Comparative analgesic efficacy of patient-controlled analgesia with ketorolac versus morphine after elective intraabdominal operations

Regional anesthesia and acute perioperative pain management in thoracic surgery: a narrative review

Background and Objective

Thoracic surgery causes significant pain which can negatively affect pulmonary function and increase risk of postoperative complications. Effective analgesia is important to reduce splinting and atelectasis. Systemic opioids and thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) have been used for decades and are effective at treating acute post-thoracotomy pain, although both have risks and adverse effects. The advancement of thoracoscopic surgery, a focus on multimodal and opioid-sparing analgesics, and the development of ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia techniques have greatly expanded the options for acute pain management after thoracic surgery. Despite the expansion of surgical techniques and analgesic approaches, there is no clear optimal approach to pain management. This review aims to summarize the body of literature regarding systemic and regional anesthetic techniques for thoracic surgery in both thoracotomy and minimally invasive approaches, with a goal of providing a foundation for providers to make individualized decisions for patients depending on surgical approach and patient factors, and to discuss avenues for future research.

Methods

We searched PubMed and Google Scholar databases from inception to May 2021 using the terms “thoracic surgery”, “thoracic surgery AND pain management”, “thoracic surgery AND analgesia”, “thoracic surgery AND regional anesthesia”, “thoracic surgery AND epidural”. We considered articles written in English and available to the reader.

Key Content and Findings

There is a wide variety of strategies for treating acute pain after thoracic surgery, including multimodal opioid and non-opioid systemic analgesics, regional anesthesia including TEA and paravertebral blocks (PVB), and a recent expansion in the use of novel fascial plane blocks especially for thoracoscopy. The body of literature on the effectiveness of different approaches for thoracotomy and thoracoscopy is a rapidly expanding field and area of active debate.

Conclusions

The optimal analgesic approach for thoracic surgery may depend on patient factors, surgical factors, and institutional factors. Although TEA may provide optimal analgesia after thoracotomy, PVB and emerging fascial plane blocks may offer effective alternatives. A tailored approach using multimodal systemic therapies and regional anesthesia is important, and future studies comparing techniques are necessary to further investigate the optimal approach to improve patient outcomes.

Comparison of Postoperative Renal Function between Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug and Opioids for Patient-Controlled Analgesia after Laparoscopic Nephrectomy: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) can be used as opioid alternatives for patient-controlled analgesia (PCA). However, their use after nephrectomy has raised concerns regarding possible nephrotoxicity. This study compared postoperative renal function and postoperative outcomes between patients using NSAID and patients using opioids for PCA in nephrectomy. In this retrospective observational study, records were reviewed for 913 patients who underwent laparoscopic or robot-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy from 2015 to 2017. After propensity score matching, 247 patients per group were analyzed. Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) percentages (postoperative value divided by preoperative value), blood urea nitrogen (BUN)/creatinine ratios, and serum creatinine percentages were compared at 2 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year after surgery between users of NSAID and users of opioids for PCA. Additionally, postoperative complication rates, postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) incidences, postoperative pain scores, and lengths of hospital stay were compared between groups. Postoperative GFR percentages, BUN/creatinine ratios, and serum creatinine percentages were similar between the two groups. There were no significant differences in the rates of postoperative complications, incidences of AKI, and pain scores at 30 min, 6 h, 48 h, or 7 days postoperatively. The length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the NSAID group than in the opioid group. This study showed no association between the use of NSAID for PCA after laparoscopic nephrectomy and the incidence of postoperative renal dysfunction.

Effect of Intravenous Morphine and Ketorolac on Pain Control in Long Bones Fractures

BACKGROUND

According to the lack of adequate studies on comparing the analgesic effect and complications of ketorolac with morphine in long bone fractures, this study aimed to compare the efficacy of ketorolac with morphine in patients referring to the Emergency Department with long bones damage and fracture.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this clinical trial study, 88 patients with long bone fracture were selected randomly and divided into two groups. To scale the intensity of pain, visual analog scale (VAS) were used. Intravenous ketorolac and morphine with the loading dose of 10 mg and 5 mg, respectively was administered to a group, followed by 5 mg and 2.5 mg every 5-20 min, if necessary (VAS ≥4). The pain scores before injection and at 5 min, half an hour and 1-h after the injection were measured and recorded for all patients.

