report is in Journal of Oncology Practice.

The investigators studied the confluence of disproportionately high cancer mortality rates and opioid fatality rates in rural southwest Virginia, in the heart of Appalachia.

They conducted a longitudinal, exploratory secondary analysis of data from the Commonwealth of Virginia All Payer Claims database to look at opioid prescribing patterns and explore whether concerns about opioid misuse could result in undertreatment of pain in cancer patients.

They looked at prescribing patterns at the patient, provider, and insurance claim levels, predictors of opioid prescription frequency, opioid-related harms and patterns related to opioid prescribing, cancer incidence, and fatalities.

They identified 4,324 patients with cancer, 958 of whom (22.16%) received a C-II opioid at least three times in any study year. The majority of patients were in the 45-64 age range, and approximately 88% were diagnosed with solid malignancies, with breast cancer and lung cancer being the most frequent diagnoses.

As noted, more than 60% of patients never received a C-II prescription.

“The large percentages of cancer patients never prescribed a C-II are concerning for a number of reasons, especially when we consider the results per year,” the investigators wrote. “First, the ‘no C-II’ patients remain over 80% of the total sample, each year, even after accounting for the upscheduling (from C-III to C-II) of commonly-prescribed hydrocodone products in 2014. Second, anecdotal data and emerging empirical evidence demonstrate that patients with legitimate pain needs, including patients with cancer, experience significant difficulty accessing POMs.”

They noted that regulations regarding opioid prescriptions have become increasingly strict since the end date of their analysis in 2015, suggesting that the number of patients with cancer who are not receiving C-II opioids today may be even higher.

They also pointed to evidence of prescription practices suggesting suboptimal pain management or potential patient harm, such as frequent prescription of opioid-acetaminophen combinations that are dose-limited due to acetaminophen toxicity; coprescription of opioids and benzodiazepines, which is not recommended under current prescribing guidelines; and infrequent use of deterrent formulations of C-II opioids such as crush-resistant tablets.

The study was supported by the University of Virginia Cancer Center, Cancer Control & Population Health Division and the Virginia Tobacco Region Revitalization Commission. The authors reported having no disclaimers or conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: LeBaron VT et al. J Oncol Pract. 2019 Nov. 4. doi: 10.1200/JOP.19.00149.

Patients with cancer who live in regions with high levels of opioid misuse may be undertreated for pain, according to investigators who studied opioid prescription patterns and cancer incidence in rural southwest Virginia.

Among 4,324 patients with cancer, only 22.16% were prescribed a Controlled Schedule II (C-II) prescription opioid medication at least 3 times in 1 year, from prescribers likely to be treating cancer pain. More than 60% of patients never received a C-II opioid prescription, reported Virginia T. LeBaron, PhD, of the University of Virginia School of Nursing in Charlottesville, and colleagues.

“A clearer view of geographic patterns and predictors of both POM [prescription opioid medication] prescribing and potential harms can inform targeted interventions and policy initiatives that achieve a balanced approach to POMs – ensuring access for patients in need while reducing risk to both patients and communities. Our research makes an important contribution by exploring how the current ‘opioid epidemic’ relates to rural patients with cancer,” they wrote. Their report is in Journal of Oncology Practice.

The investigators studied the confluence of disproportionately high cancer mortality rates and opioid fatality rates in rural southwest Virginia, in the heart of Appalachia.

They conducted a longitudinal, exploratory secondary analysis of data from the Commonwealth of Virginia All Payer Claims database to look at opioid prescribing patterns and explore whether concerns about opioid misuse could result in undertreatment of pain in cancer patients.

They looked at prescribing patterns at the patient, provider, and insurance claim levels, predictors of opioid prescription frequency, opioid-related harms and patterns related to opioid prescribing, cancer incidence, and fatalities.

They identified 4,324 patients with cancer, 958 of whom (22.16%) received a C-II opioid at least three times in any study year. The majority of patients were in the 45-64 age range, and approximately 88% were diagnosed with solid malignancies, with breast cancer and lung cancer being the most frequent diagnoses.

As noted, more than 60% of patients never received a C-II prescription.

