logo
GLP-1 Users Should Fast 24 Hours Before Anesthesia

GLP-1 Users Should Fast 24 Hours Before Anesthesia

Medscape2 days ago

Patients taking the new class of weight-loss drugs do not need to stop these medications prior to procedures requiring anesthesia, but they should adhere to longer preoperative fasting times, according to a new multidisciplinary consensus statement.
The statement, led by the Society for Perioperative Assessment and Quality Improvement, recommends patients without significant gastrointestinal symptoms associated with glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) should fast from solid foods for 24 hours and stick to clear liquids prior to a procedure requiring anesthesia. This extended fasting time can help mitigate aspiration risk in these patients with delayed gastric emptying while retaining the benefits of continuing GLP-1 RAs, such as improved glycemic control.
The statement is 'the first to provide recommendations for perioperative management of patients taking GLP-1 RAs based on an in-depth systematic literature review of both clinical perioperative studies and gastric emptying data,' Adriana Oprea, MD, the first author of the document, and her colleagues wrote.
Changing Guidance
In June 2023, the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) released the first guidance statement regarding preoperative management of patients on GLP-1 RAs, after some case reports documented aspiration events in these patients.
While the number of these events is generally low and rates of aspiration appear to be similar between patients on GLP-1 RAs and the general population, 'people got really worried with these drugs because of [the] delayed gastric emptying,' Oprea, an associate professor of anesthesiology at Yale School of Medicine in New Haven, Connecticut, told Medscape Medical News .
The 2023 ASA guidance recommended holding GLP-1 RAs for one half-life — a week for patients on long-acting medication and a day for short-acting GLP-1s. Due to a lack of adequate evidence at the time, the document suggested these patients should follow the standard ASA fasting guidelines of 8 hours after a full meal.
However, evidence suggests stopping GLP-1s for one half-life is not enough for the effects on gastric emptying to subside, according to the new statement. For longer-acting drugs like dulaglutide, semaglutide, and tirzepatide, patients would need to discontinue these medications for several weeks to restore normal gastrointestinal motility.
For patients with type 2 diabetes, discontinuation of these medications over this period could lead to poor glycemic control, which is linked to worse postoperative outcomes. For patients taking GLP-1 RAs for weight loss, restarting these medications can result in increased gastrointestinal symptoms, Oprea said, such as nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, or constipation.
'Because adverse effects are more prevalent at higher GLP-1 RA doses, discontinuation of these medications might lead to a high likelihood of side effects upon medication reinitiation or require reinitiation of therapy at lower doses followed by dose reescalation,' Oprea's group wrote. 'This is logistically difficult for both patients and treating clinicians.'
In October 2024, the ASA, along with other professional societies, published updated practice guidance stating GLP-1 RAs may be continued preoperatively in patients without an elevated risk for delayed gastric emptying and aspiration. Those defined as 'higher risk' included patients in the escalation phase, on weekly dosing, on higher doses, and with gastrointestinal symptoms.
The guidance advised these patients at higher risk for delayed stomach emptying can help mitigate aspiration risk by following a 24-hour liquid diet.
This updated guidance also received some criticism.
'As of yet, no studies have reported a difference in the incidence of increased residual gastric content that would justify treating patients differently on the basis of dose regimen and/or treatment phase,' wrote Glenio B. Mizubuti, MD, PhD, of the Kingston General Hospital, in Kingston, Ontario, Canada, and his colleagues in a letter to Anesthesiology . 'Similarly, the absence of ongoing digestive symptoms, while somewhat reassuring, should not be taken as a definitive sign of an empty stomach in GLP-1 RA users,' they wrote.
Continue Meds, Extend Fasting Times
This new consensus statement, published last month in the British Journal of Anaesthesia , recommends patients doing well on GLP-1 RAs should continue these medications preoperatively and follow a clear liquid diet for 24 hours before procedures requiring anesthesia.
The recommendations were based on a systematic review of 112 studies and a modified Delphi process and were co-sponsored and endorsed by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinology.
'From our review of the literature, we feel that the fasting times are the most important factor that could decrease the risk of having residual gastric content in the stomach in a patient on GLP-1 RAs when they're scheduled to have a procedure that requires anesthesia,' Oprea said.
The consensus also recommends patients on GLP-1s fast from high-carbohydrate-content clear liquids (containing 10% or more glucose) for 8 hours before and stop drinking any liquids four hours before these procedures. Inpatient and outpatients can restart GLP-1 RAs when they resume their original diets.
Patients with significant gastrointestinal symptoms including severe nausea, vomiting, and inability to tolerate oral intake should postpone elective procedures that require anesthesia and refer to their prescribing physician for diet and medication modifications to manage symptoms, the authors advised.
'Our recommendation for a clear liquid diet for 24 hours preprocedurally might appear overly restrictive. However, evidence points to the safety of this approach in patients on GLP-1 RAs,' they wrote.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Stocks Hit Highest Since February on Jobs Surprise
Stocks Hit Highest Since February on Jobs Surprise

