Does preincisional injection of levobupivacaine with epinephrine have any benefits for children undergoing tonsillectomy? An intraindividual evaluation

Periarticular injection in addition to interscalene nerve block can decrease opioid consumption and pain following total shoulder arthroplasty: a comparison cohort study

BACKGROUND

Interscalene nerve block (INB) is an effective technique to provide postoperative analgesia for total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). However, the analgesic effects of the block typically resolve between 8 and 24 hours postadministration, which results in rebound pain and subsequent increased opioid use. The objective of this study was to address this issue by determining how adding an intraoperative periarticular injection (PAI) in combination with INB affects acute postoperative opioid consumption and pain scores in patients undergoing TSA. We hypothesized that compared with INB alone, INB + PAI will significantly reduce opioid consumption and pain scores for the first 24 hours postsurgery.

METHODS

We reviewed 130 consecutive patients who underwent elective primary TSA at a single tertiary institution. The first 65 patients were treated with INB alone, followed by 65 patients treated with INB + PAI. The INB used was 15-20 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine. The PAI used was 50 mL of a combination of ropivacaine (123 mg), epinephrine (0.25 mg), clonidine (40 μg), and ketorolac (15 mg). The PAI was injected using a standardized protocol: 10 mL into the subcutaneous tissues prior to incision, 15 mL into the supraspinatus fossa, 15 mL at the base of the coracoid process, and 10 mL into the deltoid and pectoralis muscles-a protocol analogous with a previously described technique. For all patients, a standardized postoperative oral pain medication protocol was used. The primary outcome was acute postoperative opioid consumption represented by morphine equivalent units (MEUs), whereas the secondary outcome was visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores over the first 24 hours postsurgery, operative time, length of stay, and acute perioperative complications.

RESULTS

No significant differences in demographics existed between patients who received INB alone vs. INB + PAI. Patients who received INB + PAI had a significantly lower 24-hour postoperative opioid consumption compared to the INB alone group (38.6 ± 30.5 MEU vs. 60.5 ± 37.3 MEU, P < .001). Additionally, VAS pain scores for the first 24 hours postsurgery in the INB + PAI group were significantly lower compared to those for the INB alone group (2.9 ± 1.5 vs. 4.3 ± 1.6, P ≤ .001). No differences existed between groups regarding operative time, length of inpatient stay, and acute perioperative complications.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing TSA with INB + PAI demonstrated significantly decreased 24-hour postoperative total opioid consumption and 24-hour postoperative pain scores compared to the group treated with INB alone. No increase in acute perioperative complications related to PAI was observed. Thus, compared to an INB, the addition of an intraoperative periarticular cocktail injection appears to be a safe and effective method to reduce acute postoperative pain following TSA.

Evaluation of Anterior and Posterior Pillar Suturing Following Adult Tonsillectomy in Terms of Hemorrhage, Pain, and Dysphagia Complications

Tonsillectomy is one of the most common surgical procedures performed by otolaryngologists. Postoperative complications, although rare, can be observed in tonsillectomy. This study aimed to investigate the effect of anterior and posterior pillar suturing on dysphagia, hemorrhage, and pain complications following tonsillectomy in adult patients. The study included 80 patients (32 males, 48 females; > 18 years) who underwent tonsillectomy. The patients were divided into two groups: Group 1, in which the tonsillar lodge was closed by anterior-posterior pillar suturing with a 3-0 chromic catgut suture after hemostatic compression and Group 2, in which the tonsillar lodge was exposed following hemostatic compression and bipolar cauterization. Post-surgical pain was assessed using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). Oropharyngeal dysphagia was evaluated using the Eating Assessment Tool (EAT)-10. None of the patients experienced postoperative primary hemorrhage. However, postoperative secondary hemorrhage was observed in seven patients, two from Group 1 and five from Group 2. There was no significant difference in postoperative hemorrhage between the two groups (p = 0.449). Furthermore, no statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of the NRS scores on postoperative day 1 and at postoperative week 2 (p = 0.130 and 0.142, respectively) or the EAT-10 scores at postoperative week 2 and postoperative month 6 (p = 0.925 and 0.090, respectively). Anterior-posterior pillar suturing, which is performed for hemorrhage control after tonsillectomy, is not superior to the conventional bipolar method in terms of postoperative dysphagia, hemorrhage, and pain.

