Intrathecal morphine provides better postoperative analgesia than psoas compartment block after primary hip arthroplasty

Procedure-specific acute pain trajectory after elective total hip arthroplasty: systematic review and data synthesis

BACKGROUND

For most procedures, there is insufficient evidence to guide clinicians in the optimal timing of advanced analgesic methods, which should be based on the expected time course of acute postoperative pain severity and aimed at time points where basic analgesia has proven insufficient.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of the literature of analgesic trials for total hip arthroplasty (THA), extracting and pooling pain scores across studies, weighted for study size. Patients were grouped according to basic anaesthetic method used (general, spinal), and adjuvant analgesic interventions such as nerve blocks, local infiltration analgesia, and multimodal analgesia. Special consideration was given to high-risk populations such as chronic pain or opioid-dependent patients.

RESULTS

We identified and analysed 71 trials with 5973 patients and constructed pain trajectories from the available pain scores. In most patients undergoing THA under general anaesthesia on a basic analgesic regimen, postoperative acute pain recedes to a mild level (<4/10) by 4 h after surgery. We note substantial variability in pain intensity even in patients subjected to similar analgesic regimens. Chronic pain or opioid-dependent patients were most often actively excluded from studies, and never analysed separately.

CONCLUSIONS

We have demonstrated that it is feasible to construct procedure-specific pain curves to guide clinicians on the timing of advanced analgesic measures. Acute intense postoperative pain after THA should have resolved by 4-6 h after surgery in most patients. However, there is a substantial gap in knowledge on the management of patients with chronic pain and opioid-dependent patients.

Intrathecal Morphine Is Associated with Less Delirium Following Hip Fracture Surgery: A Register Study

Background

Delirium is a common complication after proximal femoral fracture surgery, with pain and opioid consumption as the contributing factors. The administration of intrathecal morphine may decrease these factors postoperatively and potentially reduce delirium.

Objectives

This research aimed to study the association between the use of intrathecal morphine and the occurrence of delirium.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of a prospective register kept in a non-academic hospital in the Netherlands was performed. The register contained data of all patients with proximal femur fractures that were surgically treated with osteosynthesis or prosthesis. Patients receiving spinal anesthesia (SA group) were compared with patients receiving spinal anesthesia with the addition of intrathecal morphine (SIM group). The administration of either SA or SIM was based on the preference of the anesthesiologist. The primary outcome was the incidence of delirium, as defined by the DSM-V classification. The follow-up lasted until hospital discharge. Both univariate and multivariate analyses were performed.

Results

The SA group consisted of 451 patients, and the SIM group included 34 patients. Delirium occurred in 19.7% in the SA group versus 5.9% in the SIM group (P = 0.046). This association remained significant after correction in multivariate analysis (OR of delirium in the SA group, 95% CI: 1.062 - 21.006, P = 0.041). Additionally, multivariate analysis revealed that age, gender, preoperative cognitive impairment, and fracture treatment (osteosynthesis or prosthesis) were independently associated with delirium.

Conclusions

This retrospective study found an independent association between the use of intrathecal morphine and a lower incidence of delirium. This clinically relevant decrease in delirium should be studied in a prospective randomized study.

[Incidence of epidural spread after Chayen's approach to lumbar plexus block: a retrospective study]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The lumbar plexus block (LPB) is a key technique for lower limb surgery. All approaches to the LPB involve a number of complications. We hypothesized that Chayen's approach, which involves a more caudal and more lateral needle entry point than the major techniques described in the literature, would be associated with a lower rate of epidural spread.

METHOD

We reviewed the electronic medical records and chart of all adult patients who underwent orthopedic surgery for total hip arthroplasty (THA) and hip hemiarthroplasty due to osteoarthritis and femoral neck fracture with LPB and sciatic nerve block (SNB) between January 1, 2002, and December 31, 2017, in our institute. The LPB was performed according to Chayen's technique using a mixture of mepivacaine and levobupivacaine (total volume, 25 mL) and a SNB by the parasacral approach. The sensory and motor block was evaluated bilaterally during intraoperative and postoperative period.

RESULTS

A total number of 700 patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I to IV who underwent LPB met the inclusion criteria. The LPB and SNB was successfully performed in all patients. Epidural spread was reported in a single patient (0.14%; p <0.05), accounting for an 8.30% reduction compared with the other approaches described in the literature. No other complications were recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

This retrospective study indicates that more caudal and more lateral approach to the LPB, such as the Chayen's approach, is characterized by a lower epidural spread than the other approach to the LPB.

Incidence of epidural spread after Chayen’s approach to lumbar plexus block: a retrospective study

Background and objectives

The lumbar plexus block (LPB) is a key technique for lower limb surgery. All approaches to the LPB involve a number of complications. We hypothesized that Chayen's approach, which involves a more caudal and more lateral needle entry point than the major techniques described in the literature, would be associated with a lower rate of epidural spread.

Method

We reviewed the electronic medical records and chart of all adult patients who underwent orthopedic surgery for Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) and hip hemiarthroplasty due to osteoarthritis and femoral neck fracture with LPB and Sciatic Nerve Block (SNB) between January 1, 2002, and December 31, 2017, in our institute. The LPB was performed according to Chayen’s technique using a mixture of mepivacaine and levobupivacaine (total volume, 25 mL) and a SNB by the parasacral approach. The sensory and motor block was evaluated bilaterally during intraoperative and postoperative period.

