Effect of intermediate dose dexamethasone on post-operative pain in lumbar spine surgery: A randomized, triple-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Bilateral erector spinae plane block for postoperative pain relief in lumbar spine surgery: A PRISMA-compliant updated systematic review & meta-analysis

Study design

Systematic review.

Objective

Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is growing in popularity over the recent past as an adjuvant modality in multimodal analgesic management following lumbar spine surgery (LSS). The current updated meta-analysis was performed to analyze the efficacy of ESPB for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing LSS.

Methods

We conducted independent and duplicate electronic database searches including PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library till June 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) analyzing the efficacy of bilateral ESPB for postoperative pain relief in lumbar spine surgeries. Post-operative pain scores, total analgesic consumption, first analgesic requirement time, length of stay and complications were the outcomes evaluated. Statistical analysis was performed using STATA 17 software.

Results

32 RCTs including 1464 patients (ESPB/Control = 1077/1069) were included in the analysis. There was a significant pain relief in ESPB group, as compared to placebo across all timelines such as during immediate post-operative period (p < 0.001), 4 h (p < 0.001), 8 h (p < 0.001), 12 h (p < 0.001), 24 h (p = 0.001) post-surgery. Similarly, ESPB group showed a significant reduction in analgesic requirement at 8 h (p < 0.001), 12 h (p = 0.001), and 24 h (p < 0.001). However, no difference was noted in the first analgesic requirement time, time to ambulate or total length of stay in the hospital. ESPB demonstrated significantly improved overall satisfaction score for the analgesic management (p < 0.001), reduced intensive care stay (p < 0.05) with significantly reduced post-operative nausea and vomiting (p < 0.001) compared to controls.

Conclusion

ESPB offers prolonged post-operative pain relief compared to controls, thereby reducing the need for opioid consumption and its related complications.

Methylprednisolone taper is an effective addition to multimodal pain regimens after total shoulder arthroplasty: results of a randomized controlled trial: 2022 Neer Award winner

BACKGROUND

Perioperative corticosteroids have shown potential as nonopioid analgesic adjuncts for various orthopedic pathologies, but there is a lack of research on their use in the postoperative setting after total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of a methylprednisolone taper on a multimodal pain regimen after TSA.

METHODS

This study was a randomized controlled trial (clinicaltrials.gov NCT03661645) of opioid-naive patients undergoing TSA. Patients were randomly assigned to receive intraoperative dexamethasone only (control group) or intraoperative dexamethasone followed by a 6-day oral methylprednisolone (Medrol) taper course (treatment group). All patients received the same standardized perioperative pain management protocol. Standardized pain journal entries were used to record visual analog pain scores (VAS-pain), VAS-nausea scores, and quantity of opioid tablet consumption during the first 7 postoperative days (POD). Patients were followed for at least one year postoperatively for clinical evaluation, collection of patient-reported outcomes, and observation of complications.

RESULTS

A total of 67 patients were enrolled in the study; 32 in the control group and 35 in the treatment group. The groups had similar demographics and comorbidities. The treatment group demonstrated a reduction in mean VAS pain scores over the first 7 POD. Between POD 1 and POD 7, patients in the control group consumed an average of 17.6 oxycodone tablets while those in the treatment group consumed an average of 5.5 tablets. This equated to oral morphine equivalents of 132.1 and 41.1 for the control and treatment groups, respectively. There were fewer opioid-related side effects during the first postoperative week in the treatment group. The treatment group reported improved VAS pain scores at 2-week, 6-week, and 12-week postoperatively. There were no differences in Europe Quality of Life, shoulder subjective value (SSV), at any time point between groups, although American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons questionnaire scores showed a slight improvement at 6-weeks in the treatment group. At mean follow-up, (control group: 23.4 months; treatment group:19.4 months), there was 1 infection in the control group and 1 postoperative cubital tunnel syndrome in the treatment group. No other complications were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

A methylprednisolone taper course shows promise in reducing acute pain and opioid consumption as part of a multimodal regimen following TSA. As a result of this study, we have included this 6-day methylprednisolone taper course in our multimodal regimen for all primary shoulder arthroplasties. We hope this trial serves as a foundation for future studies on the use of low-dose oral corticosteroids and other nonnarcotic modalities to control pain after shoulder surgeries.

