Opioid-Free versus Opioid-Sparing Anesthesia

Opioids are administered peri-operatively for postoperative analgesia, and intra-operatively to control the sympathetic response to surgical stimuli, frequently as a surrogate for presumed pain. However, opioid use during surgery is a matter of dispute in contemporary practice and carries the risk of side-effects such as postoperative nausea and vomiting. This meta-analysis investigated whether opioid-inclusive, compared with opioid-free anaesthesia, would reduce postoperative pain, without increasing the rate of postoperative nausea and vomiting. The electronic databases Medline and PubMed were searched until June 2018. We included trials investigating pain outcomes and comparing any type of intra-operative opioid administration with placebo injection or no intra-operative opioid. Most meta-analyses were performed using a random effects model. We rated the quality of evidence for each outcome. The primary outcome was pain score at rest (analogue scale, 0-10) at two postoperative hours. Our secondary outcomes included the rate of postoperative nausea and vomiting within the first 24 postoperative hours and length of stay in the recovery area. Twenty-three randomised controlled trials, including 1304 patients, were identified. Pain scores at rest at two postoperative hours were equivalent in the opioid-inclusive and opioid-free groups with a mean difference (95%CI) of 0.2 (-0.2 to 0.5), I2 = 83%, p = 0.38 and a high quality of evidence. Similarly, there was high-quality evidence that the rate of postoperative nausea and vomiting was reduced in the opioid-free group, with a risk ratio (95%CI) of 0.77 (0.61-0.97), I2 = 16%, p = 0.03 and high-quality evidence for a similar length of stay in the recovery area, the mean difference (95%CI) being 0.6 (-8.2 to 9.3), min, I2 = 60%, p = 0.90. As there is strong evidence that opioid-inclusive anaesthesia does not reduce postoperative pain, but is associated with more postoperative nausea and vomiting, when compared with opioid-free anaesthesia, we suggest that anaesthetists should reconsider their intra-operative opioid choices on a case-by-case basis.

Patients undergoing general anesthesia are more frequently monitored for depth of anesthesia using processed electroencephalography. Opioid-free anesthesia is nowadays an accepted modality for general anesthesia, however it is unclear how to interpret data from processed electroencephalography when using a mixture of non-opioid anesthetic drugs. Our objective was to describe density spectral array patterns and compare processed encephalographic data indices between opioid-free and routine opioid based anesthesia. This prospective observational cohort study was conducted on 30 adult patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery in a non-tertiary regional hospital. The patients underwent general anesthesia with three different methods and were monitored for anesthesia depth using processed encephalography and density spectral array. Primary outcome is a group-derived mean difference in patient state index and spectral edge frequency. As a secondary outcome a descriptive comparison of the spectral power, derived from the density spectral array, was done between groups. The opioid-free anesthesia group had significantly higher patient state index and spectral edge frequency compared to routine anesthesia. Density spectral array patterns were also different, most notably lacking the high power in alpha frequency spectrum seen in the other routine anesthesia methods. Processed electroencephalography monitoring can be used in opioid-free anesthesia, however clinicians should expect higher values in monitoring indices. The density spectral array pattern using a common protocol for opioid-free anesthesia, with mainly sevoflurane combined with low doses of dexmedetomidine and esketamine, differs from well described opioid and GABA-ergic anesthesia methods. These findings should be further validated using other protocols for opioid-free anesthesia in order to safely monitor anesthesia depth. Clinicaltrials.gov registration number NCT06227143, registration date; 26th of January 2024.

To evaluate all available evidence thus far on opioid based versus opioid-free anesthesia and its effect on acute and chronic postoperative pain. Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Operating room, postoperative recovery room and ward. Patients undergoing general anesthesia. After consulting MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane database, studies which compared opioid free anesthesia (OFA) with opioid based anesthesia (OBA) were included (last search April 15th 2022). Primary outcomes were acute and chronic pain scores in NRS or VAS. Secondary outcomes were quality of recovery and postoperative opioid consumption. Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB2 tool and a random effects model for the meta-analysis was conducted. We identified 1245 citations, of which 38 studies met our inclusion criteria. There is moderate quality evidence showing no clinically relevant difference of Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) scores or opioid consumption in the postoperative period (pooled mean difference of 0.39 points with a CI of 0.19-0.59 and 4.02 MME with a CI of 1.73-6.30). We found only one small-sized study reporting no effect of opioid-free anesthesia on chronic pain. The quality of recovery was superior in patients with opioid-free anesthesia (mean difference of 8.26 points), however, this pooled analysis was comprised of only two studies. Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) occurred less in opioid-free anesthesia, but bradycardia was more frequent. We concluded that we cannot recommend one strategy over the other. Future studies could focus on quality of recovery as outcome measure and adequately powered studies on the effects of opioid-free anesthesia on chronic pain are eagerly awaited.

