A prospective randomized comparative study of postoperative pain control using an epidural catheter in patients undergoing posterior lumbar interbody fusion

Ultrasound-Guided Modified Thoracolumbar Fascial Plane Block in Tianji Robot-Assisted Lumbar Internal Fixation: A Prospective, Randomized, and Non-Inferiority Study

Purpose

Ultrasound-guided modified thoracolumbar fascial plane block (MTLIP) has been reported effective for postoperative pain control following lumbar surgery. Although trauma of the Tianji robot-assisted lumbar internal fixation is reduced, the degree of pain cannot be ignored.MTLIP may improve operation efficiency and reduce puncture complications.This study aimed to explore whether MTLIP is not inferior to thoracolumbar fascial plane block (TLIP) in the treatment of lumbar internal fixation.

Methods

This prospective double-blinded, non-inferiority randomized trial enrolled patients underwent Tianji robot-assisted lumbar internal fixation between April and August 2022 to either MTLIP or TLIP. The primary outcome was an effective dermatomal block area after 30 min. Secondary outcomes included the numeric rating scale (NRS) scores, nerve block operation time, puncture times, image clarity, patient satisfaction, intraoperative opioid consumption, complications/adverse reactions, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI).

Results

Sixty participants were randomized to MTLIP (n=30) and TLIP (n=30). The effective dermatomal block area 30 min after block was non-inferior in the MTLIP group (283.6 ± 62.6 cm²) compared with the TLIP group (261.4±53.2 cm²) (P=0.145; estimated mean difference: -22.17, 95% CI: -52.19, 7.85; smaller than the non-inferiority margin of 39.5). Compared with TLIP, MTLIP showed shorter operation time, smaller puncture times, and better target definition and satisfaction scores (all P<0.001). Sufentanil amount, remifentanil amount, PCIA sufentanil dosage, parecoxib amount, NRS scores (increased with time in the two groups but without inter-group differences), and complications were not significantly different between the two groups (all P>0.05).

Conclusion

This non-inferiority trial supports the hypothesis that MTLIP yields a non-inferior effective dermatomal block area compared with TLIP for Tianji robot-assisted lumbar internal fixation.

Clinical Trials Registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2200058687);.

Preoperative Opioid Use Is Associated With Inferior Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Scores Following Rotator Cuff Repair

PURPOSE

To determine the influence of preoperative opioid use on Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) scores pre- and postoperatively in patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR).

METHODS

A retrospective review of all RCR patients aged >18 years old was performed. PROMIS pain interference ("PROMIS PI"), upper extremity function ("PROMIS UE"), and depression ("PROMIS D") scores, were reviewed. These measures were collected at preoperative, 6-month, and 1-year postoperative time points. A prescription drug-monitoring program was queried to track opioid prescriptions. Patients were categorized as chronic users, acute users, and nonusers based on prescriptions filled. Comparison of means were carried out using analysis of variance and least squares means. Effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals were calculated.

RESULTS

In total, 184 patients who underwent RCR were included. Preoperatively, nonusers (n = 92) had superior PROMIS UE (30.6 vs 28.9 vs 26.1; P < .05) and PI scores (61.5 vs 64.9 vs 65.3; P < .001) compared with acute users (n = 65) and chronic users (n = 27), respectively. At 6 months postoperatively; nonusers demonstrated significantly greater PROMIS UE (41.7 vs 35.6 vs. 33.5; P < .001), lower PROMIS D (41.6 vs 45.8 vs 51.1; P < .001), and lower PROMIS PI scores (50.7 vs 56.3 vs 58.1; P < .01) when compared with acute and chronic users, respectively. Nonusers had lower PROMIS PI (47.9 vs 54.3 vs 57.4; P < .0001) and PROMIS D (41.6 vs 48.3 vs 49.2; P = .0002) scores compared with acute and chronic users at 1-year postoperatively. Nonusers experienced a significantly greater magnitude of improvement in PROMIS D 6 months postoperatively compared with chronic opioid users (-5.9 vs 0.0; P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing RCR demonstrated superior PROMIS scores pre- and postoperatively if they did not use opioids within 3 months before surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, retrospective comparative trial.

Effects of general anesthesia with and without thoracic epidural block on length of stay after open spine surgery: a single-blinded randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Length of hospital stay (LOS) is an important concern in all types of surgery, and the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol has been developed to improve perioperative management and outcomes, which require multidisciplinary management. In terms of pain control, intraoperative regional anesthesia and postoperative opioid-sparing analgesia are recommended. For open spine surgery, we aimed to combine thoracic epidural analgesia to reduce pain and opioid-related side effects, thereby hastening recovery.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare the length of hospital stay after open complete laminectomy with fusion between general anesthesia and combined general anesthesia involving a single thoracic epidural injection.