Efficacy of Levobupivacaine Versus Levobupivacaine Plus Dexmedetomidine Infiltration for Post-Tonsillectomy Analgesia: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background. The study evaluated the analgesic effects of levobupivacaine infiltration in the tonsil bed, and a combination of levobupivacaine and dexmedetomidine in patients undergoing tonsillectomy. Methods. Ninety children (ages 3 to 7 years) who were scheduled for a tonsillectomy were allocated randomly into two groups. (L Group): peritonsillar infiltration with 0.25% levobupivacaine (2 ml + 0.5 ml saline 0.9% per tonsil). (LD Group): levobupivacaine 0.25% (2 ml) plus dexmedetomidine 1 μg/kg diluted in 1 ml saline 0.9% (0.5 ml in each tonsil), and administered by peritonsillar infiltration (2.5 ml per tonsil) following intubation 3–5 minutes before operation. To avoid bias, infiltrate a total volume of 2.5 ml in each tonsil. The first analgesic request time was the primary outcome, with postoperative pain score, total analgesic consumption, total oral intake, sedation, and side effects as secondary outcomes. Results. The first rescue analgesia time in the LD group was longer (644.31 ± 112.89 min) than in the L group (551.51 ± 146.16 min, $P$ -value <0.001). The number of patients who required >1 analgesic dose in the L group (n = 13) was higher than in the LD group (n = 5). The LD group consumes a lower total dose of IV paracetamol in the first 24 hours postoperatively (321.89 ± 93.25 mg) than the L group (394.89 ± 183.71 mg, $P<0.00$ -value < 0.050). On the first day postoperatively, patients in the LD group had a higher total oral intake ( $P<0.001$ ). Except for a slight increase in laryngospasm in the L group, there were no side effects. Conclusions. The Children’s peritonsillar infiltration of levobupivacaine and dexmedetomidine improved postoperative pain after adenotonsillectomy. The topically applied levobupivacaine and dexmedetomidine were concomitant with no systemic effects, greater total oral intake on the first day postoperative, and higher family satisfaction.

Critical review on the efficacy and safety of levobupivacaine peritonsillar infiltration

Levobupivacaine is a long-acting local anesthetic that is both safe and non-toxic. However, few researchers have examined the efficacy and safety of peritonsillar injections of levobupivacaine for postoperative pain relief. The goal of this study was to assess current randomized controlled trials that employed this strategy. A literature review was conducted using databases such as DELPHIS, PUBMED, COCHRANE, and SCOPUS. A total of fifteen randomized controlled trials were found and thoroughly reviewed. There were no fatalities reported. One study reported a case of nausea and vomiting. In most of the studies, levobupivacaine with magnesium, epinephrine, dexamethasone hydrochloride, tramadol, or levobupivacaine alone were compared to a placebo. Four trials employed different combinations of levobupivacaine and other medicines to recruit adults. Most of the studies had a modest sample size. As a result, larger research with more representative populations should be conducted. Despite certain flaws in the trial design, our findings suggest that levobupivacaine is safe and effective at reducing postoperative pain.

Comparison of the Perioperative and Postoperative Effects of Levobupivacaine and of Levobupivacaine + Adrenaline in Pediatric Tonsillectomy: A Double-Blind Randomized Study

Objectives

We aimed to assess the effects of levobupivacaine and of levobupivacaine + adrenaline administered during pediatric tonsillectomy on the postoperative period.

Methods

A total of 90 patients between the ages of five and twelve were divided randomly into two groups before tonsillectomy: levobupivacaine only (0.5%) 0.4 mg·kg⁻¹ or levobupivacaine (0.5%) 0.4 mg·kg⁻¹ + adrenaline (1 : 200.000) administered by means of peritonsillar infiltration. Primary outcomes were postoperative pain scores recorded at various intervals until 24 hours postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), time to first oral intake, time to the first administration of analgesics and total consumption of analgesics, and the amount of bleeding for all children.

Results

In both groups, patients had the same postoperative pain scores and PONV rates, and equal amounts of analgesics were consumed up to 24 hours postoperatively. The two groups also had the same time until first oral intake, recovery time and time to the first analgesic request, and amount of bleeding.

Conclusions

Perioperative levobupivacaine infiltration on its own is a valid alternative to the combination of levobupivacaine + adrenaline for perioperative and postoperative effectiveness in pediatric tonsillectomy. This trial is registered with Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN: ACTRN12617001167358.