“The large percentages of cancer patients never prescribed a C-II are concerning for a number of reasons, especially when we consider the results per year,” the investigators wrote. “First, the ‘no C-II’ patients remain over 80% of the total sample, each year, even after accounting for the upscheduling (from C-III to C-II) of commonly-prescribed hydrocodone products in 2014. Second, anecdotal data and emerging empirical evidence demonstrate that patients with legitimate pain needs, including patients with cancer, experience significant difficulty accessing POMs.”

They noted that regulations regarding opioid prescriptions have become increasingly strict since the end date of their analysis in 2015, suggesting that the number of patients with cancer who are not receiving C-II opioids today may be even higher.

They also pointed to evidence of prescription practices suggesting suboptimal pain management or potential patient harm, such as frequent prescription of opioid-acetaminophen combinations that are dose-limited due to acetaminophen toxicity; coprescription of opioids and benzodiazepines, which is not recommended under current prescribing guidelines; and infrequent use of deterrent formulations of C-II opioids such as crush-resistant tablets.

The study was supported by the University of Virginia Cancer Center, Cancer Control & Population Health Division and the Virginia Tobacco Region Revitalization Commission. The authors reported having no disclaimers or conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: LeBaron VT et al. J Oncol Pract. 2019 Nov. 4. doi: 10.1200/JOP.19.00149.

THE CASE

A 45-year-old white woman presented to our emergency department (ED) with a 3-day history of fever, chills, diffuse abdominal pain, severe headache, and shortness of breath.

The patient’s medical and surgical history was notable for acromegaly secondary to pituitary microadenoma, pituitary resection, and complete thyroidectomy 4 years earlier. Her medications included lanreotide, levothyroxine, gabapentin, alprazolam, and zolpidem. She had no history of cardiac disease, diabetes mellitus, immunodeficiency, or injection drug use. Three months prior to presenting to the ED, she underwent an outpatient gynecologic procedure for insertion of a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (IUD) for menorrhagia.

In the ED, the patient had a fever (101.5°F) and an elevated white blood cell count of 13,600/mm³ (reference range, 4,000–10,000/mm³). Cardiac auscultation revealed a regular heart rate and rhythm, with normal S1 and S2 sounds without murmur. Electrocardiogram documented normal sinus rhythm with no abnormalities. The physical examination revealed a diffusely tender lower abdomen without rebound or guarding. A pelvic examination was not conducted, and there was no collection of a vaginal swab sample to test for gonorrhea, chlamydia, or group B Streptococcus (GBS). Further workups for infection, including urinalysis, lumbar puncture, and chest x-ray, all yielded normal results.

Shortly after she was discharged from the ED, the patient was called to return to the hospital after blood cultures grew GBS; she was admitted for treatment.

THE DIAGNOSIS

A diagnosis of sepsis secondary to GBS bacteremia was made. However, the source of the GBS bacteremia and the patient’s abdominal symptoms remained unclear. Further workup included computed tomography (CT) of the abdomen, pelvis, and head, and magnetic resonance imaging of the brain; all imaging revealed no acute findings. Blood work (chem-7 panel, complete blood count, human immunodeficiency virus testing) was unremarkable except for an elevated level of C-reactive protein of 90 mg/L (reference range, 0–10 mg/L).

Radiography confirmed that the IUD was in the correct intrauterine position. However, transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) showed vegetations on the mitral and aortic valves, with preserved cardiac function. A diagnosis of GBS endocarditis was made, and infectious disease specialists were consulted. Because the patient had an anaphylactic allergy to penicillin, she was treated with intravenous vancomycin for 4 weeks. One month later, she had the IUD removed because of persistent abdominal pain.

DISCUSSION

Although the source of GBS bacteremia and endocarditis in our patient remained ­nondefinitive, the recent insertion of the IUD continued to be the suspected source and leading diagnosis.

Continue to: Other sources of GBS bacteremia...

Other sources of GBS bacteremia were unlikely based on the examination and imaging results. The patient’s abdominal exam was benign, and no intra-abdominal abscess was detected on CT. Although Streptococcus viridans, S bovis, and enterococcus are far more common pathogens for infective endocarditis,¹ there was no evidence of dental caries, gastrointestinal pathology, or urinary tract infection to suggest misidentification of bacteria.