DESIGN

A randomized single-blinded controlled study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Thirty-eight patients scheduled for elective open laminectomy with fusion between I and III levels were selected.

OUTCOME MEASURES

LOS, postoperative pain, patient-controlled morphine consumption at 24 hours, patient satisfaction score, and other opioid-related side effects were recorded.

METHODS

Patients were randomly selected to receive standard general anesthesia (GA) or GA combined with a single-shot thoracic epidural at T11-T12 or T12-L1, a block with 10 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine, and 4 mg of morphine.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in the demographic variables between groups. LOS was significantly lower in the combined epidural and/or GA than in the control group (3.78±0.81 [mean±standard deviation] and 4.79±1.51 days, respectively; p=.017). Numeric rating score (at rest) at the post-anesthesia care unit, 24 hours postoperative morphine consumption (mg), operating time, and blood loss were significantly lower in the epidural group. Patients who received combined epidural and/or GA were more likely to report higher patient satisfaction (p=.008). However, the incidence of intraoperative hypotension was significantly higher in the epidural group (72.2% vs. 21.1%, p=.003). The incidences of adverse events and surgical field rating scores did not differ between the 2 patient groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined lower thoracic epidural and/or GA in patients undergoing elective lumbar spine surgery was associated with decreased LOS.

Regional Anesthesia for Spine Surgery

Current advancements in spine surgery have led to a recent interest in regional anesthesia for spine surgery. Spinal anesthesia, epidural anesthesia, and their combination are commonly used modalities for regional anesthesia in spine surgeries. The successful use of regional anesthesia has led to the emergence of several new concepts such as awake spinal fusion and outpatient spinal surgery. Regarding analgesic techniques, several new modalities have been described recently such as erector spinae and thoracolumbar interfascial plane blocks. These regional analgesic modalities are aimed at decreasing perioperative pain and enhancing early recovery in patients undergoing spine surgery. This narrative review focuses on the techniques, indications and contraindications, benefits, and complications of regional anesthesia in the context of spine surgery.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in spine surgery

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are a set of interventions which are carried out in the preoperative and perioperative period. They are aimed to decrease the harmful effects of surgery on the body and help the patient recover better post-surgery. The effectiveness of ERAS has been well established in various other surgical specialities. Earlier spine surgery was thought to be very complex for application of ERAS protocols. However, this has changed over the last decade with (ERAS) protocols gaining widespread popularity in spine surgery. Initial studies involving ERAS in spine surgery were limited to lumbar spine. However, over the years the horizon of ERAS has expanded to include anterior cervical surgeries, spine deformity, spinal tumors and spine surgery in the elderly. ERAS has been shown to reduce the length of hospital stay, overall hospital costs, opioid consumption in perioperative and postoperative period and to lower complication rates in spine surgery. In this narrative review, we discuss various aspects of ERAS in spine surgery including the benefits of ERAS in spine surgery, the various components of preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative measures of ERAS protocol.

An Update on Postoperative Opioid Use and Alternative Pain Control Following Spine Surgery

Opioids are commonly prescribed postoperatively for pain control, especially in spine surgery. Not only does this pose concerns for potential abuse, but it also has been shown to worsen certain outcomes. Risk factors for increased use include preoperative opioid use, female sex, psychiatric diagnoses, and drug and alcohol use. Over the past few decades, there have been increasing efforts mostly spearheaded by governmental agencies to decrease postoperative opioid use via opioid prescription limitation laws regulating the number of days and amounts of analgesics prescribed and promotion of the use of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols, multimodal pain regimens, epidural catheters, and ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve blocks. These strategies collectively have been efficacious in decreasing overall opioid use and better controlling patients' postoperative pain while simultaneously improving other outcomes such as postoperative nausea, vomiting, and length of stay. With an aging population undergoing an increasing number of spinal surgeries each year, it is now more important than ever to continue these efforts to improve the quality and safety of pain control methods after spinal surgery and limit the transition of acute management to the development of opioid dependence and addiction long-term.

Multimodal nonopioid pain protocol provides equivalent pain control versus opioids following arthroscopic shoulder labral surgery: a prospective randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to compare postoperative pain and patient satisfaction in patients undergoing primary arthroscopic labral surgery managed with either a nonopioid alternative pain regimen or a traditional opioid pain regimen.

