Multimodal analgesia for hip arthroplasty

PREEMPTIVE ANALGESIA IN ANORECTAL SURGERY: RESULTS OF THE PROSPECTIVE, RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND, PLACEBO-CONTROLLED TRIAL

Aim: To assess the efficiency of preemptive analgesia with Ketoprofen 100 mg 2 hours before procedure per os to decrease postoperative pain. Methods: This prospective, randomized, double-blind study was conducted in the surgical department of the Lomonosov MSU Medical Center. Patients who were diagnosed with anorectal disease without contraindication to perform subarachnoid anesthesia or other somatic diseases and underwent anorectal procedure were included. After signing the consent all participants were randomly divided: the first group got a 100 mg Ketoprofen tablet, the second one got a starch tablet 2 hours before surgery. Following the procedure the primary and secondary outcomes were evaluated: opioid administration intake, the pain at rest and during defecation, duration and frequency of other analgesics intake, readmission rate, life quality, time to return to previous lifestyle, the complications rate. Results: 134 participants were included in the study: 68 in the main group, 66 in the control one. Postoperative pain syndrome was statistically less in the main group on the 4,5,7 days (p=0,035; p=0,023; p=0,046, respectively). Opioid intake after surgery was significantly lower in the main group (p=0.174). The side effects frequency, live quality, time to return to previous lifestyle also didn’t differ in both groups. Conclusion: Preoperative analgesia is safe and effective in reducing postoperative pain in anorectal surgery, reduces the opioid usе, doesn’t increase the ketoprophen side effects frequency. It should be a part of the routine patients’ multimodal management in anorectal surgery.

Comparison of periarticular multidrug injection versus epidural catheter in 55 patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty: A prospective randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Epidural catheter (EC) and periarticular multidrug injection (PMDI) are widely performed for reducing total hip arthroplasty (THA) postoperative pain. However, the more effective analgesic technique between the two is unclear. Thus, we aimed to answer the following questions: (1) does PMDI contribute to less postoperative pain than EC? (2) is there any difference in side-effect occurrence between the methods? (3) does PMDI provide better functional recovery than EC? (4) is there any difference in inflammatory parameters between the methods?

HYPOTHESIS

PMDI would reduce postoperative pain and side effects, provide better functional recovery, and contribute to lower inflammation compared with EC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This single-center, randomized controlled trial was conducted from 2017 to 2019 and enrolled 55 patients randomly allocated into two groups (28 patients: PMDI, 27 patients: EC). The primary outcome was evaluated using the pain visual analogue scale (VAS). The secondary outcomes were narcotic consumption, side effects, hip range of motion (ROM), ratio of patients performing the straight leg raise (SLR) on postoperative day (POD) 1, the day the patient started using a walker and cane, and inflammatory parameters (white blood cell [WBC], and C-reactive protein [CRP]). Paired t-tests and Fisher's exact test were used for comparisons.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in the pain VAS scores between groups. The EC group experienced significantly more side effects than the PMDI group (p<0.01). ROM of the PMDI group on POD 3 was significantly better than the EC group (p<0.05). Furthermore, more patients in the PMDI group could perform SLR than those in the EC group on POD 1 (p=0.01). On POD 1, the WBC count was significantly higher (p<0.01) in the PMDI group, whereas CRP levels were significantly lower in the PMDI group (p<0.05) and remained lower than the EC group on POD 3 (p<0.01).

DISCUSSION

The patients in the PMDI and EC groups had comparable postoperative pain. Those in the PMDI group had lower side effects. Functional recovery was comparable between the patients in the PMDI and EC groups. Compared to the EC group, the PMDI group had higher WBC count and lower CRP levels.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I; Prospective randomized controlled trial.

Post-operative pain control following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: Intravenous acetaminophen versus interscalene brachial plexus block; A prospective randomized study

Background

With the increasing number of patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR), postoperative pain control in these patients has become an important issue. We investigated and compared post-operative pain relief with intravenous acetaminophen (IA) and interscalene brachial plexus block (IBPB) after ARCR.

Methods

This prospective study involved 66 consecutive patients who underwent ARCR in 2019-2020 at our hospital. Overall, 23 and 43 shoulders were assigned to the IA and IBPB groups, respectively. We evaluated the visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores at rest, during activity, and at night for the first 72 h postoperatively. We compared the results statistically between the groups. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

VAS scores for night pain in the IBPB group were significantly lower than those in the IA group for the first 24 h postoperatively (p = 0.017). In contrast, the same scores were significantly lower in the IA group than in the IBPB group at 72 h postoperatively (p = 0.024). Other scores were not significantly different between the groups.

Conclusions

IBPB provides superior night pain control during the first 24 h postoperatively, and IA provides superior night pain control at 72 h postoperatively. However, there were no significant differences in other pain scores between the two groups.