Bloomberg

time33 minutes ago

  • Bloomberg

Stocks Hit Highest Since February on Jobs Surprise

Bloomberg Television brings you the latest news and analysis leading up to the final minutes and seconds before and after the closing bell on Wall Street. Today's guests are Bloomberg Television brings you the latest news and analysis leading up to the final minutes and seconds before and after the closing bell on Wall Street. Today's guests are Katie Nixon, Northern Trust, Betsey Stevenson, University of Michigan, Dan Dolev, Mizuho, Rashad Bilal & Troy Millings, Earn Your Leisure, Matthew Griffin, Bloomberg News, Barry Bannister, Stifel, Jess Menton, Bloomberg News, Ed Ludlow, Bloomberg News, Stacy Rasgon, Bernstein Research, Frances Katzen, Douglas Elliman, Brett Winton, Ark Invest, Tony Zaccario, Stretch Zone, Nicole Camarre, 43North. (Source: Bloomberg)

Historic House v. NCAA settlement gets final approval, allowing schools to pay college athletes
Historic House v. NCAA settlement gets final approval, allowing schools to pay college athletes

New York Times

time42 minutes ago

  • New York Times

Historic House v. NCAA settlement gets final approval, allowing schools to pay college athletes

By Ralph D. Russo, Stewart Mandel and Justin Williams A federal judge Friday granted final approval of the House v. NCAA settlement, a watershed agreement in college sports that permits schools to directly pay college athletes for the first time. The settlement, which resolves a trio of antitrust cases against the NCAA and its most powerful conferences, establishes a new 10-year revenue sharing model in college sports, with athletic departments able to distribute roughly $20.5 million in name, image and likeness (NIL) revenue to athletes over the 2025-26 season. Previously, athletes could earn NIL compensation only with outside parties, including school-affiliated donor collectives that have become instrumental in teams' recruiting. Advertisement The NCAA and the power conferences (ACC, Big 12, Big Ten, Pac-12 and SEC), as defendants in the settlement, also agree to pay nearly $2.8 billion in damages to Division I athletes who were not allowed to sign NIL deals, dating back to 2016. The damages will be paid out over 10 years, with most of the money expected to go to former power-conference football and men's basketball players. Universities can begin directly sharing revenue with college athletes starting July 1. Judge Claudia Wilken of the Northern District of California, who previously ruled against the NCAA in the O'Bannon and Alston cases, granted approval roughly a year after parties agreed to settlement terms and nearly two months after a final approval hearing on April 7, where Wilken heard testimony from more than a dozen objectors. Lawyers for both the plaintiffs and defendants noted that the number of objections and opt-outs in the settlement represent a tiny fraction of the nearly 400,000 athletes in the certified class. However, some of those objectors delayed approval, largely citing the settlement's new roster limits. These limits, which replace sport-by-sport scholarship limits, cap the maximum roster size per team while allowing for every roster spot to receive a scholarship. Schools can offer scholarship funds — partial or full — as they see fit, which creates more potential opportunities. But as schools preemptively prepared to comply with those new limits, they removed roster spots for thousands of walk-ons, particularly in football, and partial scholarship athletes in non-revenue sports. In late April, Wilken offered an ultimatum, instructing the settlement parties to revise the terms in a way that mitigated any lost roster spots as a result of schools preparing for the new roster limits, or she would deny the whole agreement. Settlement lawyers responded with an amendment that allows for voluntary 'grandfathering' of any athletes who lost roster spots as a result of the roster limits, a status that will follow those athletes through the remainder of their eligibility, whether they return to their original school or transfer elsewhere. Advertisement The initial House v. NCAA case — brought by plaintiffs Grant House, a former Arizona State swimmer, and Sedona Prince, then an Oregon women's basketball player — was filed in June 2020. It challenged NCAA policy at the time that prohibited athletes from being compensated for the commercial use of their NIL rights or from sharing in the revenue generated from NCAA and