High dose glucocorticoids for treatment of postoperative pain: A systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Glucocorticoids as a component of multimodal analgesia have been studied for many years and their post-operative analgesic effects appear to be dose-dependent. We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the evidence of peri-operative high dose corticosteroid therapy in comparison to placebo (placebo drug) or control group (no treatment) for improving the quality of post-operative analgesia as indicated by a reduction of 10 mm in 100 mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) or reduction of 1 point in a 0-10 point VAS scale, or a reduction of 1 point in an 11-point Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) score, or reduction of rescue opioid analgesia, in patients undergoing all types of surgery.

DESIGN

Systematic review of RCTs with meta-analysis.

SETTING

Acute postoperative pain treatment in non-obese adult population.

INTERVENTIONS

Perioperative administration of high dose of Dexamethasone (≥ 0,2 mg/Kg or ≥ 15 mg), or a corresponding dose of a systemic glucocorticoid.

MEASUREMENTS

Primary outcomes were postoperative pain measured in 0-100 mm VAS score at 24 h after surgery upon rest and movement. Secondary outcomes were postoperative pain 0-100 mm VAS score 48 h after surgery, postoperative rescue analgesic requirement, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), relevant adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

47 RCT's were included (3943 patients). The Mean Difference (MD) of 100 mm VAS scores for pain at rest 24 h after surgery was -6.18 mm 95% CI [-8.53, -3.83], at motion -8.86 mm 95% CI [-11.82, -5.89]. Opioid analgesic requirements evaluated in Oral Morphine Equivalents (OME) was -10.00 mg 95% CI [-13.65, -6.34]. PONV events Odds Ratio of 0.29 95%CI [0.24, 0.36]. Major adverse events OR was 0.88 95% CI [0.65, 1.19]. Minor adverse events OR 1.29 95% CI [0.86, 1.92].

CONCLUSION

High doses of glucocorticoids are one of the many possible tools available in multimodal postoperative analgesia, possibly reducing opioids consumption and recurrence of PONV but with no relevant effects in terms of reduction of postoperative VAS score. Available data show a safe therapeutic profile, without increase adverse events.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

CRD42020137119.

Perioperative Analgesia in Spine Surgery: A Review of Current Data Supporting Future Direction

This Clinical Research discusses the diverse nature of spine surgery procedures and the use of multimodal analgesia within enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols to improve patient outcomes. Spine surgeries range from minor decompressions to extensive tumor resections, performed by neurosurgeons or orthopedic spine surgeons on adults and children. To manage perioperative pain effectively, various methods have been employed, including multimodal analgesia within ERAS protocols. Incorporating ERAS protocols into spine surgery has shown benefits such as reduced pain scores, decreased opioid use, shorter hospital stays, and improved functionality. ERAS protocols help to enhance patient outcomes, focusing on deconstructing these protocols for surgeons and anesthesiologists.

A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial of Methylprednisolone for Postoperative Pain Management of Surgically Treated Distal Radius Fractures

PURPOSE

Perioperative glucocorticoids have been effectively used as a pain management regimen for reducing pain after hand surgery. We hypothesize that a methylprednisolone taper (MPT) course following surgery will reduce pain and opioid consumption in the early postoperative period.

METHODS

This study was a randomized controlled trial of patients undergoing surgical fixation for distal radius fracture. Before surgery, patients were randomly assigned to receive preoperative dexamethasone only or preoperative dexamethasone followed by a 6-day oral MPT. Patient pain and opioid consumption data were collected for 7 days after surgery using a patient-reported pain journal.

RESULTS

Our study consisted of 56 patients enrolled from November 2018 to March 2020. Twenty-eight patients each were assigned to the control and treatment groups. Demographic characteristics such as age, body mass index, the dominant side affected, smoking status, diabetes status, and current narcotic use were similar between the control and treatment groups. With a noticeable, significant reduction starting on postoperative day 2, patients who received an MPT course consumed substantially less opioids during the first 7 days (7.8 ± 7.2 pills compared with 15.5 ± 11.5 pills, a 50% reduction). These patients also consumed significantly fewer oral morphine equivalents than the control group (81.2 vs 41.2). A significant difference in the pain visual analog scale scores between the 2 groups was noted starting on postoperative day 2, with 48% of the treatment group reporting no pain by postoperative day 6. No adverse events, including infection or complications of wound or bone healing, were seen in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

There was an early improvement in pain and reduction in early opioid consumption with a 6-day MPT following surgical fixation for distal radius fracture. With no increased risk of adverse events in our sample, MPT may be a safe and effective way to reduce postoperative pain.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic II.