Comparison of periarticular multidrug infiltration and epidural catheter use in total knee arthroplasty: A prospective randomized controlled study

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of periarticular multidrug infiltration (PMDI) and compare it with that of epidural catheter use.

METHODS

Fifty-eight patients (58 joints) who underwent total knee arthroplasty were included in this single-center, prospective, parallel, randomized, controlled trial. Preoperatively, patients were randomly categorized into the PMDI and epidural catheter groups. We evaluated postoperative pain (visual analog scale (VAS) and narcotic consumption), functional outcomes (range of motion (ROM) of knee flexion, the day patients could perform the straight-leg raising (SLR) test, and day of starting cane use), and laboratory data (white blood cell (WBC) and C-reactive protein (CRP)).

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the VAS score, ROM of knee flexion, the day patients could do SLR, and the day of starting cane use between the PMDI and epidural catheter groups. However, the PMDI group could perform SLR on a postoperative day (POD) 1 (p < 0.05). WBC level on POD 1 was significantly higher in the PMDI group (p < 0.05), whereas the CRP levels on POD 1 (p < 0.01), 3 (p < 0.01), and 5 (p < 0.01) were significantly lower in the PMDI group than in the epidural catheter group. The frequency of side effects was not significantly different between the groups.

CONCLUSION

PMDI was as effective as epidural catheter use for pain control. A higher percentage of patients who underwent PMDI could perform SLR on POD 1; therefore, the functional recovery was earlier in the PMDI group than in the epidural catheter group. PMDI may suppress inflammation in the whole body because of steroids.

Local infiltration vs epidural analgesia for postoperative pain control after total knee or hip arthroplasty: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Inconsistent results have been obtained regarding postoperative pain control using local infiltration and epidural analgesia for patients after total knee or hip arthroplasty (TKA and THA). We therefore conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the efficacy and safety of local infiltration vs epidural analgesia for TKA and THA.

METHODS

Electronic searches were conducted on PubMed, EmBase, and the Cochrane library to identify eligible RCTs conducted up to February 2020. Weighted mean difference (WMD) and relative risk with 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were applied to calculate pooled effect estimates between local infiltration and epidural analgesia using the random-effects model.

RESULTS

Seven RCTs including a total of 412 TKA patients, and three RCTs including a total of 200 THA patients were selected for this meta-analysis. We noted that local infiltration was associated with lower visual analog scale (VAS) scores at rest after 48 hours (WMD: -1.31; 95%CI: -2.44 to -0.18; P = .024) and 72 hours (WMD: -0.95; 95%CI: -1.39 to -0.52; P < .001) for patients with TKA, while local infiltration significantly reduced VAS scores at rest after 12 hours for patients with THA (WMD: -1.00; 95%CI: -1.49 to -0.51; P < .001). Moreover, local infiltration was associated with lower VAS scores during movement after 48 hours in TKA patients (WMD: -1.08; 95%CI: -1.86 to -0.29; P = .007), while there were higher VAS scores during movement after 24 hours for patients with THA (WMD: 1.06; 95%CI: 0.67 to 1.45; P < .001). Furthermore, we noted that local infiltration was associated with higher flexion angles compared with epidural analgesia after 24 hours (WMD: 7.11; 95%CI: 2.30-11.93; P = .004), 48 hours (WMD: 6.69; 95%CI: 3.78 to 9.59; P < .001), and 72 hours (WMD: 5.19; 95%CI: 0.95-9.44; P = .016). There were no significant differences between local infiltration and epidural analgesia for the length of hospital stay, nausea, or wound infection.

CONCLUSIONS

Local infiltration is superior to epidural analgesia for postoperative pain control after TKA, whereas for THA patients inconsistent results were obtained at various times.

Enhanced Recovery After Shoulder Arthroplasty

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols depend on multidisciplinary care and should be peer-reviewed and data-driven. ERAS has reduced hospital length of stay and complications, simultaneously improving patient outcomes. ERAS protocol after shoulder arthroplasty features multidisciplinary collaboration among different perioperative services and multimodal analgesia with a focus on regional anesthesia. Despite success, adoption is not universal because ERAS protocols are resource intensive. They require clinicians invested in the success of these programs and patients who can take charge of their own health. Future protocols need to include quality of life and functional outcome measures to gauge success from the patient perspective.

Preemptive Analgesia Decreases Pain Following Anorectal Surgery: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pain is a frequent cause for delayed discharge following outpatient procedures, including anorectal surgery. Both central and peripheral pain receptor sensitization are thought to contribute to postoperative pain. Blocking these receptors and preempting sensitization prevents hyperalgesia leading to lower pain medication requirements. Studies in the orthopedic, urologic, and gynecologic literature support this practice, but the use of preemptive analgesia in anorectal surgery is understudied.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of preemptive analgesia in decreasing postoperative pain.