Results

A total number of 700 patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I to IV who underwent LPB met the inclusion criteria. The LPB and SNB was successfully performed in all patients. Epidural spread was reported in a single patient (0.14%;p < 0.05), accounting for an 8.30% reduction compared with the other approaches described in the literature. No other complications were recorded.

Conclusions

This retrospective study indicates that more caudal and more lateral approach to the LPB, such as the Chayen’s approach, is characterized by a lower epidural spread than the other approach to the LPB.

Postoperative pain control after the use of dexmedetomidine and propofol to sedate patients undergoing ankle surgery under spinal anesthesia: a randomized controlled trial

Background: Dexmedetomidine is widely used for conscious sedation in patients undergoing lower-extremity surgery under regional anesthesia. We evaluated the postoperative analgesic effects of intravenous dexmedetomidine given during ankle surgery under spinal anesthesia.

Methods: Forty-three participants underwent repair of lateral angle ligaments under spinal anesthesia. For sedation during surgery, participants were allocated to a dexmedetomidine group (n=22) that received a loading dose of 1 mcg.kg⁻¹ over 10 min, followed by a maintenance dose of 0.2–0.7 μg.kg⁻¹.h⁻¹; and a propofol group (n=21) that received an effective site concentration of 0.5–2.0 μg.mL⁻¹ via target-controlled infusion. The primary outcome was the postoperative, cumulative, intravenous (IV) morphine equivalent dose delivered via IV patient-controlled anesthesia (PCA) and rescue analgesic consumption in the first 24 h after surgery. We recorded sensory and motor block durations.

Results: The postoperative IV morphine equivalent dose was 14.5 mg (0.75–31.75 mg) in the dexmedetomidine group compared to 48.0 mg (31.5–92.5 mg) in the propofol group (median difference, 33.2 mg; 95% confidence interval, 21.0–54.8 mg; P<0.001). The time to the first complaint of surgical site pain was significantly prolonged in the dexmedetomidine group (P<0.001), but the duration of motor block was comparable between the two groups (P=0.55).

Conclusion: IV dexmedetomidine given as a sedative during ankle surgery under spinal anesthesia reduced postoperative opioid consumption in the first 24 h. Thus, intraoperative dexmedetomidine is a versatile sedative adjunct.

Level of evidence: Level I, prospective randomized trial.

Comparing the efficacy of pain managements after total hip arthroplasty: A network meta-analysis

The aim of our current study is to compare efficiency of various interventions implemented for pain management after total hip arthroplasty (THA). PubMed and EMBASE were searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) reporting the pain scales for evaluate the efficacy of pain control after THA including at least one pair of direct control groups. Pain scale values and the associated 95% credible interval (CrI) were used to describe efficacy. Surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) of each means of pain control was calculated to compare the relative ranking of different interventions. Thirty-five eligible literatures were involved in data analysis. The interventions for postoperative pain management we examined were psoas compartment block (PCB), posterior nerve block (PNB), fascia iliaca block (FIB), periarticular injection (PAI), femoral nerve block (FNB), lumbar plexus block (LPB), spinal anesthesia (SA), epidural analgesia (EPI), intrathecal morphine (IA), intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA), patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), onsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID), local infiltration analgaesia (LIA), and reverse LIA (rLIA). In 0 to 6 hours analysis, patients under SA were found to have significantly lower pain score and SA was ranked the best. In 6 to 12 hours analysis, SA was found to be significantly more effective than other interventions and its SUCRA was the highest. No intervention showed a significant effect on reducing pain score for 12 to 24 hours and 24 to 48 hours after THA. SA is the best intervention to reduce THA postoperative pain in the first 24 hours. LPB is a better choice to reduce pain 12 to 48 hours after THA.

Lower extremity regional anesthesia: essentials of our current understanding

The advent of ultrasound guidance has led to a renewed interest in regional anesthesia of the lower limb. In keeping with the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine's ongoing commitment to provide intensive evidence-based education, this article presents a complete update of the 2005 comprehensive review on lower extremity peripheral nerve blocks. The current review article strives to (1) summarize the pertinent anatomy of the lumbar and sacral plexuses, (2) discuss the optimal approaches and techniques for lower limb regional anesthesia, (3) present evidence to guide the selection of pharmacological agents and adjuvants, (4) describe potential complications associated with lower extremity nerve blocks, and (5) identify informational gaps pertaining to outcomes, which warrant further investigation.

Local Infiltration Analgesia Compared With Epidural and Intravenous PCA After Surgical Hip Dislocation for the Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement in Adolescents

BACKGROUND

Open treatment of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) through a surgical hip dislocation (SHD) approach has been reported to allow for improvement in pain and function. However, the approach require a trochanteric osteotomy and may be associated with high level of pain after surgery. Currently, there is no systematic approach for pain management after SHD for treatment of FAI.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was used to collect data from 121 subjects (12 to 21 y and below) who received periarticular local infiltration analgesia (LIA, n=20), epidural analgesia (n=72), or intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA, n=29) after SHD from January 2003 to June 2014. Verbal pain scores, opioid consumption, incidence of side effects/complications, and length of hospital stay (LOS) were recorded. All nonopioid medications with analgesic potential were included in the statistical models as potential confounding variables RESULTS:: Twelve hours after surgery, the odds of moderate/severe pain were higher in the PCA group (odds ratio, 20.5; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.7-243.8; P=0.0166] and epidural group (odds ratio, 5.2; 95% CI, 0.7-92.0; P=0.3218) compared with the LIA group. There was no difference in pain scores across all groups 1 hour (P=0.0675) or 24 hours (P=0.3473) postoperatively. Total opioid consumption in the LIA group was 59.8% (95% CI, 15.0%-81.0%; P=0.0175) lower than the total opioid consumption in the epidural group and 60.7% (95% CI, 17.3-81.3; P=0.0144) lower than the total opioid consumption in the PCA group. LOS was increased in the epidural (mean difference, 22.1; 95% CI, 6.8-37.4 h; P=0.0051) and PCA (mean difference, 16 h; 95% CI, 1-31.5 h; P=0.0367) groups relative to the LIA group. There was 0 (0%) complication in the LIA group compared with 11 (15.3%) in the epidural group.

