The United States is in the midst of a devastating opioid misuse epidemic leading to over 33,000 deaths per year from both prescription and illegal opioids. Roughly half of these deaths are attributable to prescription opioids. Federal and state governments have only recently begun to grasp the magnitude of this public health crisis. In 2016, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released their Guidelines for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain. While not comprehensive in scope, these guidelines attempt to control and regulate opioid prescribing. Other federal agencies involved with the federal regulatory effort include the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), and the Department of Justice. Each federal agency has a unique role in helping to stem the burgeoning opioid misuse epidemic. The DEA, working with the Department of Justice, has enforcement power to prosecute pill mills and physicians for illegal prescribing. The DEA could also implement use of prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs), currently administered at the state level, and use of electronic prescribing for schedule II and III medications. The FDA has authority to approve new and safer formulations of immediate- and long-acting opioid medications. More importantly, the FDA can also ask pharmaceutical companies to cease manufacturing a drug. Additionally, state agencies play a critical role in reducing overdose deaths, protecting the public safety, and promoting the medically appropriate treatment of pain. One of the states' primary roles is the regulation of practice of medicine and the insurance industry within their borders. Utilizing this authority, states can both educate physicians about the dangers of opioids and make physician licensure dependent on registering and using PDMPs when prescribing controlled substances. Almost every state has implemented a PDMP to some degree; however, in addition to mandating their use, increased interstate sharing of prescription information would greatly improve PDMPs' effectiveness. Further, states have the flexibility to promote innovative interventions to reduce harm such as legislation allowing naloxone access without a prescription. While relatively new, these types of laws have allowed first responders, patients, and families access to a lifesaving drug. Finally, states are at the forefront of litigation against pharmaceutical manufacturers. This approach is described as analogous to the initial steps in fighting tobacco companies. In addition to fighting for dollars to support drug treatment programs and education efforts, states are pursuing these lawsuits as a means of holding pharmaceutical companies accountable for misleading marketing of a dangerous product.
ImportanceRhabdomyolysis is a known, but rare, complication of general anesthesia. To the authors’ knowledge, it has never before been reported following an ocular surgery, and we could find no similar cases in the surgical literature following any brief surgical procedure. We believe this case to be unique in those regards and aim to raise awareness among ophthalmologists of this postoperative complication, as timely intervention can prevent renal failure and death.ObservationsWe report the case of a 58-year-old male who developed rhabdomyolysis following vitrectomy for retinal detachment repair under general anesthesia. The patient had several risk factors for this complication including morbid obesity, type II diabetes mellitus, and American Society of Anesthesia class III risk profile. His postoperative course was notable for significant myalgias in the postoperative recovery area, followed several hours later by oliguria, “root beer” colored urine, and a markedly elevated creatinine kinase level. He was hospitalized for two days for intravenous hydration and monitoring of his renal function and has fully recovered.RelevanceAs the prevalence of obesity and type II diabetes mellitus increase worldwide, ophthalmologists need to be aware of the signs and symptoms of postoperative rhabdomyolysis. Treatment often requires inpatient hospitalization to prevent the associated morbidity and mortality.
Background: Endotracheal tube (ETT) designs to decrease the risk of ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP) include supraglottic suctioning, and/or modifications of the cuff shape. The TaperGuard™ ETT has a tapered, polyvinylchloride cuff designed to reduce microaspiration around channels that form with a standard barrel-shaped cuff. We compared risk of postoperative pneumonia using the TaperGuard™ ETT and the standard ETT in surgical patients requiring general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation. Methods: We used an interrupted time-series design to compare endotracheal intubation using the TaperGuard™ ETT (intervention cohort), and a historic cohort using the standard ETT (baseline cohort), among surgical patients requiring hospital admission. We compared the incidence of postoperative pneumonia in the intervention and baseline cohorts. Data were collected from the electronic health record and linked to patient-level data from National Surgical Quality Improvement Project. Additionally, we performed secondary analyses in a subgroup of patients at high risk of postoperative pneumonia. Results: 15,388 subjects were included; 6351 in the intervention cohort and 9037 in the baseline cohort. There was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative pneumonia between the intervention cohort (1.62%) and the baseline cohort (1.79%). The unadjusted odds ratio (OR) of postoperative pneumonia was 0.90 (95% CI: 0.70, 1.16; p = 0.423) and the OR adjusted for patient characteristics and potential confounders was 0.90 (95% CI: 0.69, 1.19; p = 0.469), comparing the intervention and baseline cohorts. There was no a priori selected subgroup of patients for whom the use of the TaperGuard™ ETT was associated with decreased odds of postoperative pneumonia relative to the standard ETT. Hospital mortality was higher in the intervention cohort (1.5%) compared with the baseline cohort (1.0%; OR 1.46, 95% CI: 1.09, 1.95; p = 0.010).
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.