DESIGN

This is a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial.

SETTING

This study was conducted at the University of Vermont Medical Center, a tertiary care referral center in Burlington, Vermont.

PATIENTS

Patients who were over 18 years of age, ASA Physical Status Classes I, II, or III, and undergoing surgery for anal fissure, fistula or condyloma or hemorrhoids were selected.

INTERVENTIONS

Preoperative oral acetaminophen and gabapentin followed by intravenous ketamine and dexamethasone were given before incision compared with oral placebos.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes measured were postoperative pain scores, percentage of patients utilizing breakthrough narcotics, and rates of side effects.

RESULTS

Ninety patients were enrolled. Because of patient withdrawal, screen failures, and loss to follow-up, 61 patients were analyzed (30 in the preemptive analgesia group and 31 in the control group). Patients in the active group had significantly less pain in the postanesthesia care unit and at 8 hours postoperatively. Significantly fewer participants in the active group used narcotics in the postanesthesia care unit and at 8 hours postoperatively. Average pain scores were excellent for both groups. There was no difference in the number of medication-related side effects between the 2 groups.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by the small sample size and excellent pain control in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Preemptive analgesia is safe and results in decreased pain in the early postoperative period following anorectal surgery. It should be implemented by surgeons performing these procedures. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A588.

Multimodal Analgesia Versus Intravenous Patient-Controlled Analgesia for Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Procedures

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective analysis.

OBJECTIVE

To compare postoperative narcotic consumption and pain scores between multimodal analgesia (MMA) and patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) following minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

A multimodal analgesic approach to pain management may lead to decreased pain and narcotic consumption after orthopedic procedures. Additional evidence is, however, required to determine how MMA compares to intravenous PCA after MIS TLIF.

METHODS

Patients undergoing 1-level MIS TLIF followed by either MMA or PCA at our institution were compared in terms of inpatient pain scores, narcotic consumption, hospital length of stay, rates of surgical complications, rates of inpatient nausea/vomiting, rates of postoperative urinary retention, and rates of narcotic consumption during the months after discharge.

RESULTS

A total of 139 patients met inclusion criteria. Of these, 39 (28.1%) received MMA and 100 (71.9%) received PCA. Demographic and comorbidity characteristics did not differ between cohorts. Compared with patients receiving PCA, patients receiving MMA had a lower rate of inpatient narcotic consumption (2.8 ± 1.9 vs. 5.3 ± 4.4 oral morphine equivalents/hour, P < 0.001), a lower rate of inpatient nausea/vomiting (20.5% vs. 48.0%; P = 0.003), and a shorter hospital length of stay (53.0 ± 25.3 vs. 62.6 ± 24.4 h, P = 0.041). There were no differences in Numeric Rating Scale pain score between cohorts for day 0, postoperative day 1, or postoperative day 2 (P > 0.05 for each). There was no difference in the rate of postoperative urinary retention (P > 0.05). Similarly, there were no differences in narcotic consumption at 6 or 12 weeks postoperatively (P > 0.05 for each).

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that MMA results in reduced inpatient hospital narcotic consumption compared with PCA after MIS TLIF. The decrease in narcotic consumption may contribute to the observed decrease in the rate of inpatient nausea/vomiting and shorter hospital length of stay. Importantly, MMA and PCA resulted in similar analgesia for patients during the inpatient stay.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Combination Therapy with Continuous Three-in-One Femoral Nerve Block and Periarticular Multimodal Drug Infiltration after Total Hip Arthroplasty

Background. Various postoperative pain relief modalities, including continuous femoral nerve block (CFNB), local infiltration analgesia (LIA), and combination therapy, have been reported for total knee arthroplasty. However, no studies have compared CFNB with LIA for total hip arthroplasty (THA). The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of CFNB versus LIA after THA. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed the postoperative outcomes of 93 THA patients (20 men, 73 women; mean age 69.2 years). Patients were divided into three groups according to postoperative analgesic technique: CFNB, LIA, or combined CFNB+LIA. We measured the following postoperative outcome parameters: visual analog scale (VAS) for pain at rest, supplemental analgesia, side effects, mobilization, length of hospital stay, and Harris Hip Score (HHS). Results. The CFNB+LIA group had significantly lower VAS pain scores than the CFNB and LIA groups on postoperative day 1. There were no significant differences among the three groups in use of supplemental analgesia, side effects, mobilization, length of hospital stay, or HHS at 3 months after THA. Conclusions. Although there were no clinically significant differences in outcomes among the three groups, combination therapy with CFNB and LIA provided better pain relief after THA than CFNB or LIA alone, with few side effects.