Theoretically, GBS bacteremia after a gynecologic procedure is possible since GBS frequently colonizes the vagina.² However, most reports document transient rather than persistent bacteremia and/or endocarditis.^3,4

IUD insertion as a cause of bacteremia. The medical literature offers scant evidence of endocarditis or severe GBS bacteremia related to IUD insertion. Of 124 gynecology-related reports of infective endocarditis between 1946 and 1986, only 3 were associated with IUDs.⁵ All 3 women had underlying cardiac disease, and 2 of the 3 had identifiable pelvic infections.⁵

Among 12 case reports of endocarditis related to gynecologic procedures from 1985 to 2003, therapeutic abortion was the most common antecedent event, and no cases were related to IUD insertion.² Compared with cases reported before 1985, in these ­cases most patients (64%) did not have underlying valvular disease, and most had a subacute course with low mortality but high morbidity (8 of 11 patients had clinically significant emboli).² The study authors also mentioned a case of endocarditis following a Pap smear test, suggesting that minimally invasive procedures may result in infective endocarditis.²

THE TAKEAWAY

Our patient presented with fever, fatigue, and abdominal pain in the setting of recent IUD insertion. She was found to have GBS bacteremia with endocarditis based on TEE and positive blood culture growth. Her clinical situation was suspicious for a gynecologic source of bacteremia.

Continue to: There is no definitive way...

There is no definitive way to confirm that IUD insertion 3 months prior caused the GBS bacteremia. However, this case illustrates that it is important to consider a usually benign gynecologic procedure as the source of clinically significant persistent bacteremia.

Although the source of GBS bacteremia and endocarditis in our patient remained nondefinitive, the recent insertion of the IUD continued to be the suspected source.

Evidence is insufficient to recommend prophylactic antibiotic use prior to a gynecologic procedure, and it is not recommended by current practice guidelines of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists or the European Society of Cardiology.^6,7

This patient case raises our suspicion for IUD-related bacteremia as an adverse reaction in healthy women with recent IUD insertion who present with fever and diffuse abdominal pain without apparent signs of a pelvic infection. Prompt antibiotic treatment is necessary to prevent significant morbidity and mortality.

CORRESPONDENCE
Lauren Cowen, MD, 777 South Clinton Avenue, Rochester, NY 14620; [email protected]

THE CASE

A 45-year-old white woman presented to our emergency department (ED) with a 3-day history of fever, chills, diffuse abdominal pain, severe headache, and shortness of breath.

The patient’s medical and surgical history was notable for acromegaly secondary to pituitary microadenoma, pituitary resection, and complete thyroidectomy 4 years earlier. Her medications included lanreotide, levothyroxine, gabapentin, alprazolam, and zolpidem. She had no history of cardiac disease, diabetes mellitus, immunodeficiency, or injection drug use. Three months prior to presenting to the ED, she underwent an outpatient gynecologic procedure for insertion of a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (IUD) for menorrhagia.

In the ED, the patient had a fever (101.5°F) and an elevated white blood cell count of 13,600/mm³ (reference range, 4,000–10,000/mm³). Cardiac auscultation revealed a regular heart rate and rhythm, with normal S1 and S2 sounds without murmur. Electrocardiogram documented normal sinus rhythm with no abnormalities. The physical examination revealed a diffusely tender lower abdomen without rebound or guarding. A pelvic examination was not conducted, and there was no collection of a vaginal swab sample to test for gonorrhea, chlamydia, or group B Streptococcus (GBS). Further workups for infection, including urinalysis, lumbar puncture, and chest x-ray, all yielded normal results.

Shortly after she was discharged from the ED, the patient was called to return to the hospital after blood cultures grew GBS; she was admitted for treatment.

THE DIAGNOSIS

A diagnosis of sepsis secondary to GBS bacteremia was made. However, the source of the GBS bacteremia and the patient’s abdominal symptoms remained unclear. Further workup included computed tomography (CT) of the abdomen, pelvis, and head, and magnetic resonance imaging of the brain; all imaging revealed no acute findings. Blood work (chem-7 panel, complete blood count, human immunodeficiency virus testing) was unremarkable except for an elevated level of C-reactive protein of 90 mg/L (reference range, 0–10 mg/L).

