Pain control with ultrasound-guided inguinal field block compared with spinal anesthesia after hernia surgery: A randomized trial

Results from patient-reported outcome measures are inconsistently reported in inguinal hernia trials: a systematic review

PURPOSE

To evaluate the use, results, and reporting of patient-reported outcome measures specific to patients undergoing inguinal hernia repair.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed and reported according to the PRISMA 2020 statement. A protocol was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42021243468). Systematic searches were performed in PubMed and EMBASE. We only included randomized controlled trials that involved postoperative administration of a hernia-specific patient-reported outcome measure. Risk of bias was evaluated with the Cochrane risk of bias-tool 2.0.

RESULTS

Twenty trials and four different instruments were included: the Carolinas Comfort Scale (nine studies), Activities Assessment Scale (six studies), Inguinal Pain Questionnaire (seven studies), and Surgical Pain Scales (one study). Included trials used patient-reported outcome measures and compared either different surgical approaches (11 studies), types of mesh/fixation (seven studies), or types of anesthesia/analgesia (two studies). Results were reported using several different methods including means, medians, or proportions of either overall results, results from subscales, or results from single questionnaire items. Seven of the 20 included studies specified a patient-reported outcome measure as a primary outcome and provided clear reporting of sample size calculation.

CONCLUSION

Reporting of results from patient-reported outcome measures in inguinal hernia research was characterized by heterogeneity. The results were reported using several different methods, which impedes proper evidence synthesis. Only half of the included studies applied a patient-reported outcome measure as primary outcome. Ultimately, the heterogeneity in outcome reporting is an important methodological problem obstructing the full utilization of patient-reported outcome measures in inguinal hernia research.

European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Guidelines on peri-operative use of ultrasound for regional anaesthesia (PERSEUS regional anesthesia): Peripheral nerves blocks and neuraxial anaesthesia

Nowadays, ultrasound-guidance is commonly used in regional anaesthesia (USGRA) and to locate the spinal anatomy in neuraxial analgesia. The aim of this second guideline on the PERi-operative uSE of UltraSound (PERSEUS-RA) is to provide evidence as to which areas of regional anaesthesia the use of ultrasound guidance should be considered a gold standard or beneficial to the patient. The PERSEUS Taskforce members were asked to define relevant outcomes and rank the relative importance of outcomes following the GRADE process. Whenever the literature was not able to provide enough evidence, we decided to use the RAND method with a modified Delphi process. Whenever compared with alternative techniques, the use of USGRA is considered well tolerated and effective for some nerve blocks but there are certain areas, such as truncal blocks, where a lack of robust data precludes useful comparison. The new frontiers for further research are represented by the application of USG during epidural analgesia or spinal anaesthesia as, in these cases, the evidence for the value of the use of ultrasound is limited to the preprocedure identification of the anatomy, providing the operator with a better idea of the depth and angle of the epidural or spinal space. USGRA can be considered an essential part of the curriculum of the anaesthesiologist with a defined training and certification path. Our recommendations will require considerable changes to some training programmes, and it will be necessary for these to be phased in before compliance becomes mandatory.

The effect of perineural dexamethasone on rebound pain after ropivacaine single-injection nerve block: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Rebound pain after a single-shot nerve block challenges the real benefit of this technique. We aimed to investigate whether perineural dexamethasone addition decreased the incidence of rebound pain after a single-shot nerve block.

METHODS

We randomly allocated 132 patients scheduled for open reduction internal fixation of an upper extremity closed fracture under single-shot peripheral nerve block and sedation into two groups. Patients in the dexamethasone group received nerve block with 0.375% ropivacaine and 8 mg dexamethasone, while those in the control group received ropivacaine only. Sixty-three patients in the dexamethasone group and 60 patients in the control group were analyzed for the incidence of rebound pain 48 h after block administration, which was the primary outcome. The secondary outcomes included the highest self-reported numeric rating scale (NRS) pain score, and NRS at 8, 12, 24, and 48 h after the block, sufentanil consumption, sleep quality on the night of surgery, patient satisfaction with the pain therapy, blood glucose at 6 h after the block, pain and paresthesia at 30 days after surgery.

RESULTS

The incidence of rebound pain was significantly lower in the dexamethasone group (7 [11.1%] of 63 patients) than in the control group (28 [48.8%] of 60 patients [RR = 0.238, 95% CI (0.113-0.504), p = 0.001]. Dexamethasone decreased opioid consumption in 24 h after surgery (p < 0.001) and improved the sleep quality score on the night of surgery (p = 0.01) and satisfaction with pain therapy (p = 0.001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that only group allocation was associated with the occurrence of rebound pain [OR = 0.062, 95% CI (0.015-0.256)]. Patients in the dexamethasone group reported later onset pain (19.7 ± 6.6 h vs 14.7 ± 4.8 h since block administration, mean ± SD, p < 0.001) and lower peak NRS scores [5 (3, 6) vs 8 (5, 9), median (IQR), p < 0.001] than those in the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

The perineural administration of 8 mg dexamethasone reduces rebound pain after a single-shot nerve block in patients receiving ORIF for an upper limb fracture.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was retrospectively registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ( ChiCTR-IPR-17011365 ) on May 11th, 2017.