Comparison of local infiltration and epidural analgesia for postoperative pain control in total knee arthroplasty and total hip arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Pain management after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty should permit early mobilization with minimal pain. Local infiltration analgesia (LIA) is a new popular method for decreasing postoperative pain. The goal of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the efficacy of LIA in comparison with epidural analgesia. A literature search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, the OVID database, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane collaboration tool. Outcomes of interest included visual analog scale score, range of flexion, length of stay, and complications. Nine trials involving 537 patients met the inclusion criteria. LIA provides better pain relief and larger range of motion in TKA patients compared to epidural analgesia at the late postoperative period. No significant difference was observed in regard to the length of stay and complications. The current evidence shows that the use of local infiltration is effective for postoperative pain management in TKA patients. More high-quality randomized controlled trials with long-term follow-up are required for examining the long-term efficacy and safety of local infiltration.

Improving patients’ experience and outcome of total joint replacement: the RESTORE programme

Background

Total hip replacements (THRs) and total knee replacements (TKRs) are common elective procedures. In the REsearch STudies into the ORthopaedic Experience (RESTORE) programme, we explored the care and experiences of patients with osteoarthritis after being listed for THR and TKR up to the time when an optimal outcome should be expected.

Objective

To undertake a programme of research studies to work towards improving patient outcomes after THR and TKR.

Methods

We used methodologies appropriate to research questions: systematic reviews, qualitative studies, randomised controlled trials (RCTs), feasibility studies, cohort studies and a survey. Research was supported by patient and public involvement.

Results

Systematic review of longitudinal studies showed that moderate to severe long-term pain affects about 7–23% of patients after THR and 10–34% after TKR. In our cohort study, 10% of patients with hip replacement and 30% with knee replacement showed no clinically or statistically significant functional improvement. In our review of pain assessment few research studies used measures to capture the incidence, character and impact of long-term pain. Qualitative studies highlighted the importance of support by health and social professionals for patients at different stages of the joint replacement pathway. Our review of longitudinal studies suggested that patients with poorer psychological health, physical function or pain before surgery had poorer long-term outcomes and may benefit from pre-surgical interventions. However, uptake of a pre-operative pain management intervention was low. Although evidence relating to patient outcomes was limited, comorbidities are common and may lead to an increased risk of adverse events, suggesting the possible value of optimising pre-operative management. The evidence base on clinical effectiveness of pre-surgical interventions, occupational therapy and physiotherapy-based rehabilitation relied on small RCTs but suggested short-term benefit. Our feasibility studies showed that definitive trials of occupational therapy before surgery and post-discharge group-based physiotherapy exercise are feasible and acceptable to patients. Randomised trial results and systematic review suggest that patients with THR should receive local anaesthetic infiltration for the management of long-term pain, but in patients receiving TKR it may not provide additional benefit to femoral nerve block. From a NHS and Personal Social Services perspective, local anaesthetic infiltration was a cost-effective treatment in primary THR. In qualitative interviews, patients and health-care professionals recognised the importance of participating in the RCTs. To support future interventions and their evaluation, we conducted a study comparing outcome measures and analysed the RCTs as cohort studies. Analyses highlighted the importance of different methods in treating and assessing hip and knee osteoarthritis. There was an inverse association between radiographic severity of osteoarthritis and pain and function in patients waiting for TKR but no association in THR. Different pain characteristics predicted long-term pain in THR and TKR. Outcomes after joint replacement should be assessed with a patient-reported outcome and a functional test.

Conclusions

The RESTORE programme provides important information to guide the development of interventions to improve long-term outcomes for patients with osteoarthritis receiving THR and TKR. Issues relating to their evaluation and the assessment of patient outcomes are highlighted. Potential interventions at key times in the patient pathway were identified and deserve further study, ultimately in the context of a complex intervention.

Study registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN52305381.

Funding

This project was funded by the NIHR Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full inProgramme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 4, No. 12. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Current Approaches in Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Anaesthesia

Risk assesment, preoperative drug regulation, the anesthesia and analgesia techniques are very important and the effectivity on success of surgery is great. So, these topics in arthroplasty were reviewed under current knowledge.

Multimodal Versus Patient-Controlled Analgesia After an Anterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained surgical registry.

OBJECTIVE

To compare postoperative narcotic consumption between multimodal analgesia (MMA) and patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) after an anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Studies suggest that a multimodal approach to pain management leads to decreased pain and morphine consumption after total joint arthroplasty and lumbar spinal procedures. Patients and surgeons would benefit from knowing whether a multimodal approach to pain management is superior to PCA for ACDF.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of ACDF patients receiving either MMA or PCA was conducted. Inpatient narcotic consumption, pain scores, nausea/vomiting, hospital length of stay, and narcotic dependence during the months after surgery were compared between MMA and PCA.