CONCLUSIONS

LIA was more effective at controlling pain 12 hours after surgery in comparison with PCA with similar pain control to epidural. LIA was associated with significantly lower need for opioids and shorter LOS compared with the PCA and epidural protocols. Periarticular infiltration should be considered for pain management after SHD for treatment of FAI in adolescents.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III-retrospective comparative study.

Nerve blocks or no nerve blocks for pain control after elective hip replacement (arthroplasty) surgery in adults

BACKGROUND

It is estimated that over 300,000 total hip replacements are performed each year in the USA. For European countries, the number of hip replacement procedures per 100,000 people performed in 2007 varied from less than 50 to over 250. To facilitate postoperative rehabilitation, pain must be adequately treated. Peripheral nerve blocks and neuraxial blocks have been proposed to replace or supplement systemic analgesia.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to compare the relative effects (benefits and harms) of the different nerve blocks that may be used to relieve pain after elective hip replacement in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, Issue 12, 2016), MEDLINE (Ovid SP) (1946 to December Week 49, 2016), Embase (Ovid SP) (1980 to December week 49, 2016), CINAHL (EBSCO host) (1982 to 6 December 2016), ISI Web of Science (1973 to 6 December 2016), Scopus (from inception to December 2016), trials registers, and relevant web sites.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) performed in adults undergoing elective primary hip replacement and comparing peripheral nerve blocks to any other pain treatment modality. We applied no language or publication status restrictions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted independently by two review authors. We contacted study authors.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 51 RCTs with 2793 participants; of these 45 RCTs (2491 participants: peripheral nerve block = 1288; comparators = 1203) were included in meta-analyses. There are 11 ongoing studies and three awaiting classification.Compared to systemic analgesia alone, peripheral nerve blocks reduced: pain at rest on arrival in the postoperative care unit (SMD -1.12, 95% CI -1.67 to -0.56; 9 trials, 429 participants; equivalent to 3.2 on 0 to 10 scale; moderate-quality evidence); risk of acute confusional status: risk ratio (RR) 0.10 95% CI 0.02 to 0.54; 1 trial, 225 participants; number needed to treat for additional benefit (NNTB) 12, 95% CI 11 to 22; very low-quality evidence); pruritus (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.70; 2 trials, 259 participants for continuous peripheral nerve blocks; NNTB 4 (95% CI 4 to 8); very low-quality evidence); hospital length of stay (SMD -0.75, 95% CI -1.02 to -0.48; very low-quality evidence; 2 trials, 249 participants; equivalent to 0.75 day). Participant satisfaction increased (SMD 0.67, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.89; low-quality evidence; 5 trials, 363 participants; equivalent to 2.4 on 0 to 10 scale). We did not find a difference for the number of participants walking on postoperative day one (very low-quality evidence). Two nerve block-related complications were reported: one local haematoma and one delayed persistent paresis.Compared to neuraxial blocks, peripheral nerve blocks reduced the risk of pruritus (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.58; 6 trials, 299 participants; moderate-quality evidence; NNTB 6 (95% CI 5 to 9). We did not find a difference for pain at rest on arrival in the postoperative care unit (moderate-quality evidence); number of nerve block-related complications (low-quality evidence); acute confusional status (very low-quality evidence); hospital length of stay (low quality-evidence); time to first walk (low-quality evidence); or participant satisfaction (high-quality evidence).We found that peripheral nerve blocks provide better pain control compared to systemic analgesia with no major differences between peripheral nerve blocks and neuraxial blocks. We also found that peripheral nerve blocks may be associated with reduced risk of postoperative acute confusional state and a modest reduction in hospital length of stay that could be meaningful in terms of cost reduction considering the increasing numbers of procedures performed annually.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to systemic analgesia alone, there is moderate-quality evidence that peripheral nerve blocks reduce postoperative pain, low-quality evidence that patient satisfaction is increased and very low-quality evidence for reductions in acute confusional status, pruritus and hospital length of stay .We found moderate-quality evidence that peripheral nerve blocks reduce pruritus compared with neuraxial blocks.The 11 ongoing studies, once completed, and the three studies awaiting classification may alter the conclusions of the review once assessed.

Is Local Infiltration Analgesia Superior to Peripheral Nerve Blockade for Pain Management After THA: A Network Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Local infiltration analgesia and peripheral nerve blocks are common methods for pain management in patients after THA but direct head-to-head, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have not been performed. A network meta-analysis allows indirect comparison of individual treatments relative to a common comparator; in this case placebo (or no intervention), epidural analgesia, and intrathecal morphine, yielding an estimate of comparative efficacy.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We asked, when compared with a placebo, (1) does use of local infiltration analgesia reduce patient pain scores and opioid consumption, (2) does use of peripheral nerve blocks reduce patient pain scores and opioid consumption, and (3) is local infiltration analgesia favored over peripheral nerve blocks for postoperative pain management after THA?