RESULTS

The mean age of the ketorolac and morphine groups was 29.1 ± 12.5 and 33.2 ± 11.4, respectively. In the groups, there was 63.6% and 70.5% of male patients respectively. The mean ± SD of pain score before the injection was 7.59 ± 1 and 7.93 ± 1.09 (P = 0.13). One hour after the injection, the mean ± SD of pain in the both groups was 1.41 ± 0.9 and 1.61 ± 1.17 and the mean pain score has no significant difference in the two groups before the injection. Repeated measures ANOVA test also showed that the trend of changes in pain score had no significant difference in both groups (P = 0.08).

CONCLUSION

According to the fewer side effects of ketorolac and effective pain release versus morphine, ketorolac could be suggested to use.

A comparison between ketorolac and nefopam as adjuvant analgesics for postoperative patient-controlled analgesia: a randomized, double-blind, prospective study

Background

We compared the analgesic efficacy and side effects of ketorolac and nefopam that were co-administered with fentanyl via intravenous patient-controlled analgesia.

Methods

One hundred and sixty patients scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomly assigned to ketorolac (Group K) or nefopam (Group N) groups. The anesthetic regimen was standardized for all patients. The analgesic solution contained fentanyl 600 µg and ketorolac 180 mg in Group K, and fentanyl 600 µg and nefopam 120 mg in Group N. The total volume of analgesic solution was 120 ml. Postoperative analgesic consumption, recovery of pulmonary function, and pain intensities at rest and during the forced expiration were evaluated at postoperative 2, 6, 24, and 48 h. The postoperative side effects of analgesics were recorded.

Results

Cumulative postoperative analgesic consumptions at postoperative 48 h were comparable (Group K: 93.4 ± 24.0 ml vs. Group N: 92.9 ± 26.1 ml, P = 0.906) between the groups. Pain scores at rest and during deep breathing were similar at the time of each examination. The recovery of pulmonary function showed no significant differences between the groups. Overall, postoperative nausea and vomiting incidence was higher in Group N compared with Group K (59% vs. 34%, P = 0.015). The other side effects were comparable between both groups.

Conclusions

Analgesic efficacies of ketorolac and nefopam that were co-administered with fentanyl for postoperative pain management as adjuvant analgesics were similar. However, postoperative nausea and vomiting incidence was higher in the nefopam-fentanyl combination compared with the ketorolac-fentanyl combination.

Patient controlled opioid analgesia versus non-patient controlled opioid analgesia for postoperative pain

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 4, 2006. Patients may control postoperative pain by self administration of intravenous opioids using devices designed for this purpose (patient controlled analgesia or PCA). A 1992 meta-analysis by Ballantyne et al found a strong patient preference for PCA over non-patient controlled analgesia, but disclosed no differences in analgesic consumption or length of postoperative hospital stay. Although Ballantyne's meta-analysis found that PCA did have a small but statistically significant benefit upon pain intensity, a 2001 review by Walder et al did not find statistically significant differences in pain intensity or pain relief between PCA and groups treated with non-patient controlled analgesia.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of patient controlled intravenous opioid analgesia (termed PCA in this review) versus non-patient controlled opioid analgesia of as-needed opioid analgesia for postoperative pain relief.

SEARCH METHODS

We ran the search for the previous review in November 2004. For this update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2014, Issue 12), MEDLINE (1966 to 28 January 2015), and EMBASE (1980 to 28 January 2015) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in any language, and reference lists of reviews and retrieved articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected RCTs that assessed pain intensity as a primary or secondary outcome. These studies compared PCA without a continuous background infusion with non-patient controlled opioid analgesic regimens. We excluded studies that explicitly stated they involved patients with chronic pain.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data, which included demographic variables, type of surgery, interventions, efficacy, and adverse events. We graded each included study for methodological quality by assessing risk of bias and employed the GRADE approach to assess the overall quality of the evidence. We performed meta-analysis of outcomes that included pain intensity assessed by a 0 to 100 visual analog scale (VAS), opioid consumption, patient satisfaction, length of stay, and adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-nine studies with 1725 participants receiving PCA and 1687 participants assigned to a control group met the inclusion criteria. The original review included 55 studies with 2023 patients receiving PCA and 1838 patients assigned to a control group. There were fewer included studies in our updated review due to the revised exclusion criteria. For the primary outcome, participants receiving PCA had lower VAS pain intensity scores versus non-patient controlled analgesia over most time intervals, e.g., scores over 0 to 24 hours were nine points lower (95% confidence interval (CI) -13 to -5, moderate quality evidence) and over 0 to 48 hours were 10 points lower (95% CI -12 to -7, low quality evidence). Among the secondary outcomes, participants were more satisfied with PCA (81% versus 61%, P value = 0.002) and consumed higher amounts of opioids than controls (0 to 24 hours, 7 mg more of intravenous morphine equivalents, 95% CI 1 mg to 13 mg). Those receiving PCA had a higher incidence of pruritus (15% versus 8%, P value = 0.01) but had a similar incidence of other adverse events. There was no difference in the length of hospital stay.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Since the last version of this review, we have found new studies providing additional information. We reanalyzed the data but the results did not substantially alter any of our previously published conclusions. This review provides moderate to low quality evidence that PCA is an efficacious alternative to non-patient controlled systemic analgesia for postoperative pain control.