[Role of Dexamethasone for Pain Management in Intervertebral Disc Surgery]

Intervertebral disc operations are already among the most common and their frequency is increasing. The pain associated with these operations is one of the most common postoperative discomforts, has a significant impact on psychosocial aspects, and should therefore be treated effectively. Therefore, we present the importance of dexamethasone for multimodal pain management after intervertebral disc surgery.

What's New in Pain Management for Pediatric Orthopaedic Surgery

BACKGROUND

Improving pain control and decreasing opioid prescription and usage continue to be emphasized across both pediatric and adult populations. The purpose of this review is to provide a comprehensive assessment of recent literature and highlight new advancements pertaining to pain control in pediatric orthopaedic surgery.

METHODS

An electronic search of the PubMed database was performed for keywords relating to perioperative pain management of pediatric orthopaedic surgery. Search results were filtered by publication date for articles published between January 1, 2015 and December 1, 2020 and yielded 404 papers.

RESULTS

A total of 32 papers were selected for review based upon new findings and significant contributions in the following categories: risk factors for increased opioid usage, opioid overprescribing and disposal, nonpharmacologic interventions, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, peripheral nerve blocks, spine surgery specific considerations, surgical pathway modifications, and future directions.

CONCLUSIONS

There have been many advances in pain management for pediatric patients following orthopaedic surgery. Rapid recovery surgical care pathways are associated with shorter length of stay and improved pain control in pediatric spine surgery. Opioid overprescribing continues to be common and information regarding safe opioid disposal practices should be routinely provided for pediatric patients undergoing surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV-literature review.

Pain management after laminectomy: a systematic review and procedure-specific post-operative pain management (prospect) recommendations

PURPOSE

With lumbar laminectomy increasingly being performed on an outpatient basis, optimal pain management is critical to avoid post-operative delay in discharge and readmission. The aim of this review was to evaluate the available literature and develop recommendations for optimal pain management after one- or two-level lumbar laminectomy.

METHODS

A systematic review utilizing the PROcedure-SPECific Post-operative Pain ManagemenT (PROSPECT) methodology was undertaken. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in the English language from 1 January 2008 until 31 March 2020-assessing post-operative pain using analgesic, anaesthetic and surgical interventions-were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Databases.

RESULTS

Out of 65 eligible studies identified, 39 RCTs met the inclusion criteria. The analgesic regimen for lumbar laminectomy should include paracetamol and a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) or cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 selective inhibitor administered preoperatively or intraoperatively and continued post-operatively, with post-operative opioids for rescue analgesia. In addition, surgical wound instillation or infiltration with local anaesthetics prior to wound closure is recommended. Some interventions-gabapentinoids and intrathecal opioid administration-although effective, carry significant risks and consequently were omitted from the recommendations. Other interventions were also not recommended because there was insufficient, inconsistent or lack of evidence.

CONCLUSION

Perioperative pain management for lumbar laminectomy should include paracetamol and NSAID- or COX-2-specific inhibitor, continued into the post-operative period, as well as intraoperative surgical wound instillation or infiltration. Opioids should be used as rescue medication post-operatively. Future studies are necessary to evaluate the efficacy of our recommendations.

Postoperative Dexamethasone Following Posterior Spinal Fusion for Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis

BACKGROUND

Surgeons have hesitated to use steroids in patients undergoing posterior spinal fusion because of the risk of wound complications. The literature has supported the use of postoperative steroids in other areas of orthopaedics on the basis of more rapid recovery and improved postoperative pain control. We hypothesized that a short course of postoperative dexamethasone following posterior spinal fusion for the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) would decrease opioid usage without increasing wound-healing problems.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing posterior spinal fusion for the treatment of AIS from 2015 to 2018 at a single hospital were included. A review of demographic characteristics, curve characteristics, surgical data, and postoperative clinic notes was performed. Opioid usage was determined by converting all postoperative opioids given into morphine milligram equivalents (MME).