METHODS

We searched six databases, from inception through June 30, 2014, to identify RCTs comparing local infiltration analgesia or peripheral nerve block use in patients after THA. A total of 35 RCTs at low risk of bias based on the recommended Cochrane Collaboration risk assessment tool were included in the network meta-analysis (2296 patients). Primary outcomes for this review were patient pain scores at rest and cumulative opioid consumption, both assessed at 24 hours after THA. Because of substantial heterogeneity (variation of outcomes between studies) across included trials, a random effect model for meta-analysis was used to estimate the weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% CI. The gray literature was searched with the same inclusion criteria as published trials. Only one unpublished trial (published abstract) fulfilled our criteria and was included in this review. All other studies included in this systematic review were full published articles. Bayesian network meta-analysis included all RCTs that compared local infiltration analgesia or peripheral nerve blocks with placebo (or no intervention), epidural analgesia, and intrathecal morphine.

RESULTS

Compared with placebo, local infiltration analgesia reduced patient pain scores (WMD, -0.61; 95% CI, -0.97 to -0.24; p = 0.001) and opioid consumption (WMD, -7.16 mg; 95% CI, -11.98 to -2.35; p = 0.004). Peripheral nerve blocks did not result in lower pain scores or reduced opioid consumption compared with placebo (WMD, -0.43; 95% CI, -0.99 to 0.12; p = 0.12 and WMD, -3.14 mg, 95% CI, -11.30 to 5.02; p = 0.45). However, network meta-analysis comparing local infiltration analgesia with peripheral nerve blocks through common comparators showed no differences between postoperative pain scores (WMD, -0.36; 95% CI, -1.06 to 0.31) and opioid consumption (WMD, -4.59 mg; 95% CI, -9.35 to 0.17), although rank-order analysis found local infiltration analgesia to be ranked first in more simulations than peripheral nerve blocks, suggesting that it may be more effective.

CONCLUSIONS

Using the novel statistical network meta-analysis approach, we found no differences between local infiltration analgesia and peripheral nerve blocks in terms of analgesia or opioid consumption 24 hours after THA; there was a suggestion of a slight advantage to peripheral nerve blocks based on rank-order analysis, but the effect size in question is likely not large. Given the slight difference between interventions, clinicians may choose to focus on other factors such as cost and intervention-related complications when debating which analgesic treatment to use after THA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, therapeutic study.

Regional analgesia for improvement of long-term functional outcome after elective large joint replacement

BACKGROUND

Regional analgesia is more effective than conventional analgesia for controlling pain and may facilitate rehabilitation after large joint replacement in the short term. It remains unclear if regional anaesthesia improves functional outcomes after joint replacement beyond three months after surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of regional anaesthesia and analgesia on long-term functional outcomes 3, 6 and 12 months after elective major joint (knee, shoulder and hip) replacement surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed an electronic search of several databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL), and handsearched reference lists and conference abstracts. We updated our search in June 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing regional analgesia versus conventional analgesia in patients undergoing total shoulder, hip or knee replacement. We included studies that reported a functional outcome with a follow-up of at least three months after surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We contacted study authors for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six studies with 350 participants followed for at least three months. All of these studies enrolled participants undergoing total knee replacement. Studies were at least partially blinded. Three studies had a high risk of performance bias and one a high risk of attrition bias, but the risk of bias was otherwise unclear or low.Only one study assessed joint function using a global score. Due to heterogeneity in outcome and reporting, we could only pool three out of six RCTs, with range of motion assessed at three months after surgery used as a surrogate for joint function. All studies had a high risk of detection bias. Using the random-effects model, there was no statistically significant difference between the experimental and control groups (mean difference 3.99 degrees, 95% confidence interval (CI) - 2.23 to 10.21; P value = 0.21, 3 studies, 140 participants, very low quality evidence).We did not perform further analyses because immediate adverse effects were not part of the explicit outcomes of any of these typically small studies, and long-term adverse events after regional anaesthesia are rare.None of the included studies elicited or reported long-term adverse effects like persistent nerve damage.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

More high-quality studies are needed to establish the effects of regional analgesia on function after major joint replacement, as well as on the risk of adverse events (falls).

Spinal Anaesthesia with Adjunctive Intrathecal Morphine versus Continuous Lumbar Plexus Blockade: A Randomised Comparison for Analgesia after Hip Replacement

Following elective total hip replacement, both continuous lumbar plexus blockade and spinal anaesthesia (with adjunctive intrathecal morphine) have shown early outcome benefits over opioid analgesia and single-injection nerve block. However, the two techniques have not been compared in a prospective randomised manner. Our study examined 50 patients undergoing elective hip joint replacement who were randomised to receive spinal anaesthesia (with adjunctive intrathecal morphine 0.1 mg) or patient-controlled continuous lumbar plexus blockade. All surgery was conducted under general anaesthesia. Measured outcomes included numerically rated postoperative pain, supplemental opioid consumption and indices of mobilisation together with complications. Results show that block placement time was marginally shorter for the spinal group (5 versus 7 minutes, P=0.01). The primary outcome, worst pain on movement/mobilisation during the first 24 hours, was not statistically significantly different between groups. Patients in the lumbar plexus group were given more intraoperative opioid and rescue morphine in the post-anaesthesia care unit (median = 4 versus 0 mg, P <0.001), with correspondingly higher pain scores (median 5/10 versus 0/10, P <0.001). Pain scores during the subsequent 24 hours were similar between groups, but more patients in the spinal group were given rescue morphine (5 versus 0, P=0.02). Physiotherapy mobilisation indices appeared similar between groups. More spinal group patients reported pruritus (12 versus 5, P=0.01), but antiemetic requirements, episodes of disorientation, arterial oxygen desaturation and falls were all similar between groups. Postoperative symptoms suggestive of neurological irritation or injury did not differ between groups. We found that following elective hip joint replacement, compared to continuous lumbar plexus blockade, spinal anaesthesia incorporating adjunctive intrathecal morphine did not result in a statistically significant difference in worst pain on movement/mobilisation during the first 24 hours, although it was associated with better analgesia in the post-anaesthesia care unit. Subsequently, however, these patients appeared to require more rescue morphine and more of them reported pruritus.