Radiography confirmed that the IUD was in the correct intrauterine position. However, transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) showed vegetations on the mitral and aortic valves, with preserved cardiac function. A diagnosis of GBS endocarditis was made, and infectious disease specialists were consulted. Because the patient had an anaphylactic allergy to penicillin, she was treated with intravenous vancomycin for 4 weeks. One month later, she had the IUD removed because of persistent abdominal pain.

DISCUSSION

Although the source of GBS bacteremia and endocarditis in our patient remained ­nondefinitive, the recent insertion of the IUD continued to be the suspected source and leading diagnosis.

Continue to: Other sources of GBS bacteremia...

Other sources of GBS bacteremia were unlikely based on the examination and imaging results. The patient’s abdominal exam was benign, and no intra-abdominal abscess was detected on CT. Although Streptococcus viridans, S bovis, and enterococcus are far more common pathogens for infective endocarditis,¹ there was no evidence of dental caries, gastrointestinal pathology, or urinary tract infection to suggest misidentification of bacteria.

Theoretically, GBS bacteremia after a gynecologic procedure is possible since GBS frequently colonizes the vagina.² However, most reports document transient rather than persistent bacteremia and/or endocarditis.^3,4

IUD insertion as a cause of bacteremia. The medical literature offers scant evidence of endocarditis or severe GBS bacteremia related to IUD insertion. Of 124 gynecology-related reports of infective endocarditis between 1946 and 1986, only 3 were associated with IUDs.⁵ All 3 women had underlying cardiac disease, and 2 of the 3 had identifiable pelvic infections.⁵

Among 12 case reports of endocarditis related to gynecologic procedures from 1985 to 2003, therapeutic abortion was the most common antecedent event, and no cases were related to IUD insertion.² Compared with cases reported before 1985, in these ­cases most patients (64%) did not have underlying valvular disease, and most had a subacute course with low mortality but high morbidity (8 of 11 patients had clinically significant emboli).² The study authors also mentioned a case of endocarditis following a Pap smear test, suggesting that minimally invasive procedures may result in infective endocarditis.²

THE TAKEAWAY

Our patient presented with fever, fatigue, and abdominal pain in the setting of recent IUD insertion. She was found to have GBS bacteremia with endocarditis based on TEE and positive blood culture growth. Her clinical situation was suspicious for a gynecologic source of bacteremia.

Continue to: There is no definitive way...

There is no definitive way to confirm that IUD insertion 3 months prior caused the GBS bacteremia. However, this case illustrates that it is important to consider a usually benign gynecologic procedure as the source of clinically significant persistent bacteremia.

Although the source of GBS bacteremia and endocarditis in our patient remained nondefinitive, the recent insertion of the IUD continued to be the suspected source.

Evidence is insufficient to recommend prophylactic antibiotic use prior to a gynecologic procedure, and it is not recommended by current practice guidelines of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists or the European Society of Cardiology.^6,7

This patient case raises our suspicion for IUD-related bacteremia as an adverse reaction in healthy women with recent IUD insertion who present with fever and diffuse abdominal pain without apparent signs of a pelvic infection. Prompt antibiotic treatment is necessary to prevent significant morbidity and mortality.

CORRESPONDENCE
Lauren Cowen, MD, 777 South Clinton Avenue, Rochester, NY 14620; [email protected]

THE CASE

A 45-year-old white woman presented to our emergency department (ED) with a 3-day history of fever, chills, diffuse abdominal pain, severe headache, and shortness of breath.

The patient’s medical and surgical history was notable for acromegaly secondary to pituitary microadenoma, pituitary resection, and complete thyroidectomy 4 years earlier. Her medications included lanreotide, levothyroxine, gabapentin, alprazolam, and zolpidem. She had no history of cardiac disease, diabetes mellitus, immunodeficiency, or injection drug use. Three months prior to presenting to the ED, she underwent an outpatient gynecologic procedure for insertion of a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (IUD) for menorrhagia.

In the ED, the patient had a fever (101.5°F) and an elevated white blood cell count of 13,600/mm³ (reference range, 4,000–10,000/mm³). Cardiac auscultation revealed a regular heart rate and rhythm, with normal S1 and S2 sounds without murmur. Electrocardiogram documented normal sinus rhythm with no abnormalities. The physical examination revealed a diffusely tender lower abdomen without rebound or guarding. A pelvic examination was not conducted, and there was no collection of a vaginal swab sample to test for gonorrhea, chlamydia, or group B Streptococcus (GBS). Further workups for infection, including urinalysis, lumbar puncture, and chest x-ray, all yielded normal results.

