Department of Anesthesia, Surrey Memorial Hospital, Surrey, BC Canada.
Division of Pharmacy, Southern Adelaide Local Health Network, SA Pharmacy, SA Health, Adelaide, Australia.
Pain Physician. 2020 Mar;23(2):E163-E174.
Acute pain management in patients on buprenorphine opioid agonist therapy (BOAT) can be challenging. It is unclear whether BOAT should be continued or interrupted for optimization of postoperative pain control.
To determine an evidence-based approach for pain management in patients on BOAT in the perioperative setting, particularly whether BOAT should be continued or interrupted with or without bridging to another mu opioid agonist and to identify benefits and harms of either perioperative strategy.
Systematic literature review with qualitative data synthesis.
Hospital, perioperative.
The study protocol was registered on PROSPERO (Registration number 9030276355). Medline via OVID, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane CENTRAL register of trials were searched for prospective or retrospective observational or controlled studies, case series, and case reports that described perioperative or acute pain care for patients on BOAT. References of narrative and systematic reviews addressing acute pain management in patients on BOAT and references of included articles were hand-searched to identify additional original articles for inclusion. The full text of publications were reviewed for final inclusion, and data were extracted using a standardized data extraction form. Results were summarized qualitatively. Primary outcomes were postoperative pain intensity and total opioid use and identification of benefits and harms of perioperative strategies.
Eighteen publications presenting data on the perioperative management of patients on BOAT were identified: 10 case reports, 5 case series, and 3 retrospective cohort studies. Eleven articles reported continuation of BOAT, 2 concerned bridging BOAT, and 4 articles described stopping BOAT without planned bridging. In one retrospective cohort study, BOAT was continued in half and interrupted in half of patients. Patients on BOAT may have pain that is more difficult to treat than those who are not on OAT. There is no clear evidence that one particular strategy provides superior postoperative pain control, but interruption of BOAT may result in harm, including failure to return to baseline BOAT doses, continuing non-BOAT opioid use, or relapse of opioid use disorder.
There were a limited number of articles relevant to the study question consisting of case reports and retrospective observational studies. Some omitted relevant details. No prospective studies were found.
There is no clear benefit to bridging or stopping BOAT but failure to restart it may pose concerns for relapse. We recommend continuing BOAT in the perioperative period when possible and incorporating an interdisciplinary approach with multimodal analgesia.
Opioid use disorder, opiate substitution treatment, buprenorphine, buprenorphine-naloxone, buprenorphine opioid agonist therapy, postoperative pain, acute pain, multimodal analgesia.
对接受丁丙诺啡阿片激动剂治疗(BOAT)的患者进行急性疼痛管理具有挑战性。目前尚不清楚 BOAT 是应该继续使用还是中断使用,以优化术后疼痛控制。
确定围手术期接受 BOAT 治疗的患者的疼痛管理循证方法,特别是 BOAT 是否应继续使用或中断使用,以及是否需要用另一种 μ 阿片激动剂桥接,并确定这两种围手术期策略的利弊。
系统文献综述,定性数据综合。
医院,围手术期。
研究方案已在 PROSPERO(注册号:9030276355)上注册。通过 OVID、EMBASE、CINAHL 和 Cochrane 临床试验中心注册库检索前瞻性或回顾性观察性或对照研究、病例系列和病例报告,以描述接受 BOAT 治疗的患者的围手术期或急性疼痛护理。对针对 BOAT 治疗患者的急性疼痛管理的叙述性和系统评价的参考文献以及纳入文章的参考文献进行手工检索,以确定其他纳入的原始文章。对出版物的全文进行审查以最终纳入,并使用标准化数据提取表提取数据。结果以定性方式进行总结。主要结局是术后疼痛强度和总阿片类药物使用以及围手术期策略的获益和危害的确定。
确定了 18 篇关于 BOAT 治疗患者围手术期管理的文献:10 篇病例报告、5 篇病例系列和 3 篇回顾性队列研究。11 篇文章报告了 BOAT 的继续使用,2 篇涉及 BOAT 的桥接,4 篇文章描述了在没有计划桥接的情况下停止 BOAT。在一项回顾性队列研究中,一半患者继续使用 BOAT,一半患者中断使用 BOAT。接受 BOAT 治疗的患者的疼痛可能比未接受 OAT 治疗的患者更难治疗。没有明确的证据表明一种特定的策略可以提供更好的术后疼痛控制,但中断 BOAT 可能会造成伤害,包括无法恢复到基线 BOAT 剂量、继续使用非 BOAT 阿片类药物或阿片类药物使用障碍复发。
与研究问题相关的文章数量有限,包括病例报告和回顾性观察性研究。一些文章遗漏了相关细节。没有发现前瞻性研究。
桥接或停止 BOAT 没有明显的益处,但未能重新开始使用可能会引起复发的担忧。我们建议在围手术期继续使用 BOAT,并采用多模式镇痛的跨学科方法。
阿片类药物使用障碍、阿片类药物替代治疗、丁丙诺啡、丁丙诺啡-纳洛酮、丁丙诺啡阿片激动剂治疗、术后疼痛、急性疼痛、多模式镇痛。