RESULTS

A total of 239 patients met inclusion criteria. Of these, 55 (23.0%) received MMA and 184 (77.0%) received PCA. Patients who received MMA had a lower rate of inpatient narcotic consumption (2.5 OME/h vs. 5.8 OME/h, P < 0.001) were less likely to experience nausea/vomiting during the hospitalization (5.5% vs. 37.5%, P < 0.001), and had a shorter hospital length of stay (27.3 vs. 40.1 h, P < 0.001). However, there was no difference between groups in mean visual analogue pain scale during postoperative day zero (4.7 for MMA vs. 5.2 for PCA, P = 0.126) or during postoperative day one (4.1 for MMA vs. 4.1 for PCA, P = 0.937). In addition, there was no difference in the rate of narcotic dependence at the first (P = 0.626) or second (P = 0.480) postoperative visits.

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that MMA results in lower narcotic consumption than PCA after an ACDF. This difference is associated with a shorter inpatient stay and a decrease in postoperative nausea/vomiting. Critically, MMA and PCA appear to provide similar postoperative analgesia.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Current Challenges in Pain Management in Hip Fracture Patients

The high incidence of hip fracture, together with considerable associated morbidity, mortality, and cost of care, makes this injury a major clinical challenge. Of particular importance is the pain associated with hip fracture, which can have potentially severe consequences and may lead to delayed recovery. The prevailing opioid-dependent model of analgesia, however, presents multiple drawbacks and risks that can compromise outcomes in the hip fracture population. The pain management process has essential preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative components, yet data on the comparative effectiveness of different pain management interventions in patients undergoing surgery for hip fracture are not clear cut. A Cochrane database review that included 83 different pain management studies indicated that there are not enough well-designed studies to show unequivocally which pain management approaches work well after hip fracture surgery. Yet a growing body of data on certain interventions, such as nerve blocks and multimodal analgesia, supports consideration of these options.

Perioperative Pain Management in Total Hip Arthroplasty: Korean Hip Society Guidelines

Effective perioperative pain management techniques and accelerated rehabilitation programs can improve health-related quality of life and functional status of patients after total hip arthroplasty. Traditionally, postoperative analgesia following arthroplasty was provided by intravenous patient-controlled analgesia or epidural analgesia. Recently, peripheral nerve blockade has emerged alternative analgesic approach. Multimodal analgesia strategy combines analgesics with different mechanisms of action to improve pain management. Intraoperative periarticular injection of multimodal drugs is one of the most important procedures in perioperative pain control for total hip arthroplasty. The goal of this review article is to provide a concise overview of the principles of multimodal pain management regimens as a practical guide for the perioperative pain management for total hip arthroplasty.

Patient-controlled epidural analgesia or multimodal pain regimen with periarticular injection after total hip arthroplasty: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND

The optimal postoperative analgesia after primary total hip arthroplasty remains in question. This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study compared the use of patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) with use of a multimodal pain regimen including periarticular injection (PAI). We hypothesized that PAI would lead to earlier readiness for discharge, decreased opioid consumption, and lower pain scores.

METHODS

Forty-one patients received PAI, and forty-three patients received PCEA. Preoperatively, both groups were administered dexamethasone (6 mg, orally). The PAI group received a clonidine patch and sustained-release oxycodone (10 mg), while the PCEA group had placebo. Both groups received combined spinal-epidural anesthesia and used an epidural pain pump postoperatively; the PAI group had normal saline solution, while the PCEA group had bupivacaine and hydromorphone. The primary outcome, readiness for discharge, required the discontinuation of the epidural, a pain score of <4 (numeric rating scale) without parenteral narcotics, normal eating, minimal nausea, urination without a catheter, a dry surgical wound, no acute medical problems, and the ability to independently transfer and walk 12.2 m (40 ft).

RESULTS

The mean time to readiness for discharge (and standard deviation) was 2.4 ± 0.7 days (PAI) compared with 2.3 ± 0.8 days (PCEA) (p = 0.86). The mean length of stay was 3.0 ± 0.8 days (PAI) compared with 3.1 ± 0.7 days (PCEA) (p = 0.46). A significant mean difference in pain score of 0.74 with ambulation (p = 0.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.18 to 1.31) and 0.80 during physical therapy (p = 0.03; 95% CI, 0.09 to 1.51) favored the PCEA group. The mean opioid consumption (oral morphine equivalents in milligrams) was significantly higher in the PAI group on postoperative day 0 (43 ± 21 compared with 28 ± 23; p = 0.002) and postoperative days 0 through 2 (136 ± 59 compared with 90 ± 79; p = 0.004). Opioid-Related Symptom Distress Scale (ORSDS) composite scores for severity and bothersomeness as well as scores for nausea, vomiting, and itchiness were significantly higher in the PCEA group (p < 0.05). Quality of Recovery-40 scores and patient satisfaction were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

PAI did not decrease the time to discharge and was associated with higher pain scores and greater opioid consumption but lower ORSDS scores compared with PCEA. The choice for analgesic regimen may depend on a particular patient's threshold for pain and the potential side effects.