METHODS

Sixty consecutive patients undergoing primary arthroscopic shoulder labral surgery were assessed for participation. In accordance with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) 2010 statement, a prospective randomized controlled trial was performed. The 2 arms of the study were a multimodal nonopioid analgesic protocol as the experimental group and a standard opioid regimen as the control group. The primary outcome was postoperative pain scores (on a visual analog scale [VAS]) for the first 10 days postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included patient satisfaction, patient-reported outcomes, and complications. Randomization was performed with a random number generator, and all data were collected by blinded observers. Patients were not blinded.

RESULTS

Twelve patients did not meet the inclusion criteria or declined to participate. Thus, 48 patients were included in the final analysis: 24 in the nonopioid group and 24 in the opioid group. There was no significant difference in VAS or PROMIS (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System) scores between patients in the 2 cohorts on any postoperative day (P > .05). When we controlled for confounding factors with repeated-measures mixed models, the nonopioid cohort reported significantly lower VAS and PROMIS (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System) Pain Interference scores (P < .01) at all time points. No difference was found in reported adverse events (constipation, diarrhea, drowsiness, nausea, and upset stomach) between cohorts at any time point (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

This study found that a multimodal nonopioid pain regimen provided, at the minimum, equivalent pain control, an equivalent adverse reaction profile, and equivalent patient satisfaction when compared with a standard opioid-based regimen following arthroscopic shoulder labral surgery.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol for Lumbar Spinal Surgery With Regional Anesthesia: A Retrospective Review

Background

In the USA, spinal fusion surgery incurs the highest hospital cost. Despite the recent advances in the application of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols in these surgeries, the efficacy of these protocols in improving the perioperative outcomes remains unclear. We conducted a retrospective review as a quality improvement (QI) project to analyze the efficacy of the ERAS protocol with intraoperative modified thoracolumbar interfascial plane (mTLIP) block to determine whether these interventions reduce the length of stay (LOS) and opioid requirements during the postoperative period.

Methods

Retrospective reviews of adult patients (>18 yrs) who underwent elective lumbar spinal fusion or laminectomy at our institute were reviewed. Patients were administered oral gabapentin and acetaminophen preoperatively. Prior to incision, an mTLIP block was performed using liposomal bupivacaine. Intraoperatively, ketamine, ketorolac, and tranexamic acid were administered. Postoperative, pain control was treated with scheduled acetaminophen, ketorolac, and low-dose ketamine infusion. Hydromorphone and oxycodone were administered for breakthrough pain. Patients who underwent a similar procedure without ERAS protocol were chosen as controls to assess the efficacy of ERAS protocol. Data pertaining to patient demographics, operative and perioperative use of analgesics, LOS, 90-day readmissions, and morbidity were collected. Patients who underwent laminectomy and spinal fusion surgery were analyzed separately

Results

A total of 65 patients were identified; laminectomy (n- 24), spinal fusion surgery (n-41). In the laminectomy patients, treatment group (n-12) and the control group (n-12). Treatment group receiving the ERAS protocol with the regional anesthesia via the mTLIP (n= 12) opioid requirement was reduced by 51.42% [P = 0.03], and LOS was reduced by 2.04 days [P = 0.01] [0.75 days vs. 2.79 days]). In the spinal fusion patients, treatment group (n-15) and control group (n-26). Treatment group receiving the ERAS protocol with the use of regional anesthesia via the mTLIP group (n= 15), opioid requirement was reduced by 38.33% [P = 0.04]. No difference in LOS was observed at 5.4 days vs. 4.88 days (P = 0.28).

Conclusion

ERAS protocol in patients undergoing lumbar spinal surgery incorporated the use of regional anesthesia via the mTLIP block, we observed there is a statistically significant reduction in the LOS for lumbar laminectomy and a significant reduction in opioid administration for lumbar laminectomies and spinal fusion surgery.

Pain management after complex spine surgery: A systematic review and procedure-specific postoperative pain management recommendations

BACKGROUND

Complex spinal procedures are associated with intense pain in the postoperative period. Adequate peri-operative pain management has been shown to correlate with improved outcomes including early ambulation and early discharge.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to evaluate the available literature and develop recommendations for optimal pain management after complex spine surgery.

DESIGN AND DATA SOURCES

A systematic review using the PROcedure SPECific postoperative pain managemenT methodology was undertaken. Randomised controlled trials and systematic reviews published in the English language from January 2008 to April 2020 assessing postoperative pain after complex spine surgery using analgesic, anaesthetic or surgical interventions were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Databases.