Shortly after she was discharged from the ED, the patient was called to return to the hospital after blood cultures grew GBS; she was admitted for treatment.

THE DIAGNOSIS

A diagnosis of sepsis secondary to GBS bacteremia was made. However, the source of the GBS bacteremia and the patient’s abdominal symptoms remained unclear. Further workup included computed tomography (CT) of the abdomen, pelvis, and head, and magnetic resonance imaging of the brain; all imaging revealed no acute findings. Blood work (chem-7 panel, complete blood count, human immunodeficiency virus testing) was unremarkable except for an elevated level of C-reactive protein of 90 mg/L (reference range, 0–10 mg/L).

Radiography confirmed that the IUD was in the correct intrauterine position. However, transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) showed vegetations on the mitral and aortic valves, with preserved cardiac function. A diagnosis of GBS endocarditis was made, and infectious disease specialists were consulted. Because the patient had an anaphylactic allergy to penicillin, she was treated with intravenous vancomycin for 4 weeks. One month later, she had the IUD removed because of persistent abdominal pain.

DISCUSSION

Although the source of GBS bacteremia and endocarditis in our patient remained ­nondefinitive, the recent insertion of the IUD continued to be the suspected source and leading diagnosis.

Continue to: Other sources of GBS bacteremia...

Other sources of GBS bacteremia were unlikely based on the examination and imaging results. The patient’s abdominal exam was benign, and no intra-abdominal abscess was detected on CT. Although Streptococcus viridans, S bovis, and enterococcus are far more common pathogens for infective endocarditis,¹ there was no evidence of dental caries, gastrointestinal pathology, or urinary tract infection to suggest misidentification of bacteria.

Theoretically, GBS bacteremia after a gynecologic procedure is possible since GBS frequently colonizes the vagina.² However, most reports document transient rather than persistent bacteremia and/or endocarditis.^3,4

IUD insertion as a cause of bacteremia. The medical literature offers scant evidence of endocarditis or severe GBS bacteremia related to IUD insertion. Of 124 gynecology-related reports of infective endocarditis between 1946 and 1986, only 3 were associated with IUDs.⁵ All 3 women had underlying cardiac disease, and 2 of the 3 had identifiable pelvic infections.⁵

Among 12 case reports of endocarditis related to gynecologic procedures from 1985 to 2003, therapeutic abortion was the most common antecedent event, and no cases were related to IUD insertion.² Compared with cases reported before 1985, in these ­cases most patients (64%) did not have underlying valvular disease, and most had a subacute course with low mortality but high morbidity (8 of 11 patients had clinically significant emboli).² The study authors also mentioned a case of endocarditis following a Pap smear test, suggesting that minimally invasive procedures may result in infective endocarditis.²

THE TAKEAWAY

Our patient presented with fever, fatigue, and abdominal pain in the setting of recent IUD insertion. She was found to have GBS bacteremia with endocarditis based on TEE and positive blood culture growth. Her clinical situation was suspicious for a gynecologic source of bacteremia.

Continue to: There is no definitive way...

There is no definitive way to confirm that IUD insertion 3 months prior caused the GBS bacteremia. However, this case illustrates that it is important to consider a usually benign gynecologic procedure as the source of clinically significant persistent bacteremia.

Although the source of GBS bacteremia and endocarditis in our patient remained nondefinitive, the recent insertion of the IUD continued to be the suspected source.

Evidence is insufficient to recommend prophylactic antibiotic use prior to a gynecologic procedure, and it is not recommended by current practice guidelines of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists or the European Society of Cardiology.^6,7

This patient case raises our suspicion for IUD-related bacteremia as an adverse reaction in healthy women with recent IUD insertion who present with fever and diffuse abdominal pain without apparent signs of a pelvic infection. Prompt antibiotic treatment is necessary to prevent significant morbidity and mortality.