It is speculated that opioid-free anesthesia may provide adequate pain control while reducing postoperative opioid consumption. However, there is currently no evidence to support the speculation. The authors hypothesized that opioid-free balanced anesthetic with dexmedetomidine reduces postoperative opioid-related adverse events compared with balanced anesthetic with remifentanil. Patients were randomized to receive a standard balanced anesthetic with either intraoperative remifentanil plus morphine (remifentanil group) or dexmedetomidine (opioid-free group). All patients received intraoperative propofol, desflurane, dexamethasone, lidocaine infusion, ketamine infusion, neuromuscular blockade, and postoperative lidocaine infusion, paracetamol, nefopam, and patient-controlled morphine. The primary outcome was a composite of postoperative opioid-related adverse events (hypoxemia, ileus, or cognitive dysfunction) within the first 48 h after extubation. The main secondary outcomes were episodes of postoperative pain, opioid consumption, and postoperative nausea and vomiting. The study was stopped prematurely because of five cases of severe bradycardia in the dexmedetomidine group. The primary composite outcome occurred in 122 of 156 (78%) dexmedetomidine group patients compared with 105 of 156 (67%) in the remifentanil group (relative risk, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.33; P = 0.031). Hypoxemia occurred 110 of 152 (72%) of dexmedetomidine group and 94 of 155 (61%) of remifentanil group patients (relative risk, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.40; P = 0.030). There were no differences in ileus or cognitive dysfunction. Cumulative 0 to 48 h postoperative morphine consumption (11 mg [5 to 21] versus 6 mg [0 to 17]) and postoperative nausea and vomiting (58 of 157 [37%] versus 37 of 157 [24%]; relative risk, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.90) were both less in the dexmedetomidine group, whereas measures of analgesia were similar in both groups. Dexmedetomidine patients had more delayed extubation and prolonged postanesthesia care unit stay. This trial refuted the hypothesis that balanced opioid-free anesthesia with dexmedetomidine, compared with remifentanil, would result in fewer postoperative opioid-related adverse events. Conversely, it did result in a greater incidence of serious adverse events, especially hypoxemia and bradycardia.

Patients who undergo laparoscopic bariatric surgery (LBS) are susceptible to postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) or opioid-sparing anesthesia (OSA) protocols have been proposed as solutions; however, differences between the 2 alternative opioid protocols for anesthesia maintenance in obese patients remain uncertain. A network meta-analysis was conducted to compare the impacts of OFA and OSA on PONV. Systematic searches were conducted using Embase, PubMed, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing OFA and OSA strategies. After screening according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, we used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the credibility of the evidence. The main concern of this review was the difference between OFA and OSA in reducing PONV. The primary outcome was any PONV occurrence within 24 hours. Secondary outcomes included postoperative pain intensity, opioid consumption, opioid-related adverse events, and length of hospital stay. Fifteen RCTs involving 1310 patients were identified for a network meta-analysis from 1776 articles that compared OFA, OSA, and traditional opioid-based anesthesia (OBA) strategies in LBS. Twelve RCTs (80%) with 922 participants (70%) were eligible for the occurrence of PONV. These included 199 (22%) patients who received OFA and 476 (52%) and 247 (27%) patients who received OSA and OBA, respectively. OFA was more effective at reducing PONV (relative risks [RR], 0.6, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.5-0.9, moderate-quality evidence) compared to OSA. No differences were observed in postoperative pain control or opioid consumption between the OFA and OSA strategies (very low-to high-quality evidence). Notably, OFA is associated with a higher risk of bradycardia than OSA (RR, 2.6, 95% CI, 1.2-5.9, moderate-quality evidence). OFA is more effective than OSA in reducing the occurrence of PONV during the early postoperative period of LBS, although it may associate with an increased risk of bradycardia. Patients who received either opioid-alternative strategy demonstrated similar effects in reducing postoperative opioid consumption and alleviating pain intensity.

Enhanced recovery after surgery pathways are essential for ambulatory surgery. They usually recommend lower intraoperative opioid use to avoid opioid-related adverse effects. This has led to opioid-sparing anaesthesia (OSA) techniques, with the extreme approach of opioid-free anaesthesia (OFA) mostly with dexmedetomidine. As evidence is lacking in day-case primary total hip arthroplasty, this study was performed to assess the potential benefits in postoperative analgesia of OFA over OSA. In this single-centre, prospective, triple blind study, we randomly allocated 80 patients undergoing day-case primary THA under general anaesthesia. Patients received a total intravenous anaesthesia with a laryngeal mask and multimodal analgesic regimen with non-opioid analgesics. The OSA group received low dose of sufentanil, and the OFA group received dexmedetomidine The primary outcome was the opioid consumption in the first 24 h in oral morphine equivalents (OME). There was no difference in median cumulative OME consumption at 24 h between the OSA and OFA groups (12 [0-25] mg vs 16 [0-30] mg, respectively; P=0.7). Pain scores were similar and low in both groups with comparable walking recovery time. Adverse events were sparse and equivalent in both groups except for dizziness, which was more frequent in the OSA group (P<0.05). In day-case total hip arthoplasty under general anaesthesia, opioid-free anaesthesia and opioid-sparing anaesthesia both provide early recovery and effective postoperative pain relief. When compared with opioid-sparing anaesthesia, opioid-free anaesthesia does not decrease opioid consumption in the first 24 h. These findings do not suggest any significant benefit from complete intraoperative avoidance of opioids. NCT0507270.