RESULTS

Out of 111 eligible studies identified, 31 randomised controlled trials and four systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria. Pre-operative and intra-operative interventions that improved postoperative pain were paracetamol, cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2 specific-inhibitors or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), intravenous ketamine infusion and regional analgesia techniques including epidural analgesia using local anaesthetics with or without opioids. Limited evidence was found for local wound infiltration, intrathecal and epidural opioids, erector spinae plane block, thoracolumbar interfascial plane block, intravenous lidocaine, dexmedetomidine and gabapentin.

CONCLUSIONS

The analgesic regimen for complex spine surgery should include pre-operative or intra-operative paracetamol and COX-2 specific inhibitors or NSAIDs, continued postoperatively with opioids used as rescue analgesics. Other recommendations are intra-operative ketamine and epidural analgesia using local anaesthetics with or without opioids. Although there is procedure-specific evidence in favour of intra-operative methadone, it is not recommended as it was compared with shorter-acting opioids and due to its limited safety profile. Furthermore, the methadone studies did not use non-opioid analgesics, which should be the primary analgesics to ultimately reduce overall opioid requirements, including methadone. Further qualitative randomised controlled trials are required to confirm the efficacy and safety of these recommended analgesics on postoperative pain relief.

Consensus statement for perioperative care in lumbar spinal fusion: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society recommendations

BACKGROUND

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) evidence-based protocols for perioperative care have led to improvements in outcomes in numerous surgical areas, through multimodal optimization of patient pathway, reduction of complications, improved patient experience and reduction in the length of stay. ERAS represent a relatively new paradigm in spine surgery.

PURPOSE

This multidisciplinary consensus review summarizes the literature and proposes recommendations for the perioperative care of patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery with an ERAS program.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a review article.

METHODS

Under the impetus of the ERAS® society, a multidisciplinary guideline development group was constituted by bringing together international experts involved in the practice of ERAS and spine surgery. This group identified 22 ERAS items for lumbar fusion. A systematic search in the English language was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, and cohort studies were included, and the evidence was graded according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Consensus recommendation was reached by the group after a critical appraisal of the literature.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-six articles were included to develop the consensus statements for 22 ERAS items; one ERAS item (prehabilitation) was excluded from the final summary due to very poor quality and conflicting evidence in lumbar spinal fusion. From these remaining 21 ERAS items, 28 recommendations were included. All recommendations on ERAS protocol items are based on the best available evidence. These included nine preoperative, eleven intraoperative, and six postoperative recommendations. They span topics from preoperative patient education and nutritional evaluation, intraoperative anesthetic and surgical techniques, and postoperative multimodal analgesic strategies. The level of evidence for the use of each recommendation is presented.

CONCLUSION

Based on the best evidence available for each ERAS item within the multidisciplinary perioperative care pathways, the ERAS® Society presents this comprehensive consensus review for perioperative care in lumbar fusion.

Effects of controlled hypotension with restrictive transfusion on intraoperative blood loss and systemic oxygen metabolism in elderly patients who underwent lumbar fusion

BACKGROUND

The effects of restrictive fluid therapy combined with controlled hypotension in the elderly on systemic oxygen metabolism and renal function are clinical concerns. The aim of this study was to evaluate blood loss, oxygen metabolism, and renal function in different levels of controlled hypotension induced by intravenous nitroglycerin, in combination with limited infusion, in elderly patients undergoing posterior lumbar fusion.

METHODS

A total of 40 patients, aged 60-75 with ASA grade II or III, who were planned for posterior lumbar fusion were randomly allocated into two groups: experimental group [target mean arterial pressure 65 mmHg (MAP 65) or control group (MAP 75)]. Indicators for blood loss, hemodynamic, systemic oxygen metabolism, and renal function evaluation index were recorded before operation (T0), 1 h after induced hypotension (T1), 2 h after hypotension (T2), and in recovery (T3). We compared changes in these parameters between groups to evaluate the combined effects of controlled hypotension with restrictive infusion.

RESULTS

CI, DO₂I, and VO₂I were lower in both groups at T1-T3 compared with T0 (p < 0.05). DO₂I and VO₂I in the MAP 65 group were lower than the MAP 75 group after operation. In both groups, SCysC increased at T1, T2, and T3 (p < 0.05) compared with T0.

CONCLUSIONS

Restrictive transfusion and control MAP at 65 mmHg can slightly change in renal function and reduce the risk of insufficient oxygen supply and importantly have no significant effect on blood loss and postoperative complications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR-INR-16008153 . Registered on 25 March 2016.