RESULTS

Sixty-five patients underwent posterior spinal fusion for the treatment of AIS without postoperative steroids (the NS group), and 48 patients were managed with 3 doses of postoperative steroids (the WS group) (median, 8.0 mg/dose). There was no difference between the groups in terms of curve magnitude, number of vertebrae fused, or estimated blood loss. There was a 39.6% decrease in total MME used and a 29.5% decrease in weight-based MME used in the group receiving postoperative steroids (82.0 mg [1.29 mg/kg] in the NS group versus 49.5 mg [0.91 mg/kg] in the WS group]; p < 0.001). This difference persisted after accounting for gabapentin, ketorolac, and diazepam usage; surgical time; curve size; levels fused; and number of osteotomies (median decrease, 0.756 mg/kg [95% CI, 0.307 to 1.205 mg/kg]; p = 0.001). Three patients in the NS group (4.6%) and 4 patients in the WS group (8.3%) developed wound dehiscence requiring wound care (p = 0.53). One patient in the NS group required surgical debridement for the treatment of an infection. Patients in the WS group were more likely to walk at the time of the initial physical therapy evaluation (60.4% versus 35.4%; p = 0.013).

CONCLUSIONS

A short course of postoperative steroids after posterior spinal fusion was associated with a 40% decrease in the use of opioids, with no increase in wound complications. Surgeons may consider the use of perioperative steroids in an effort to decrease the use of postoperative opioids following posterior spinal fusion for the treatment of AIS.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Drugs for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults after general anaesthesia: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common adverse effect of anaesthesia and surgery. Up to 80% of patients may be affected. These outcomes are a major cause of patient dissatisfaction and may lead to prolonged hospital stay and higher costs of care along with more severe complications. Many antiemetic drugs are available for prophylaxis. They have various mechanisms of action and side effects, but there is still uncertainty about which drugs are most effective with the fewest side effects.

OBJECTIVES

• To compare the efficacy and safety of different prophylactic pharmacologic interventions (antiemetic drugs) against no treatment, against placebo, or against each other (as monotherapy or combination prophylaxis) for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults undergoing any type of surgery under general anaesthesia • To generate a clinically useful ranking of antiemetic drugs (monotherapy and combination prophylaxis) based on efficacy and safety • To identify the best dose or dose range of antiemetic drugs in terms of efficacy and safety SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists of relevant systematic reviews. The first search was performed in November 2017 and was updated in April 2020. In the update of the search, 39 eligible studies were found that were not included in the analysis (listed as awaiting classification).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing effectiveness or side effects of single antiemetic drugs in any dose or combination against each other or against an inactive control in adults undergoing any type of surgery under general anaesthesia. All antiemetic drugs belonged to one of the following substance classes: 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists, D₂ receptor antagonists, NK₁ receptor antagonists, corticosteroids, antihistamines, and anticholinergics. No language restrictions were applied. Abstract publications were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