The incidence of postoperative urinary retention in patients undergoing elective hip and knee arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION

Postoperative urinary retention requiring urethral catheterisation increases the risk of joint sepsis following arthroplasty. Spinal anaesthesia with opiate administration is used widely in lower limb arthroplasty. We sought to establish whether the choice of opiate agent had any effect on the incidence of postoperative retention and therefore the risk of joint sepsis.

METHODS

A total of 445 consecutive patients who underwent primary elective lower limb arthroplasty were reviewed retrospectively. Patients had general anaesthesia and femoral nerve block (GA+FNB), spinal anaesthesia and intrathecal fentanyl (SA+ITF) or spinal anaesthesia and intrathecal morphine (SA+ITM).

RESULTS

Urinary retention was observed in 14% of male and 2% of female patients with GA+FNB, 9% of male and 3% of female patients with SA+ITF, and 60% of male (p=0.0005) and 5% of female patients with SA+ITM. Men who experienced retention were older (68 vs 64 years, p=0.013) and had longer inpatient stays (6.7 vs 4.6 days, p=0.043). Fewer patients in the SA+ITM group required breakthrough analgesia (28% vs 58%, p=0.004). Concusions: The use of ITM in men significantly increases the incidence of urinary retention requiring urethral catheterisation and subsequently increases the risk of deep joint sepsis. Its use should be rationalised against the intended benefits and alternatives sought where possible.

Local infiltration analgesia with levobupivacaine compared with intrathecal morphine in total hip arthroplasty patients

BACKGROUND

Recently, local infiltration analgesia (LIA) has been promoted for pain control after total hip arthroplasty (THA). We hypothesized that LIA would offer equal analgesic efficacy but less adverse effects, e.g., nausea and vomiting, when compared with an established regimen [intrathecal morphine (it-M)] after THA.

METHODS

This randomized controlled trial comprised 60 patients undergoing THA under spinal anaesthesia. For LIA, the surgeon administered levobupivacaine, ketorolac and epinephrine at the surgical site intraoperatively. LIA patients received a LIA top-up through a wound catheter on the morning of the 1st post-operative day (POD). In group it-M, 0.1 mg morphine was given together with the spinal anaesthetic. Study parameters included pain scores, vital parameters and side effects, e.g., post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Besides, levobupivacaine plasma concentrations were determined in 10 LIA patients.

RESULTS

The median (25th/75th percentiles) rescue oxycodone demand differed significantly with LIA 15 (10/25) mg vs. 8.5 (1.5/15) mg with it-M (P < 0.006) during the day of surgery, but not anymore on 1st or 2nd POD. The LIA top-up had no effect. However, both analgesic regimens resulted in comparable pain scores and patient satisfaction. PONV incidence and medication did not vary significantly. LIA offered certain advantages regarding early post-operative mobilization. Maximum levobupivacaine plasma concentrations (229-580 ng/ml) remained under the toxic level.

CONCLUSIONS

While LIA might enable earlier mobilization after THA, it was not associated with less nausea as compared with it-M. Less rescue oxycodone was given early after it-M, but urinary retention was more common in that group.

Can a periarticular levobupivacaine injection reduce postoperative opiate consumption during primary hip arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND

Several reports have confirmed the ability of intraoperative periarticular injections to control pain after THA. However, these studies used differing combinations of analgesic agents and the contribution of each, including the local anesthetic agent, is uncertain. Understanding the independent effects of the various agents could assist in improved pain management after surgery.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We therefore determined the ability of intraoperative periarticular infiltration of levobupivacaine to (1) reduce postoperative pain, (2) reduce postoperative morphine requirements, and (3) reduce the incidence of nausea and urinary retention.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of patients undergoing primary THAs was performed. Patients were randomized to receive a periarticular infiltration of 150 mg levobupivacaine in 60 mL 0.9% saline (n = 45) or a placebo consisting of 60 mL 0.9% saline (n = 46). We obtained a short-form McGill pain score, visual analog scale (VAS), and morphine requirements via patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) as primary measures. Postoperative antiemetic requirements and need for catheterization for urinary retention were determined as secondary measures.

RESULTS

Subjectively reported pain scores and the overall intensity scores were similar for both groups in the postoperative period. At the same time the mean morphine consumption was less in the levobupivacaine group, most notable in the first 12 hours after surgery: treatment group 11.5 mg vs control group 21.2 mg. We observed no differences in the frequency of postoperative nausea and vomiting or urinary retention.

CONCLUSIONS

Our observations suggest periarticular injection of levobupivacaine can supplement available postoperative analgesic techniques and reduce postoperative morphine requirements after THA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Risk factors for urinary retention after hip or knee replacement: a cohort study

Introduction

In 2006, our provincial government initiated a program to reduce wait times for total hip or knee replacements by referring patients to a single tertiary-care centre. This program provided an opportunity to identify risk factors for perioperative complications as part of a continuing quality improvement project. We report the risk of postoperative urinary retention after hip and knee replacements and the risk factors associated with this complication.