CORRESPONDENCE
Lauren Cowen, MD, 777 South Clinton Avenue, Rochester, NY 14620; [email protected]

Researchers have developed models that successfully predict persistent postoperative pain (PPP) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) two-thirds of the time. Major risk factors include pre-operative pain, sensory testing results, anxiety and anticipated pain.

“The results of this study provide some basis for the identification of patients at risk of PPP after TKA and highlight several modifiable factors that may be targeted by clinicians in an attempt to reduce the risk of developing PPP,” write the authors of the study, which appeared in the British Journal of Anaesthesia.

The authors, led by David Rice, PhD, of Auckland University of Technology, note that moderate to severe levels of PPP affect an estimated 10%-34% of patients at least 3 months after TKA surgery. “PPP adversely affects quality of life, is the most important predictor of patient dissatisfaction after TKA, and is a common reason for undergoing revision surgery.”

The researchers, who launched the study to gain insight into the risk factors that can predict PPP, recruited 300 New Zealand volunteers (average age = 69, 48% female, 92% white, average body mass index [BMI] = 31 kg/m²) to be surveyed before and after TKA surgery. They monitored pain and tracked a long list of possible risk factors including psychological traits (such as anxiety, pain catastrophizing and depression), physical traits (such as gender, BMI), and surgical traits (such as total surgery time).

At 6 months, 21% of 291 patients reported moderate to severe pain, and the percentage fell to 16% in 288 patients at 12 months.

The researchers developed two models that successfully predicted moderate-to-severe PPP.

The 6-month model relied on higher levels of preoperative pain intensity, temporal summation (a statistic that’s based on quantitative sensory testing), trait anxiety (a measure of individual anxiety level), and expected pain. It correctly predicted moderate to severe PPP 66% of the time (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.70, sensitivity = 0.72, specificity = 0.64).

The 12-month model relied on higher levels of all the risk factors except for temporal summation and correctly predicted moderate-to-severe PPP 66% of the time (AUC = 0.66, sensitivity = 0.61, specificity = 0.67).

The researchers noted that other research has linked trait anxiety and expected pain to PPP. In regard to anxiety, “cognitive behavioral interventions in the perioperative period aimed at reducing the threat value of surgery and of postoperative pain, improving patients’ coping strategies, and enhancing self-efficacy might help to reduce the risk of PPP after TKA,” the researchers write. “Furthermore, there is some evidence that anxiolytic medications can diminish perioperative anxiety and reduce APOP [acute postoperative pain] although its effects on PPP are unclear.”

Moving forward, the authors write, “strategies to minimize intraoperative nerve injury, reduce preoperative pain intensity, and address preoperative psychological factors such as expected pain and anxiety may lead to improved outcomes after TKA and should be explored.”

The Australia New Zealand College of Anesthetists and Auckland University of Technology funded the study. The study authors report no relevant disclosures.

SOURCE: Rice D et al. Br J Anaesth 2018;804-12. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2018.05.070.

Researchers have developed models that successfully predict persistent postoperative pain (PPP) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) two-thirds of the time. Major risk factors include pre-operative pain, sensory testing results, anxiety and anticipated pain.

“The results of this study provide some basis for the identification of patients at risk of PPP after TKA and highlight several modifiable factors that may be targeted by clinicians in an attempt to reduce the risk of developing PPP,” write the authors of the study, which appeared in the British Journal of Anaesthesia.

The authors, led by David Rice, PhD, of Auckland University of Technology, note that moderate to severe levels of PPP affect an estimated 10%-34% of patients at least 3 months after TKA surgery. “PPP adversely affects quality of life, is the most important predictor of patient dissatisfaction after TKA, and is a common reason for undergoing revision surgery.”

The researchers, who launched the study to gain insight into the risk factors that can predict PPP, recruited 300 New Zealand volunteers (average age = 69, 48% female, 92% white, average body mass index [BMI] = 31 kg/m²) to be surveyed before and after TKA surgery. They monitored pain and tracked a long list of possible risk factors including psychological traits (such as anxiety, pain catastrophizing and depression), physical traits (such as gender, BMI), and surgical traits (such as total surgery time).

At 6 months, 21% of 291 patients reported moderate to severe pain, and the percentage fell to 16% in 288 patients at 12 months.

The researchers developed two models that successfully predicted moderate-to-severe PPP.