A review team of 11 authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias and subsequently extracted data. We performed pair-wise meta-analyses for drugs of direct interest (amisulpride, aprepitant, casopitant, dexamethasone, dimenhydrinate, dolasetron, droperidol, fosaprepitant, granisetron, haloperidol, meclizine, methylprednisolone, metoclopramide, ondansetron, palonosetron, perphenazine, promethazine, ramosetron, rolapitant, scopolamine, and tropisetron) compared to placebo (inactive control). We performed network meta-analyses (NMAs) to estimate the relative effects and ranking (with placebo as reference) of all available single drugs and combinations. Primary outcomes were vomiting within 24 hours postoperatively, serious adverse events (SAEs), and any adverse event (AE). Secondary outcomes were drug class-specific side effects (e.g. headache), mortality, early and late vomiting, nausea, and complete response. We performed subgroup network meta-analysis with dose of drugs as a moderator variable using dose ranges based on previous consensus recommendations. We assessed certainty of evidence of NMA treatment effects for all primary outcomes and drug class-specific side effects according to GRADE (CINeMA, Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis). We restricted GRADE assessment to single drugs of direct interest compared to placebo.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 585 studies (97,516 randomized participants). Most of these studies were small (median sample size of 100); they were published between 1965 and 2017 and were primarily conducted in Asia (51%), Europe (25%), and North America (16%). Mean age of the overall population was 42 years. Most participants were women (83%), had American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I and II (70%), received perioperative opioids (88%), and underwent gynaecologic (32%) or gastrointestinal surgery (19%) under general anaesthesia using volatile anaesthetics (88%). In this review, 44 single drugs and 51 drug combinations were compared. Most studies investigated only single drugs (72%) and included an inactive control arm (66%). The three most investigated single drugs in this review were ondansetron (246 studies), dexamethasone (120 studies), and droperidol (97 studies). Almost all studies (89%) reported at least one efficacy outcome relevant for this review. However, only 56% reported at least one relevant safety outcome. Altogether, 157 studies (27%) were assessed as having overall low risk of bias, 101 studies (17%) overall high risk of bias, and 327 studies (56%) overall unclear risk of bias. Vomiting within 24 hours postoperatively Relative effects from NMA for vomiting within 24 hours (282 RCTs, 50,812 participants, 28 single drugs, and 36 drug combinations) suggest that 29 out of 36 drug combinations and 10 out of 28 single drugs showed a clinically important benefit (defined as the upper end of the 95% confidence interval (CI) below a risk ratio (RR) of 0.8) compared to placebo. Combinations of drugs were generally more effective than single drugs in preventing vomiting. However, single NK₁ receptor antagonists showed treatment effects similar to most of the drug combinations. High-certainty evidence suggests that the following single drugs reduce vomiting (ordered by decreasing efficacy): aprepitant (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.38, high certainty, rank 3/28 of single drugs); ramosetron (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.59, high certainty, rank 5/28); granisetron (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.54, high certainty, rank 6/28); dexamethasone (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.57, high certainty, rank 8/28); and ondansetron (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.60, high certainty, rank 13/28). Moderate-certainty evidence suggests that the following single drugs probably reduce vomiting: fosaprepitant (RR 0.06, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.21, moderate certainty, rank 1/28) and droperidol (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.69, moderate certainty, rank 20/28). Recommended and high doses of granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol showed clinically important benefit, but low doses showed no clinically important benefit. Aprepitant was used mainly at high doses, ramosetron at recommended doses, and fosaprepitant at doses of 150 mg (with no dose recommendation available). Frequency of SAEs Twenty-eight RCTs were included in the NMA for SAEs (10,766 participants, 13 single drugs, and eight drug combinations). The certainty of evidence for SAEs when using one of the best and most reliable anti-vomiting drugs (aprepitant, ramosetron, granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol compared to placebo) ranged from very low to low. Droperidol (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.08 to 9.71, low certainty, rank 6/13) may reduce SAEs. We are uncertain about the effects of aprepitant (RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.26 to 7.36, very low certainty, rank 11/13), ramosetron (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.05 to 15.74, very low certainty, rank 7/13), granisetron (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.11 to 13.15, very low certainty, rank 10/13), dexamethasone (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.28 to 4.85, very low certainty, rank 9/13), and ondansetron (RR 1.62, 95% CI 0.32 to 8.10, very low certainty, rank 12/13). No studies reporting SAEs were available for fosaprepitant. Frequency of any AE Sixty-one RCTs were included in the NMA for any AE (19,423 participants, 15 single drugs, and 11 drug combinations). The certainty of evidence for any AE when using one of the best and most reliable anti-vomiting drugs (aprepitant, ramosetron, granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol compared to placebo) ranged from very low to moderate. Granisetron (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.05, moderate certainty, rank 7/15) probably has no or little effect on any AE. Dexamethasone (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.08, low certainty, rank 2/15) and droperidol (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.98, low certainty, rank 6/15) may reduce any AE. Ondansetron (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.01, low certainty, rank 9/15) may have little or no effect on any AE. We are uncertain about the effects of aprepitant (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.97, very low certainty, rank 3/15) and ramosetron (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.54, very low certainty, rank 11/15) on any AE. No studies reporting any AE were available for fosaprepitant. Class-specific side effects For class-specific side effects (headache, constipation, wound infection, extrapyramidal symptoms, sedation, arrhythmia, and QT prolongation) of relevant substances, the certainty of evidence for the best and most reliable anti-vomiting drugs mostly ranged from very low to low. Exceptions were that ondansetron probably increases headache (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.28, moderate certainty, rank 18/23) and probably reduces sedation (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.96, moderate certainty, rank 5/24) compared to placebo. The latter effect is limited to recommended and high doses of ondansetron. Droperidol probably reduces headache (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.86, moderate certainty, rank 5/23) compared to placebo. We have high-certainty evidence that dexamethasone (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.09, high certainty, rank 16/24) has no effect on sedation compared to placebo. No studies assessed substance class-specific side effects for fosaprepitant. Direction and magnitude of network effect estimates together with level of evidence certainty are graphically summarized for all pre-defined GRADE-relevant outcomes and all drugs of direct interest compared to placebo in http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4066353.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found high-certainty evidence that five single drugs (aprepitant, ramosetron, granisetron, dexamethasone, and ondansetron) reduce vomiting, and moderate-certainty evidence that two other single drugs (fosaprepitant and droperidol) probably reduce vomiting, compared to placebo. Four of the six substance classes (5-HT₃ receptor antagonists, D₂ receptor antagonists, NK₁ receptor antagonists, and corticosteroids) were thus represented by at least one drug with important benefit for prevention of vomiting. Combinations of drugs were generally more effective than the corresponding single drugs in preventing vomiting. NK₁ receptor antagonists were the most effective drug class and had comparable efficacy to most of the drug combinations. 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists were the best studied substance class. For most of the single drugs of direct interest, we found only very low to low certainty evidence for safety outcomes such as occurrence of SAEs, any AE, and substance class-specific side effects. Recommended and high doses of granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol were more effective than low doses for prevention of vomiting. Dose dependency of side effects was rarely found due to the limited number of studies, except for the less sedating effect of recommended and high doses of ondansetron. The results of the review are transferable mainly to patients at higher risk of nausea and vomiting (i.e. healthy women undergoing inhalational anaesthesia and receiving perioperative opioids). Overall study quality was limited, but certainty assessments of effect estimates consider this limitation. No further efficacy studies are needed as there is evidence of moderate to high certainty for seven single drugs with relevant benefit for prevention of vomiting. However, additional studies are needed to investigate potential side effects of these drugs and to examine higher-risk patient populations (e.g. individuals with diabetes and heart disease).