Local anaesthetic infiltration for peri-operative pain control in total hip and knee replacement: systematic review and meta-analyses of short- and long-term effectiveness

Background

Surgical pain is managed with multi-modal anaesthesia in total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR). It is unclear whether including local anaesthetic infiltration before wound closure provides additional pain control.

Methods

We performed a systematic review of randomised controlled trials of local anaesthetic infiltration in patients receiving THR or TKR. We searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane CENTRAL to December 2012. Two reviewers screened abstracts, extracted data, and contacted authors for unpublished outcomes and data. Outcomes collected were post-operative pain at rest and during activity after 24 and 48 hours, opioid requirement, mobilisation, hospital stay and complications. When feasible, we estimated pooled treatment effects using random effects meta-analyses.

Results

In 13 studies including 909 patients undergoing THR, patients receiving local anaesthetic infiltration experienced a greater reduction in pain at 24 hours at rest by standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.61 (95% CI -1.05, -0.16; p = 0.008) and by SMD -0.43 (95% CI -0.78 -0.09; p = 0.014) at 48 hours during activity.

In TKR, diverse multi-modal regimens were reported. In 23 studies including 1439 patients undergoing TKR, local anaesthetic infiltration reduced pain on average by SMD -0.40 (95% CI -0.58, -0.22; p < 0.001) at 24 hours at rest and by SMD -0.27 (95% CI -0.50, -0.05; p = 0.018) at 48 hours during activity, compared with patients receiving no infiltration or placebo. There was evidence of a larger reduction in studies delivering additional local anaesthetic after wound closure. There was no evidence of pain control additional to that provided by femoral nerve block.

Patients receiving local anaesthetic infiltration spent on average an estimated 0.83 (95% CI 1.54, 0.12; p = 0.022) and 0.87 (95% CI 1.62, 0.11; p = 0.025) fewer days in hospital after THR and TKR respectively, had reduced opioid consumption, earlier mobilisation, and lower incidence of vomiting.

Few studies reported long-term outcomes.

Conclusions

Local anaesthetic infiltration is effective in reducing short-term pain and hospital stay in patients receiving THR and TKR. Studies should assess whether local anaesthetic infiltration can prevent long-term pain. Enhanced pain control with additional analgesia through a catheter should be weighed against a possible infection risk.

Effects of 2 different doses of pregabalin on morphine consumption and pain after abdominal hysterectomy: a randomized, double-blind clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Pregabalin has a similar pharmacologic profile to that of its developmental predecessor gabapentin but has shown greater analgesic activity in rodent models of neuropathic pain.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to compare the effects of 2 different doses of pregabalin and placebo on postoperative pain and morphine consumption.

METHODS

Ninety patients who underwent abdominal hysterectomy were included in the study and randomly divided into 3 groups in a doubled-blinded manner. They were given 150 mg of pregabalin (group P300, n = 30), 300 mg of pregabalin (group P600, n = 30), or placebo capsules (group C, n = 30) 4 hours before the induction of anesthesia; they received a second dose of the drug 12 hours postoperatively. Morphine consumption, nausea, and vomiting, visual analogue scale-pain intensity (VAS-PI), sedation scores, and dissatisfaction scores were recorded in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) and at 2, 4, 6, and 24 hours after operation.

RESULTS

Morphine consumption at 24 hours was 40.80 (3.42) mg, 33.79 (5.77) mg, and 46.97 (6.67) mg in groups P300, P600, and C, respectively (P < 0.001). VAS-PI scores at movement and at rest in the PACU and at 2, 4, and 6 hours decreased in group P600 (P < 0.01). In the PACU and at 2, 4, and 6 hours, the sedation scores were increased in group P600 compared with the scores in group C (P < 0.001, P < 0.001, P = 0.01, P = 0.006, respectively). Patient satisfaction was higher in group P600 than in group C for all time points (P < 0.001, P < 0.001, P < 0.001, P = 0.001, P < 0.001, respectively). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups for side effects such as nausea, vomiting, and dizziness (P = 0.58).

CONCLUSIONS

Pregabalin at a total dose of 600 mg, administered before operation and at 12 hours postoperatively after abdominal hysterectomy, reduced morphine consumption and pain intensity and increased patient satisfaction. No significant differences in side effects were observed between the study groups.

Multimodal therapy in perioperative analgesia

This article reviews the current evidence for multimodal analgesic options for common surgical procedures. As perioperative physicians, we have come a long way from using only opioids for postoperative pain to combinations of acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), selective Cyclo-oxygenase (COX-2) inhibitors, local anesthetics, N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists, and regional anesthetics. As discussed in this article, many of these agents have decreased narcotic requirements, improved patient satisfaction, and decreased postanesthesia care unit (PACU) times, as well as morbidity in the perioperative period.

