Cannabis use disorder was not linked to worse outcomes after complex cancer surgery

Among 15,014 matched patients undergoing high-risk cancer surgery, cannabis use disorder was not independently associated with higher overall morbidity and mortality.

Munir, Muhammad M et al.·Journal of surgical oncology·2024·Strong EvidenceRetrospective Cohort
RTHC-05576Retrospective CohortStrong Evidence2024RETHINKTHC RESEARCH DATABASErethinkthc.com/research

Quick Facts

Study Type
Retrospective Cohort
Evidence
Strong Evidence
Sample
N=15,014

What This Study Found

After propensity score matching, CUD was associated with slightly higher AKI (7.8% vs 6.1%) but lower in-hospital mortality (0.9% vs 1.6%). On multivariable analysis, CUD was not associated with higher overall morbidity and mortality (aOR 1.06, 95% CI 0.98-1.15, p=0.158).

Key Numbers

15,014 patients. AKI: 7.8% vs 6.1%. Mortality: 0.9% vs 1.6%. Adjusted composite: aOR 1.06 (p=0.158).

How They Did This

Retrospective cohort using National Inpatient Sample (2016-2019). 15,014 patients after 1:1 propensity score matching on comorbidities, demographics, and procedure type.

Why This Research Matters

Cancer patients increasingly use cannabis. The finding that CUD does not independently worsen complex surgical outcomes may reassure patients and surgeons, though the kidney injury signal warrants monitoring.

The Bigger Picture

This is the largest propensity-matched study of CUD and complex cancer surgery. The null overall finding suggests CUD is not the perioperative risk factor some feared.

What This Study Doesn't Tell Us

ICD-10 codes for CUD may undercount use. Cannot distinguish active from historical diagnosis. Cannot assess dose or recency.

Questions This Raises

  • ?What mechanism explains the slightly higher AKI risk?
  • ?Would results differ if active use could be identified?

Trust & Context

Key Stat:
CUD not independently associated with worse morbidity/mortality after complex cancer surgery (aOR 1.06, p=0.158)
Evidence Grade:
Large propensity-matched cohort from national database with appropriate adjustment. Administrative data limitations apply.
Study Age:
2024 publication using 2016-2019 data.
Original Title:
Cannabis use disorder and perioperative outcomes following complex cancer surgery.
Published In:
Journal of surgical oncology, 129(8), 1430-1441 (2024)
Database ID:
RTHC-05576

Evidence Hierarchy

Meta-Analysis / Systematic Review
Randomized Controlled Trial
Cohort / Case-ControlFollows or compares groups over time
This study
Cross-Sectional / Observational
Case Report / Animal Study

Looks back at existing records to find patterns.

What do these levels mean? →

Frequently Asked Questions

Is cancer surgery safe if you use cannabis?

This large study found CUD was not independently linked to worse overall outcomes. Kidney injury was slightly elevated, and disclosure to your team remains important.

Why was mortality lower in the cannabis group?

CUD patients were younger on average. After adjusting for all factors, there was no significant difference in the composite outcome.

Read More on RethinkTHC

Cite This Study

RTHC-05576·https://rethinkthc.com/research/RTHC-05576

APA

Munir, Muhammad M; Woldesenbet, Selamawit; Endo, Yutaka; Dillhoff, Mary; Pawlik, Timothy M. (2024). Cannabis use disorder and perioperative outcomes following complex cancer surgery.. Journal of surgical oncology, 129(8), 1430-1441. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.27644

MLA

Munir, Muhammad M, et al. "Cannabis use disorder and perioperative outcomes following complex cancer surgery.." Journal of surgical oncology, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.27644

RethinkTHC

RethinkTHC Research Database. "Cannabis use disorder and perioperative outcomes following c..." RTHC-05576. Retrieved from https://rethinkthc.com/research/munir-2024-cannabis-use-disorder-and

Access the Original Study

Study data sourced from PubMed, a service of the U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

This study breakdown was produced by the RethinkTHC research team. We analyze and report published research findings without making health recommendations. All interpretations are based solely on the published abstract and study data.