The Efficacy of Levobupivacaine Hydrochloride-Dexamethasone Infiltration for Post-Tonsillectomy Pain in Adults

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study is to evaluate the efficacy of peritonsillar infiltration of a levobupivacaine hydrochloride and dexamethasone combination for post-tonsillectomy pain in adult patients.

METHODS

A total of 40 patients were included in this double-blind, randomized, and placebo-controlled study. The patients were equally randomized into 2 groups by means of sealed envelopes. The study group (SG) received peritonsillar levobupivacaine hydrochloride and dexamethasone infiltration and the control group (CG) received peritonsillar saline infiltration. Pain scores at the second, fourth, eighth, 12th, 16th, and 24th hours and the second to seventh days after operation were recorded by the patients in each group using a visual analog scale. Duration of surgery and the total amount of blood loss during the surgery were also recorded for each patient.

RESULTS

All pain scores in the SG were lower than those in the CG; however, the difference was significant at the second, 12th, and 16th hours, and the second and third day (P < 0.05). Postoperative morbidity parameters, including otalgia, nausea, vomiting, fever, halitosis, and bleeding were similar between the 2 groups. Total amount of analgesic consumption in the SG was significantly lower than in the CG on each day of the week after tonsillectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Peritonsillar infiltration of a levobupivacaine hydrochloride and dexamethasone combination may provide pain reduction and decrease analgesic consumption in the postoperative period after adult tonsillectomy.

Pre-emptive peritonsillar dexamethasone vs. levobupivacaine infiltration for relief of post-adenotonsillectomy pain in children: a controlled clinical study

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the effects of the pre-emptive local infiltration of dexamethasone vs. levobupivacaine on postoperative pain and morbidity in pediatric adenotonsillectomy patients.

METHODS

A total of 60 patients (32 males and 28 females), aged 3-14 years, were included in this double-blind prospective randomized controlled clinical study from September of 2011 until May of 2012. Patients admitted for adenotonsillectomies after informed consent was obtained from the parents, and randomized into three groups receiving either dexamethasone sodium phosphate (Group 1, mean age 5.9 ± 1.6), levobupivacaine with epinephrine (Group 2, mean age 6.1 ± 2.6), or saline (Group 3, mean age 6.0 ± 3.4). Pain scores at the 1st, 4th, 8th, 12th, 16th, and 20th hours, and first, second, third and seventh days post-operatively were recorded by the parents using McGrath's face scale. The operation type, operation time and anesthesia time, the time of the first request for postoperative analgesia, and the total number of analgesic interventions were recorded.

RESULTS

Pain scores were revealed in this order: Group 1 (steroid) < Group 2 (levobupivacaine) < Group 3 (saline) at all times (p = 0.000). The anesthesia times for Group 1 and Group 2 were different (steroid vs. levobupivacaine), and the time to first analgesic was longer in Groups 1 (steroid) and 2 (levobupivacaine) than in Group 3 (saline) (p < 0.000). The total number of analgesic interventions was lower in Group 1 (steroid) than in Group 2 (levobupivacaine) and Group 3 (saline) (steroid vs. saline, p = 0.000, and steroid vs. levobupivacaine, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Peritonsillar dexamethasone infiltration was more effective than both levobupivacaine and saline in reducing post-tonsillectomy pain. It was proven to be a safe and effective method.

Vasoconstrictive and analgesic efficacy of locally infiltrated levobupivacaine in tonsillectomy patients

OBJECTIVES

The use of preincisional plain levobupivacaine, lidocaine adrenaline and saline for perioperative blood loss and postoperative analgesia in pediatric tonsillectomy patients are compared.

METHODS

Ninety patients were randomly assigned into one of the 3 groups to receive preincisional peritonsillar infiltration of levobupivacaine 0.25% (group LB), lidocaine-adrenaline 1% with 1:200,000 (group LA) and saline (group S) under general anesthesia. Intraoperative blood loss, pre- and postoperative hemoglobin (hb) and haematocrit (htc) values, hemostasis time, operation duration, number of cautery used (20 W, 1s) and heart rates were recorded. Pain scores in PACU, at 6th, 12th and 24th hours postoperatively and the number of the patients requiring analgesic treatment for first 24h was also recorded.