Can Preoperative Intravenous Corticosteroids Administration Reduce Postoperative Pain Scores Following Spinal Fusion?: A Meta-Analysis

Objective: This meta-analysis aimed to assess whether preoperative intravenous corticosteroids reduced postoperative pain in patients undergoing spinal fusion surgery. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science and Google databases, from inception to March 29, 2018. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared preoperative intravenous glucocorticoids against a control treatment for the effect on pain following spinal fusion surgery were included. A meta-analysis was performed to generate a pooled risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) for discontinuous outcomes (the occurrence of postoperative nausea and vomiting [PONV] as well as surgical-site infections) and continuous outcomes (visual analog scale [VAS] scores at 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h; total morphine consumption and the length of hospital stay), respectively. Results: Ten RCTs that compared intravenous corticosteroids versus placebo were included in our final meta-analysis. Compared with controls, intravenous corticosteroids were associated with a statistically significant reduction in pain VAS scores at 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h. Additionally, intravenous corticosteroids decreased total morphine consumption, PONV, and the length of hospital stay. There was no significant difference between intravenous corticosteroids and controls, regarding the occurrence of infection (p > 0.05). Conclusions: In summary, our results indicated that intravenous corticosteroids not only reduce pain but also have anti-emetic effects. More studies should focus on the adverse effects of administering intravenous corticosteroids.

Intravenous glucocorticoid for pain control after spinal fusion: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

Postoperative pain was a common symptom after spinal surgery. This meta-analysis aimed to assess whether intravenous glucocorticoids has a beneficial role in reducing pain in patients following spinal fusion.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Google databases, from inception to March 2, 2018. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that comparing intravenous glucocorticoids with control treatment for spinal fusion were included. A meta-analysis was performed to generate pooled risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) for discontinuous outcomes (the occurrence of nausea and infection) and continuous outcomes (visual analog scale [VAS] at 12, 24, and 48 h; total morphine consumption; and the length of hospital stay), respectively.

RESULTS

Eight clinical trials involving 918 patients (glucocorticoid group = 449, control group = 469) were finally included in this meta-analysis. Compared with control, intravenous glucocorticoids had significantly reduced VAS at 12, 24, and 48 hours with statistically significance (P < .05). Intravenous glucocorticoids can decrease the occurrence of nausea (RR = 0.42, 95% CI 0.29-0.62, P = .000; I = 0.0%) and the length of hospital stay. No difference was noticed in the occurrence of infection between glucocorticoids intravenous and control (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

Existing evidence indicated that intravenous glucocorticoids have a beneficial role in decreasing early pain and the occurrence of nausea after spinal fusion surgery. In consideration of the limitation in current meta-analysis, more high-quality RCTs were needed to identify the optimal dose of glucocorticoids in spinal fusion patients.