Multimodal analgesia therapy reduces length of hospitalization in patients undergoing fusions of the ankle and hindfoot

BACKGROUND

Multimodal postoperative analgesia employs multiple medications given perioperatively to block the generation and perception of pain at different points in the nociceptive pathway. This retrospective study examines its effect on the length of stay for patients undergoing hindfoot and ankle fusions.

METHODS

All patients operated upon by the senior authors between 2007 and 2011, inclusive, underwent ankle fusion, subtalar fusion, pantalar arthrodesis, triple arthrodesis, or combined ankle/subtalar fusions. The perioperative pain management was either the "traditional" method (patient-controlled-analgesia-delivered parenteral narcotics beginning immediately postoperatively) or the multimodal pain protocol (pre- and postoperative oral administration of opioids, celecoxib, pregabalin, acetaminophen, and prednisone). The choice of pain protocol was up to the surgeons, without any exclusion criteria. Physical therapy protocols were not changed during the study. The study included 220 patients; 175 received the multimodal protocol and 45 received traditional management. Multimodal protocol patients were younger (53.9 vs 59.7 years; P < .003), but there were no other differences between the groups with respect to gender, obesity, body mass index, tobacco use, alcohol use, or comorbidities. Complex cases (revision surgeries, Charcot joint surgeries, multiple concurrent procedures, etc) were equally represented in both groups.

RESULTS

Multimodal protocol patients had lower lengths of stay (2.5 days; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-3.7) than traditional pain management patients (4.2 days; 95% CI, 2.7-5.7; P < .001). This was also true for both complicated and uncomplicated surgeries when considered separately.

CONCLUSION

This study provides the first evidence that multimodal therapy reduces the length of stay for patients undergoing major hindfoot or ankle fusion surgery, regardless of surgical complexity.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, comparative series.

Periarticular infiltration for pain relief after total hip arthroplasty: a comparison with epidural and PCA analgesia

PURPOSE

Epidural and intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) are established methods for pain relief after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Periarticular infiltration is an alternative method that is gaining ground due to its simplicity and safety. Our study aims to assess the efficacy of periarticular infiltration in pain relief after THA.

METHODS

Sixty-three patients undergoing THA under spinal anaesthesia were randomly assigned to receive postoperative analgesia with continuous epidural infusion with ropivacaine (epidural group), intraoperative periarticular infiltration with ropivacaine, clonidine, morphine, epinephrine and corticosteroids (infiltration group) or PCA with morphine (PCA group). PCA morphine provided rescue analgesia in all groups. We recorded morphine consumption, visual analog scale (VAS) scores at rest and movement, blood loss from wound drainage, mean arterial pressure (MAP) and adverse effects at 1, 6, 12, 24 h postoperatively.

RESULTS

Morphine consumption at all time points, VAS scores at rest, 6, 12 and 24 h and at movement, 6 and 12 h postoperatively were lower in infiltration group compared to PCA group (p < 0.05), but did not differ between infiltration and epidural group. There was no difference in adverse events in all groups. At 24 h, MAP was higher in the PCA group (p < 0.05) and blood loss was lower in the infiltration group (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In our study periarticular infiltration was clearly superior to PCA with morphine after THA, providing better pain relief and lower opioid consumption postoperatively. Infiltration seems to be equally effective to epidural analgesia without having the potential side effects of the latter.

Does the anterior approach for THA provide closer-to-normal lower-limb motion?

The purpose of this study was to compare the muscle-sparing anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty to a traditional lateral approach using 3D motion analysis. Kinematics and kinetics of walking were obtained for 40 patients (20 anterior and 20 lateral) and 20 control participants. Participants were assessed six to twelve months postoperatively. It was hypothesized that the anterior group would have closer-to-normal range of motion, moments, and powers than the lateral group. Both surgical groups had gait anomalies, such as significantly lower peak hip abduction moments. It is therefore thought that other variables such as preoperative gait adaptations, trauma from the surgery, or postoperative protection mechanisms for avoiding loading the prosthesis might be more influential factors than surgical approach when determining function after surgery.

Local Infiltration Analgesia for Postoperative Pain Control following Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review

Local infiltration analgesia (LIA) is an analgesic technique that has gained popularity since it was first brought to widespread attention by Kerr and Kohan in 2008. The technique involves the infiltration of a large volume dilute solution of a long-acting local anesthetic agent, often with adjuvants (e.g., epinephrine, ketorolac, an opioid), throughout the wound at the time of surgery. The analgesic effect duration can then be prolonged by the placement of a catheter to the surgical site for postoperative administration of further local anesthetic. The technique has been adopted for use for postoperative analgesia following a range of surgical procedures (orthopedic, general, gynecological, and breast surgeries). The primary objective of this paper was to determine, based on the current evidence, if LIA is superior when compared to no intervention, placebo, and alternative analgesic methods in patients following total hip arthroplasty, in terms of certain outcome measures. The outcomes considered were postoperative analgesia scores, joint function/rehabilitation, and length of hospital stay. Secondary objectives were to review available evidence and current knowledge regarding the pharmacokinetics of local anesthetic and adjuvant drugs when administered in this way and the occurrence of adverse events.