Pain Management After Hip Arthroscopy: Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials and Cohort Studies

BACKGROUND

Hip arthroscopy is often associated with significant postoperative pain and opioid-associated side effects. Effective pain management after hip arthroscopy improves patient recovery and satisfaction and decreases opioid-related complications.

PURPOSE

To collect, examine, and provide a comprehensive review of the available evidence from randomized controlled trials and comparative studies on pain control after hip arthroscopy.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines, a systematic review of the literature for postoperative pain control after hip arthroscopy was performed using electronic databases. Only comparative clinical studies with level 1 to 3 evidence comparing a method of postoperative pain control with other modalities or placebo were included in this review. Case series and studies without a comparative cohort were excluded.

RESULTS

Several methods of pain management have been described for hip arthroscopy. A total of 14 studies met our inclusion criteria: 3 on femoral nerve block, 3 on lumbar plexus block, 3 on fascia iliaca block, 4 on intra-articular injections, 2 on soft tissue surrounding surgical site injection, and 2 on celecoxib (4 studies compared 2 or more methods of analgesia). The heterogeneity of the studies did not allow for pooling of data. Single-injection femoral nerve blocks and lumbar plexus blocks provided improved analgesia, but increased fall rates were observed. Fascia iliaca blocks do not provide adequate pain relief when compared with surgical site infiltration with local anesthetic and are associated with increased risk of cutaneous nerve deficits. Patients receiving lumbar plexus block experienced significantly decreased pain compared with fascia iliaca block. Portal site and periacetabular injections provide superior analgesia compared with intra-articular injections alone. Preoperative oral celecoxib, compared with placebo, resulted in earlier time to discharge and provided significant pain relief up to 24 hours.

CONCLUSION

Perioperative nerve blocks provide effective pain management after hip arthroscopy but must be used with caution to decrease risk of falls. Intra-articular and portal site injections with local anesthetics and preoperative celecoxib can decrease opioid consumption. There is a lack of high-quality evidence on this topic, and further research is needed to determine the best approach to manage postoperative pain and optimize patient satisfaction.

A comparison of the postoperative analgesic efficacy between epidural and intravenous analgesia in major spine surgery: a meta-analysis

Postoperative analgesia remains a challenge for orthopedic surgeons. The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare the efficacy of epidural analgesia (EA) and intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) following major spine surgery. We searched electronic databases, including the PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid and Cochrane databases, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published before June 2016. The quality of the included trials was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Random effects models were used to estimate the standardized mean differences (SMDs) and relative risks (RRs), with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). Subgroup analyses stratified by the type of epidural-infused medication and epidural delivery were also performed. A total of 17 trials matched the inclusion criteria and were chosen for the following meta-analysis. Overall, EA provided significantly superior analgesia, higher patient satisfaction and decreased overall opioid consumption compared with IV-PCA following major spine surgery. Additionally, no differences were found in the side effects associated with these two methods of analgesia. Egger’s and Begg’s tests showed no significant publication bias. We suggest that EA is superior to IV-PCA for pain management after major spine surgery. More large-scale, high-quality trials are needed to verify these findings.

Comparison of the Effects of Sufentanil and Fentanyl Intravenous Patient Controlled Analgesia after Lumbar Fusion

Objective

Postoperative pain is one of the major complaints of patients after lumbar fusion surgery. The authors evaluated the effects of intravenous patient controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) using fentanyl or sufentanil on postoperative pain management and pain-related complications.

Methods

Forty-two patients that had undergone surgery with lumbar instrumentation and fusion at single or double levels constituted the study cohort. Patients were equally and randomly allocated to a sufentanil group (group S) or a fentanyl group (group F) for patient controlled analgesia (PCA). Group S received sufentanil at a dose of 4 μg/kg IV-PCA and group F received fentanyl 24 μg/kg IV-PCA. A numeric rating scale (NRS) of postoperative pain was applied before surgery, and immediately and at 1, 6, and 24 hours (hrs) after surgery. Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores were obtained before surgery and one month after surgery. Opioid-related side effects were also evaluated.

Results

No significant intergroup difference was observed in NRS or ODI scores at any of the above-mentioned time points. Side effects were more frequent in group F. More specifically, nausea, vomiting rates were significantly higher (p=0.04), but pruritus, hypotension, and headache rates were non-significantly different in the two groups.

Conclusion

Sufentanil displayed no analgesic advantage over fentanyl postoperatively. However, sufentanil should be considerable for patients at high risk of GI issues, because it had lower postoperative nausea and vomiting rates than fentanyl.