Methods

After local Research Ethics Board approval, data were abstracted from charts of patients who underwent elective primary unilateral total hip or knee replacement surgery. The outcome was urinary retention in the first 24 hr after surgery. Risk factors were identified using multivariable logistic regression, and they were expressed as odds ratios (OR) or 95% confidence intervals (CI).

Results

From April 1, 2006 to May 31, 2007, 1,440 patients underwent 1,515 elective total hip replacement or total knee replacement. We abstracted data from 1,031 (71.3%) patients: mean age, 62 yr (interquartile range [IQR] 55-70); 53.7% female; 605 total hip replacements; and 426 total knee replacements. The procedures were performed under spinal (81.8%), general (10.2%), or combined spinal and general (8.0%) anesthesia. Patients spent 100 [IQR 90-114] min in the operating room and 3 [IQR 3-4] days in hospital. The 24-hr incidence of urinary retention was 43.3% (446/1031). Male sex (odds ratio [OR] 3.9; 95% CI 3.0 to 5.2), total hip replacement (OR 1.4; 95% CI 1.1 to 1.9), and intrathecal morphine were risk factors.

Discussion

Postoperative urinary retention is a common complication after total hip or total knee replacement, especially amongst men and patients receiving intrathecal morphine.

Intrathecal opioid versus ultrasound guided fascia iliaca plane block for analgesia after primary hip arthroplasty: study protocol for a randomised, blinded, noninferiority controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Hip replacement surgery is increasingly common due to an ageing population, and rising levels of obesity. The provision of excellent pain relief with minimal side effects is important in order to facilitate patient mobilisation and rehabilitation.Spinal opioids provide excellent analgesia but are associated with adverse effects. The fascia-iliaca block is an alternative technique which provides analgesia to the nerves innervating the hip. The success of fascia iliaca blocks has been demonstrated to be superior when using ultrasound compared to landmark techniques. However, the clinical benefit of this improvement has yet to be investigated.The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of ultrasound guided fascia iliaca block with spinal morphine for hip replacement surgery.

METHODS/DESIGN

This study is a randomised, blinded, placebo-controlled, noninferiority trial. Patients scheduled to undergo unilateral primary hip arthroplasty will receive a study information sheet and consent will be obtained in keeping with the Declaration of Helsinki. Patients will be randomised to receive either; (i) Ultrasound guided fascia iliaca block using levobupivacaine, plus spinal anaesthesia with hyperbaric bupivacaine containing no morphine, or (ii) sham ultrasound guided fascia iliaca block performed with sterile saline, and spinal anaesthesia containing hyperbaric bupivacaine and 0.1 mg of spinal morphine.A total of 108 patients will be recruited. Primary outcome is post-operative morphine consumption in a 24 hour period. Secondary outcomes include; pain scores at 3, 6, 12, 24, 36 and 48 hours, episodes of respiratory depression, hypotension, nausea and vomiting, pruritus, sedation, time to first mobilisation and patient satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

There are no studies to date comparing ultrasound guided fascia iliaca block with spinal morphine for pain control after hip arthroplasty. If the ultrasound guided fascia iliaca block provides pain relief which is not inferior to spinal morphine, then morphine could be removed from the spinal injection. This could reduce side effects and improve patient safety.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study has been approved by the West of Scotland Research Ethics Committee 4 (reference no. 10/S0704/43) and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (reference no. NCT01217294).

[Pain therapy for the lower extremities]

Pain therapy after surgical procedures of the lower extremity is an important goal, whereas insufficient analgesia leads to an essential reduction of the patient's mobility and convalescence. If possible, regional anaesthetic and intrathecal procedures for pre-, intra- and postoperative analgesia should be used. Systemic analgesics should not be used preoperatively, whereas non-opioids and opioids are recommended postoperatively. Surgical options that adequately reduce pain are intra-articular injection of local anaesthetics alone or in combination with opioids and cooling and physiotherapeutic treatment regimens after joint procedures. There is no scientific rationale as an argument for inserting drains. The surgical approach depends more on the individual patient's anatomical characteristics. Whereas the regional analgesic regimen is more effective than systemic therapy, sufficient tools for pain reduction during surgical procedures of the lower extremity are at the orthopaedic surgeon's disposal, too.

Psoas compartment block for lower extremity surgery: a meta-analysis

Psoas compartment block (PCB) is a potentially useful but controversial technique for lower limb surgery. We have conducted a systematic review of the efficacy and safety of PCB for anaesthesia and postoperative analgesia for hip and knee surgery. Relevant studies were identified within PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. The main outcome measure for anaesthesia was anaesthetic efficacy. For postoperative analgesia, the severity of postoperative pain was compared. The data were subjected to meta-analysis using relative risks with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for dichotomous variables and weighted mean differences with 95% CI for continuous variables. Thirty publications were included. PCB is an effective intervention for analgesia after hip and knee surgery. It appears superior to opioids for pain relief after hip surgery. This analgesic benefit may be extended beyond 8 h by the use of a catheter technique. Compared with Winnie's 3-in-1 block, PCB is associated with more consistent block of the obturator nerve. PCB may be an alternative to postoperative neuraxial block. Although PCB combined with sciatic nerve block and sedation is an effective technique for minor knee surgery, there is currently insufficient data to recommend the use of this approach for hip and major knee surgery. PCB is a safe and effective alternative for analgesia after hip and knee surgery. More research is required to define its role in the intraoperative setting and confirm potentially beneficial effects on variables such as perioperative haemodynamics and blood loss.