Antinociceptive effects of low dose lumbosacral epidural ropivacaine in healthy ponies

The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of low dose lumbosacral epidural ropivacaine in ponies. Antinociceptive effects of epidural ropivacaine were evaluated by means of mechanical nociceptive thresholds (MNTs) at several spinal levels in conscious ponies. The effects of ropivacaine on nociceptive afferent transmission to the spinal cord were also assessed by measuring spinal cord somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs) in anaesthetised ponies. Ataxia scores were determined in conscious ponies to assess the effects on motor function. A randomised, placebo controlled, double blind cross-over design was used. Low dose lumbosacral epidural ropivacaine led to increases in MNTs at various anatomical locations with a maximum effect at the lumbosacral and sacrococcygeal regions, both with respect to increase in threshold and duration of effect. Analysis of SSEPs showed that epidural ropivacaine influenced both Aβ- and Aδ-mediated afferent transmission to the spinal cord at the level of the lumbosacral junction. Ponies showed mild ataxia after low dose lumbosacral epidural ropivacaine, but all ponies remained standing. Application of low dose lumbosacral epidural ropivacaine provided safe and efficacious antinociceptive effects in conscious and anaesthetised ponies, and could therefore be a valuable addition to multimodal analgesic protocols in Equidae.

Multimodal approach to postoperative pain control in patients undergoing rotator cuff repair

PURPOSE

This prospective study was undertaken to compare the effectiveness and safety of a multimodal pain control protocol with those of intravenous patient-controlled analgesia in rotator cuff repair.

METHODS

Seventy patients scheduled for rotator cuff repair were randomized to either a multimodal pain control group (group 1, 40 patients) or an intravenous patient-controlled analgesia group (group 2, 30 patients). We compared these two groups with respect to level of pain before surgery to the fifth postoperative day, duration of postoperative rehabilitation, consumption of additional analgesics, and adverse effects.

RESULTS

Mean visual analogue scale scores immediately after surgery (day 0) and on postoperative days 1-5 were 6.9, 5.5, 4.3, 3.3, 3.0, and 2.6 in group 1 and 7.8, 5.9, 4.4, 4.7, 4.3, and 3.7 in group 2. Pain relief was significantly better in group 1 on days 0, 3, 4, and 5 (P = 0.026, 0.006, 0.010, and 0.009, respectively). Furthermore, functional recovery occurred earlier in group 1. No significant differences were observed between the two groups with respect to nausea, vomiting, urinary retention, and headache (n.s.), but group 1 was found to be significantly less likely to experience dizziness or urticaria (P = 0.007, 0.017, respectively). One other significant difference was observed: 1 patient (2.5%) in group 1 and 6 patients (20%) in group 2 discontinued regimen because of medication-related adverse effects (P = 0.016).

CONCLUSION

The multimodal pain control protocol was found to offer more effective postoperative pain control with fewer adverse effects than intravenous patient-controlled analgesia. However, achieving adequate pain control within the first 48 h of surgery remains challenging, and thus, the developments of more effective and safer multimodal pain control protocols are required.

Using evidence to enhance the recovery of patients undergoing colorectal surgery: part 2

This is the second part of a three-part series describing how an enhanced recovery clinical pathway uses a multidisciplinary team to reduce postoperative stress and complications, improve recovery, and decrease hospital length of stay without affecting patient safety for patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Last month, patient education and discharge planning were discussed. This part discusses multimodal analgesia and standardized postoperative nausea and vomiting prophylaxis. Next month, fluids, diet, tubes and drains, and early mobilization will be discussed.

Pain management in total joint arthroplasty: a historical review

Patients undergoing total hip and knee arthroplasty experience substantial and sustained postoperative pain. Inadequate analgesia may impede recovery and delay hospital discharge. Traditionally, postoperative analgesia following arthroplasty was provided by intravenous patient-controlled analgesia or epidural analgesia, but each technique has distinct advantages and disadvantages. Recently, peripheral nerve blockade of the lumbosacral plexus has emerged as an alternative analgesic approach. An increasing number of studies have reported multimodal analgesia featuring unilateral peripheral block provide pain relief and functional outcomes similar to that of continuous epidural and superior to systemic analgesia but with fewer side effects. This review discusses the indications, benefits, and side effects associated with conventional and innovative analgesic approaches to facilitate rehabilitation and improve outcome following total joint arthroplasty.