conference television contracts. The case was later consolidated with two similar suits, Carter v. NCAA and Hubbard v. NCAA. The cases had not gone to trial. The NCAA and Power 5 conferences, fearful a verdict might result in much higher damages, agreed to a settlement in May 2024. Wilken granted preliminary approval in October 2024. The NCAA's traditional amateurism model, in which athletes could not receive any compensation beyond a scholarship, began to crumble in 2014 when Wilken ruled against the NCAA in a suit brought by former UCLA star Ed O'Bannon, who objected to his image being used in an EA Sports video game without his permission. Wilken ruled for the plaintiffs, but after an appeals court struck part of her decision, the only tangible effect was that schools began offering cost-of-attendance stipends. The next major case, Alston v. NCAA, made it to the Supreme Court, where the justices ruled 9-0 against the NCAA. Often mischaracterized as a case about NIL, Alston's main impact was that it allowed schools to provide athletes $5,980 a year in academic expenses. However, the lopsided decision left the NCAA vulnerable to additional legal challenges regarding rules that limited compensation, and it was delivered on June 21, 2021, nine days before numerous state laws allowing NIL payments were set to go into effect. The NCAA quickly scrapped most of its intended restrictions on NIL. In the years since, many athletes have entered into deals with local companies and struck lucrative endorsement deals with national brands like Gatorade and New Balance, as intended. But a far more common practice involves boosters using purported NIL deals to lure recruits or players from the transfer portal to their favorite school. The NCAA's enforcement division initially sought to punish schools that used NIL as a form of 'pay for play' or recruiting inducement, but when the University of Tennessee came under fire in early 2024, the state's attorney general sued, and a judge issued an injunction prohibiting the NCAA from enforcing those rules. Advertisement The amount of money being spent in the NIL arena has skyrocketed since 2021. Last year, Ohio State athletic director Ross Bjork said the Buckeyes football team — which later won the national championship — was earning $20 million in NIL. CBS Sports recently reported that a number of men's basketball rosters have already topped $10 million for next season. To this point, collectives supporting specific schools have ruled the market, but administrators are hoping the House settlement will curtail that influence. In addition to schools being allowed to make NIL deals themselves, the new model also requires all outside NIL deals of more than $600 to go through a clearinghouse that will determine whether the payments are for a valid business purpose and reflect fair market value. Meanwhile, the settlement establishes an enforcement arm that will penalize schools that go over the $20.5 million cap. All of this will be overseen by the newly established regulatory body, called the College Sports Commission, which is in the process of shifting considerable oversight and control of college sports away from the NCAA and to the power conferences. The NCAA's Division I Board of Directors recently approved a series of proposals, pending settlement approval, that will strike 153 rules from the association's handbook and clear the way for the settlement terms to be implemented. The settlement represents a significant shift in college sports, but it will not mark the end of the NCAA's legal challenges. Among numerous ongoing cases, Johnson v. NCAA was filed in 2019 in Pennsylvania and seeks to have athletes classified as employees who are entitled to minimum wage compensation. The NCAA's efforts to dismiss the case have thus far been denied. Revenue sharing and third-party NIL constraints could also invite additional lawsuits on the basis of Title IX, antitrust violations and conflicts with state laws. NCAA and power conference stakeholders continue to pursue antitrust exemptions in the form of Congressional intervention, in hopes of codifying the settlement and its effectiveness moving forward. President Donald Trump has explored a new commission focused on the issues facing college sports, led by former Alabama head coach Nick Saban and billionaire Texas Tech board chair Cody Campbell, though it is paused as members of Congress pursue legislation.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store