Multimodal analgesia without parenteral narcotics for total knee arthroplasty

Use of parenteral narcotics after total knee arthroplasty is considered by most orthopedic surgeons to be the standard of care. This study tested the hypothesis that a multimodal oral pain medication protocol could control pain and minimize complications of parenteral narcotics. Postoperative oral analgesia was augmented with either continuous epidural infusion or continuous femoral infusion using ropivacaine only. Seventy patients had total knee arthroplasty with a protocol that included preemptive oral analgesics, epidural anesthesia, pericapsular analgesic injection, and postoperative analgesia without parenteral opioids. The average daily pain score was less than 4 out of 10, nausea occurred in 15 patients (21%), emesis in 1 patient (1.4%), and there were no severe complications. This study proved the hypothesis that pain after total knee arthroplasty could be effectively managed without routine use of parenteral opioids.

The efficacy of levobupivacaine, ropivacaine, and bupivacaine for combined psoas compartment-sciatic nerve block in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The aim of our study was to compare postoperative analgesic efficacy, and the extent of sensory and motor blockade of levobupivacaine, ropivacaine, and bupivacaine administered in a combined psoas compartment-sciatic nerve block (PCSNB) for total hip arthroplasty.

METHODS

Forty-five patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty under general anesthesia combined with PCSNB, were randomly assigned to receive either 50 mL levobupivacaine 3 mg/mL, 50 mL ropivacaine 4.5 mg/mL or 50 mL bupivacaine 3 mg/mL with epinephrine. Postoperative, the pain intensity at rest, the degree of motor block (Modified Bromage Scale) and the extent of sensory block (pin prick test) were recorded at 4, 8, 12, 24, and 48 hours following initial injection in a double blind fashion.

RESULTS

The postoperative pain intensity was low and did not differ between groups, except for a significantly lower pain intensity in group ropivacaine compared with group levobupivacaine at 4 hours. Five patients (11%), equally divided over three groups, needed parenteral rescue opiates postoperatively. The extent of sensory block was not different between the three groups. In each group the majority of patients showed no sensory block in dermatome L1. Group levobupivacaine initially showed the least motor impairment. Motor impairment was found to be significantly higher in bupivacaine group compared with both ropivacaine and levobupivacaine groups at 12 (P = 0.012) and 48 hours (P = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Levobupivacaine, bupivacaine and ropivacaine are equally effective for PCSNB in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. Residual pain may be due to the lack of sensory block in dermatome L1, suggesting that modification of this technique should be considered for this type of surgery.

Opioid-free analgesia by continuous psoas compartment block after total hip arthroplasty. A randomized study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Adequate analgesia is needed after total hip arthroplasty to control pain at rest and during rehabilitation. Our aim was to compare, in a randomized study, the efficacy of two analgesia regimens in control of postoperative pain after total hip arthroplasty: opioid-free continuous psoas compartment block vs. an opioid/non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs continuous intravenous infusion.

METHODS

In all, 73 patients (ASA I-III), aged 61-82 yr, undergoing total hip arthroplasty were prospectively enrolled in a single-blind randomized trial. Patients were allocated either to the study group (Group A, n = 37) or to the control group (Group B, n = 36). Patients in Group A underwent preoperative placement of a catheter in the psoas compartment and, 30 min before the end of surgery, the catheter was primed with a loading dose of 0.75% ropivacaine (0.4 mL kg(-1)) followed by a continuous infusion of 10 mL h(-1) ropivacaine 0.2% for 48 h. Patients in Group B received, from 1 h before the end of surgery, a continuous intravenous infusion of 0.1% morphine and 0.12% ketorolac at 2 mL h(-1) for 48 h. Both groups received spinal anaesthesia for surgery. Pain scores at rest and after mobilization, amount of rescue analgesia, nausea/vomiting and haemodynamic parameters were recorded.

RESULTS

In Group A, median pain scores were very low during the whole study duration both at rest and during physiotherapy in comparison to Group B. Less rescue analgesia was needed and less nausea and vomiting was observed in Group A.

CONCLUSIONS

Opioid-free continuous psoas compartment block seems to be an appropriate and reliable technique in providing effective postoperative analgesia at rest and during physiotherapy after total hip arthroplasty when compared to intravenous morphine/ketorolac infusion.

[Psoas compartment block with general anaesthesia: descriptive study of 93 cases]

OBJECTIVES

During many years the approach to the lumbar plexus has been the anterior paravascular technique described as a "3-1" block by Winnie. The posterior approach results in a complete block of the principal nerves of the lumbar plexus. The goal of the study was to evaluate the performance of the psoas compartment block with general anaesthesia.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, descriptive, non randomized study.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Ninety-three patients scheduled for hip surgery were studied after informed consent. Demographic data, technical aspects of the puncture, complications, and intra- and postoperative analgesics were recorded.

RESULTS

The block was performed by resident alone, senior alone, both in respectively 44%, 45, and 11% of cases. The mean duration of the procedure was 6+/-3 min for the residents, 5+/-2 min for the seniors, and 9+/-4 min for both. The transverse process was reach in 72% of cases during the first approach, after reorientation of the needle in the others cases, except 3 failures of attempt. The lumbar plexus was assessed within 60-90 mm of depth, with a median of 75 mm. The motor response was mainly a femoral response; the minimal intensity of stimulation was ranged between 0.3 and 1 mA, with a median of 0.6 mA. The duration of analgesic block was 16.5+/-4.5 hours, with a median of 18 hours. The morphine use during the first postoperative 24 hours was 8+/-8 mg, with a median of 5.6 mg. No neurologic complication was recorded at discharge from the hospital.