The 6-month model relied on higher levels of preoperative pain intensity, temporal summation (a statistic that’s based on quantitative sensory testing), trait anxiety (a measure of individual anxiety level), and expected pain. It correctly predicted moderate to severe PPP 66% of the time (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.70, sensitivity = 0.72, specificity = 0.64).

The 12-month model relied on higher levels of all the risk factors except for temporal summation and correctly predicted moderate-to-severe PPP 66% of the time (AUC = 0.66, sensitivity = 0.61, specificity = 0.67).

The researchers noted that other research has linked trait anxiety and expected pain to PPP. In regard to anxiety, “cognitive behavioral interventions in the perioperative period aimed at reducing the threat value of surgery and of postoperative pain, improving patients’ coping strategies, and enhancing self-efficacy might help to reduce the risk of PPP after TKA,” the researchers write. “Furthermore, there is some evidence that anxiolytic medications can diminish perioperative anxiety and reduce APOP [acute postoperative pain] although its effects on PPP are unclear.”

Moving forward, the authors write, “strategies to minimize intraoperative nerve injury, reduce preoperative pain intensity, and address preoperative psychological factors such as expected pain and anxiety may lead to improved outcomes after TKA and should be explored.”

The Australia New Zealand College of Anesthetists and Auckland University of Technology funded the study. The study authors report no relevant disclosures.

SOURCE: Rice D et al. Br J Anaesth 2018;804-12. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2018.05.070.

Researchers have developed models that successfully predict persistent postoperative pain (PPP) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) two-thirds of the time. Major risk factors include pre-operative pain, sensory testing results, anxiety and anticipated pain.

“The results of this study provide some basis for the identification of patients at risk of PPP after TKA and highlight several modifiable factors that may be targeted by clinicians in an attempt to reduce the risk of developing PPP,” write the authors of the study, which appeared in the British Journal of Anaesthesia.

The authors, led by David Rice, PhD, of Auckland University of Technology, note that moderate to severe levels of PPP affect an estimated 10%-34% of patients at least 3 months after TKA surgery. “PPP adversely affects quality of life, is the most important predictor of patient dissatisfaction after TKA, and is a common reason for undergoing revision surgery.”

The researchers, who launched the study to gain insight into the risk factors that can predict PPP, recruited 300 New Zealand volunteers (average age = 69, 48% female, 92% white, average body mass index [BMI] = 31 kg/m²) to be surveyed before and after TKA surgery. They monitored pain and tracked a long list of possible risk factors including psychological traits (such as anxiety, pain catastrophizing and depression), physical traits (such as gender, BMI), and surgical traits (such as total surgery time).

At 6 months, 21% of 291 patients reported moderate to severe pain, and the percentage fell to 16% in 288 patients at 12 months.

The researchers developed two models that successfully predicted moderate-to-severe PPP.

The 6-month model relied on higher levels of preoperative pain intensity, temporal summation (a statistic that’s based on quantitative sensory testing), trait anxiety (a measure of individual anxiety level), and expected pain. It correctly predicted moderate to severe PPP 66% of the time (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.70, sensitivity = 0.72, specificity = 0.64).

The 12-month model relied on higher levels of all the risk factors except for temporal summation and correctly predicted moderate-to-severe PPP 66% of the time (AUC = 0.66, sensitivity = 0.61, specificity = 0.67).

The researchers noted that other research has linked trait anxiety and expected pain to PPP. In regard to anxiety, “cognitive behavioral interventions in the perioperative period aimed at reducing the threat value of surgery and of postoperative pain, improving patients’ coping strategies, and enhancing self-efficacy might help to reduce the risk of PPP after TKA,” the researchers write. “Furthermore, there is some evidence that anxiolytic medications can diminish perioperative anxiety and reduce APOP [acute postoperative pain] although its effects on PPP are unclear.”

Moving forward, the authors write, “strategies to minimize intraoperative nerve injury, reduce preoperative pain intensity, and address preoperative psychological factors such as expected pain and anxiety may lead to improved outcomes after TKA and should be explored.”

The Australia New Zealand College of Anesthetists and Auckland University of Technology funded the study. The study authors report no relevant disclosures.

SOURCE: Rice D et al. Br J Anaesth 2018;804-12. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2018.05.070.