RESULTS

There was a 30% reduction in perioperative blood loss in group LB and 63% reduction in group LA compared to group S (39 ± 6, 21 ± 4 and 55 ± 7 ml respectively) (p<0.001). Even though all three groups have significantly lower postoperative hb and htc values with respect to preoperative levels both local anesthetic groups had significantly higher postoperative hb and htc values than saline (p<0.001). Time required for hemostasis, the number of cautery used for haemostasis and operation duration were lower in groups LB and LA with respect to group S. Pain scores of the group LB revealed a significantly lower score throughout 24h. Only 14 patients in group LB demanded additional analgesic where as all patients in the other groups had. Adding adrenaline to the local anesthetic solution showed no side effects. Also we did not happened to see any complications related to local anesthetic injections. There was no postoperative major bleeding in groups.

CONCLUSION

Levobupivacaine has a vasoconstrictive effect in 0.25% concentrations that may be beneficial in tonsillectomy patients and has a consistent analgesic effect.

The effects of levobupivacaine infiltration on post-tonsillectomy pain relief in adults: a single-blinded, randomized, and controlled clinical study

The aim of this prospective single-blinded and controlled study is to evaluate the efficacy of levobupivacaine infiltration on post-tonsillectomy pain relief in adults. The study was conducted with 40 adult patients who underwent tonsillectomy. These patients were randomized in either study group (SG) who received levobupivacaine infiltration to peritonsillary fossae prior to surgery or control group (CG) with no medication. After surgery, all the patients were queried for pain scores by visual analog scale. In addition, the volume of intraoperative bleeding, the duration of operation, the severity of postoperative complications, and the amount of analgesic requirement were the other outcome measures of this study. There were significant differences between groups regarding pain scores for the first 24 h in favor of SG. The analgesic requirement was also significantly lower in SG (p = 0.009). Although there was a sustained decrement at pain score during first 24 h for SG, however, the change from baseline score (immediate score) for each time interval revealed no significance compared to CG. In addition, the duration of operation and the volume of intraoperative bleeding were similar (p = 0.64 and p = 0.165). In conclusion, preincisional infiltration of levobupivacaine is a safe and reliable method for post-tonsillectomy pain reduction in adults. However, more in-depth, double-blinded and placebo controlled studies are required to elucidate its long term benefits.

Focused local anesthesia and analgesia for head and neck surgery

Facility in the use of head and neck regional blocks will provide excellent perioperative analgesia and patient satisfaction. The scope of ambulatory surgical care for head and neck surgery will undoubtedly increase as expertize in these blocks expand in the face of strict criteria for patient selection. Supplemental sedation will be more precise with the intended result of less hangover and nausea and vomiting.

Comparison of peritonsillar levobupivacaine and bupivacaine infiltration for post-tonsillectomy pain relief in children: placebo-controlled clinical study

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of preincisional peritonsillar infiltration of levobupivacaine and bupivacaine on post-tonsillectomy pain in children.

METHODS

Sixty children undergoing elective tonsillectomy or adenotonsillectomy were randomly allocated into three groups before tonsillectomy: peritonsillar infiltrations with 0.25% levobupivacaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine (group levobupivacaine, n=20), 0.25% bupivacaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine (group bupivacaine, n=20), and normal saline (group saline, n=20) were applied. Pain was evaluated by using a modified Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Pain Scale (mCHEOPS). Choice of additional analgesic was acetaminophen for all patients.

RESULTS

mCHEOPS values at 0th (immediately) and 30th minute after arrival the PACU were lower in both the local anesthetics groups than the saline group (p<0.001, p<0.01 for the group levobupivacaine; p<0.001, p<0.05 for the group bupivacaine, respectively). In addition, mCHEOPS values at 1st hour in the ward was lower in the group bupivacaine when compared to the group saline (p<0.05). Analgesic requirements and the time to first analgesia required, were also significantly different between the local anesthetic and saline groups (p<0.05 for both local anesthetics groups). Time to first mobilization was shorter in both local anesthetic groups when compared to the saline group (p<0.05 for both local anesthetic groups).

CONCLUSION

Preincisional peritonsillar infiltration with levobupivacaine or bupivacaine before tonsillectomy, are effective than saline, in reducing early post-tonsillectomy pain, where as bupivacaine had slightly longer effect. Compared to saline, with both anesthetic infiltrations, lesser medication for analgesia is required. The clinical trial registration number (Research Ethics Committee of Medical Faculty, Uludag University): 2008-4/36, 19 February 2008.