CONCLUSION

The psoas compartment block with general anaesthesia have shown it feasibility and efficiency on intra- and postoperative analgesia during hip surgery.

Multimodal analgesia without routine parenteral narcotics for total hip arthroplasty

Methods for managing pain after a total hip replacement have changed substantially in the past 5 years. We documented the outcome of patients treated with a multimodal pain program designed to avoid parenteral narcotics. Avoidance of parenteral narcotics can essentially eliminate the complications of respiratory depression, ileus, and narcotic-induced hypotension. It can minimize nausea and vomiting which cause dissatisfaction with an operation. Twenty-one of 140 patients (15%) needed parenteral narcotics postoperatively with only nine patients (6.4%) using parenteral narcotics after the day of surgery. Mean pain scores were below 3 of 10 on all postoperative days. There were no patients with respiratory depression or ileus, and four (2.9%) with urinary retention. Nausea occurred with 35 patients (25%) in the recovery room and in 28 patients (20%) thereafter. Emesis occurred in five patients (3.6%) with two incidences in the recovery room. One hundred and thirty-eight patients (98.6%) were discharged home at a mean of 2.7 seven days postoperatively with 98 (70%) on a single assistive device. The multimodal pain management program, which avoided parenteral narcotics, was effective in providing pain relief, nearly eliminating emesis, and eliminating the severe complications of respiratory depression, urinary tract infection and ileus, as well as accelerating function.

A procedure-specific systematic review and consensus recommendations for analgesia after total hip replacement

Total hip replacement is a major surgical procedure usually associated with significant pain in the early postoperative period. Several anaesthetic and analgesic techniques are in common clinical use for this procedure but, to date, clinical studies of pain after total hip replacement have not been systematically assessed. Using the Cochrane protocol, we have conducted a systematic review of analgesic, anaesthetic and surgical interventions affecting postoperative pain after total hip replacement. In addition to the review, transferable evidence from other relevant procedures and clinical practice observations collated by the Delphi method were used to develop evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of postoperative pain. For primary total hip replacement, PROSPECT recommends either general anaesthesia combined with a peripheral nerve block that is continued after surgery or an intrathecal (spinal) injection of local anaesthetic and opioid. The primary analgesic technique should be combined with a step-down approach using paracetamol plus conventional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, with strong or weak opioids as required.

In with the new, out with the old? Comparison of two approaches for psoas compartment block

We compared the approaches of Winnie and Capdevila for psoas compartment block (PCB) performed by a single operator in terms of contralateral spread, lumbar plexus blockade, and postoperative analgesic efficacy. Sixty patients underwent PCB (0.4 mL/kg levobupivacaine 0.5%) and subsequent spinal anesthesia for primary joint arthroplasty (hip or knee) in a prospective, double-blind study. Patients were randomly allocated to undergo PCB by using the Capdevila (group C; n = 30) or a modified Winnie (group W; n = 30) approach. Contralateral spread and lumbar plexus blockade were assessed 15, 30, and 45 min after PCB. Contralateral spread (bilateral from T4 to S5) and femoral and lateral cutaneous nerve block were evaluated by sensory testing, and obturator motor block was assessed. Bilateral anesthesia occurred in 10 patients in group C and 12 patients in group W (P = 0.8). Blockade of the femoral, lateral cutaneous, and obturator nerves was 90%, 93%, and 80%, respectively, for group C and 93%, 97%, and 90%, respectively, for group W (P > 0.05). No differences were found in PCB procedure time, pain scores, 24-h morphine consumption, or time to first morphine analgesia.

Failed spinal anesthesia after a psoas compartment block

PURPOSE

To report the case of a patient who experienced failed spinal anesthesia following a psoas compartment block (PCB) and discuss its implications.

CLINICAL FEATURES

A 70-yr-old male was scheduled for a right total hip arthroplasty. He agreed to a PCB for postoperative analgesia and a spinal anesthetic. The spinal anesthetic was performed after completion of the PCB. Free flow of clear fluid was demonstrated at the beginning and at the end of the presumed intrathecal injection. General anesthesia had to be induced because of failure of the spinal anesthetic. The patient awoke from his general anesthetic with a functional PCB and no evidence of residual neuraxial anesthesia. The possibility of epidural spread of local anesthetic from the PCB impairing the ability to perform spinal anesthesia is discussed and reviewed. We hypothesize that local anesthetic in the epidural space may have falsely reassured the anesthesiologist that the needle was properly placed.

CONCLUSION

We describe a case of failed spinal anesthesia following a PCB and discuss its implications.

Endogenous opiates and behavior: 2003

This paper is the 26th consecutive installment of the annual review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system, now spanning over a quarter-century of research. It summarizes papers published during 2003 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides, opioid receptors, opioid agonists and opioid antagonists. The particular topics that continue to be covered include the molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors related to behavior (Section 2), and the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia (Section 3); stress and social status (Section 4); tolerance and dependence (Section 5); learning and memory (Section 6); eating and drinking (Section 7); alcohol and drugs of abuse (Section 8); sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology (Section 9); mental illness and mood (Section 10); seizures and neurologic disorders (Section 11); electrical-related activity and neurophysiology (Section 12); general activity and locomotion (Section 13); gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions (Section 14); cardiovascular responses (Section 15); respiration and thermoregulation (Section 16); and immunological responses (Section 17).