IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0288988.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of oral versus intravenous methadone on postoperative pain and opioid use after adult spinal deformity surgery: A retrospective, non-inferiority analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Kamilla Esfahani
  • William Tennant
  • Siny Tsang
  • Bhiken I Naik
  • Lauren K Dunn

Abstract

Objective: To compare efficacy of oral versus intravenous (IV) methadone on postoperative pain and opioid requirements after spine surgery. Methods: This was a retrospective, single-academic center cohort study evaluating 1010 patients who underwent >3 level spine surgery from January 2017 to May 2020 and received a one-time dose of oral or intravenous methadone prior to surgery. The primary outcome measured was postoperative opioid use in oral morphine equivalents (ME) and verbal response scale (VRS) pain scores up to postoperative day (POD) three. Secondary outcomes were time to first bowel movement and adverse effects (reintubation, myocardial infarction, and QTc prolongation) up to POD 3. Results: A total of 687 patients received oral and 317 received IV methadone, six patients were excluded. The IV group received a significantly greater methadone morphine equivalent (ME) dose preoperatively (112.4 ± 83.0 mg ME versus 59.3 ± 60.9 mg ME, p

Suggested Citation

  • Kamilla Esfahani & William Tennant & Siny Tsang & Bhiken I Naik & Lauren K Dunn, 2023. "Comparison of oral versus intravenous methadone on postoperative pain and opioid use after adult spinal deformity surgery: A retrospective, non-inferiority analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(7), pages 1-12, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0288988
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288988
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0288988
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0288988&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0288988?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0288988. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.