Is pain after TKA better with periarticular injection or intrathecal morphine?

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pain after TKA is a major concern to patients. The best technique to control pain is still controversial. Intrathecal morphine or periarticular multimodal drug injection are both commonly used and both appear to provide better pain control than placebo, but it is unclear whether one or the other provides better pain control.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We asked whether intrathecal morphine or periarticular multimodal drug injection provides better pain control with fewer adverse events.

METHODS

In a prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial we randomized 57 patients with osteoarthritic knees who underwent TKAs into two groups. Group M (n = 28) received 0.2 mg intrathecal morphine while Group I (n = 29) received periarticular multimodal drug injection. Postoperative pain was managed with patient-controlled analgesia using ketorolac. The outcomes were pain levels, the amount of analgesic drug used, and drug-related side effects. Patients and evaluators were blinded. All patients were followed up to 3 months.

RESULTS

We found no difference in postoperative pain level, analgesia drug consumption, blood loss in drain, and knee function. More patients in Group M required antiemetic (19 [69%] versus 10 [34%]) and antipruritic drugs (10 [36%] versus three [10%]) than patients in Group I.

CONCLUSIONS

The two techniques provide no different pain control capacity. The periarticular multimodal drug injection was associated with lower rates of vomiting and pruritus.

Bowel function after bowel surgery: morphine with ketamine or placebo; a randomized controlled trial pilot study

BACKGROUND

Morphine decreases gut peristalsis, and ketamine decreases morphine use after surgery, and does not slow peristalsis. Thus, the combination should result in faster return of bowel function after surgery than morphine alone.

METHOD

A double-blind randomized controlled trial of saline vs. ketamine with intravenous patient-controlled-analgesia morphine for post-operative pain control was conducted on 42 patients having bowel resection. Bowel function was assessed by auscultation, time to passage of flatus and stool, and time to first retained oral intake; pain by visual analog scale. Time to return of all four measures of bowel function was the primary outcome.

RESULTS

Despite a ketamine dose that in other studies had decreased morphine use without side-effects, there was no difference in bowel function, pain control, or morphine use between the two groups. Ketamine resulted in hallucinations in six out of 19 patients, with none in the placebo group (P =0.018).

CONCLUSION

Low-dose ketamine was not efficacious for hastening return of bowel function, or for decreasing post-operative pain after surgery for bowel resection. It resulted in hallucinations in some patients. Those reporting hallucinations all wished to remain in the study.

Postoperative pain management using intravenous patient-controlled analgesia for pediatric patients

Pain control is an important consideration after any surgical procedures. Especially in children, more attention and care are needed during the period of postoperative pain control, which must be both sufficiently safe and effective. In this respect, intravenous patient-controlled analgesia provides improved titration of analgesic drugs, thereby maintaining optimal analgesic status with few side effects. Thirty pediatric patients were randomly divided into two groups: the intravenous patient-controlled analgesia group (with nalbuphine HCl and ketorolac tromethamine) and the conventional pethidine HCl intramuscular group. The degree of analgesia was assessed every 4 hours until the second postoperative day. The intravenous patient-controlled analgesia group had significantly lower pain scores and took less time until they were able to walk to the bathroom, but as many side effects as the control group. We concluded that intravenous patient-controlled analgesia is safe and effective for pediatric patients who have moderate to severe pain after operations such as rib cartilage graft, iliac bone graft, and large flap surgeries.

Cost effectiveness analysis of intravenous ketorolac and morphine for treating pain after limb injury: double blind randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the cost effectiveness of intravenous ketorolac compared with intravenous morphine in relieving pain after blunt limb injury in an accident and emergency department.

DESIGN

Double blind, randomised, controlled study and cost consequences analysis.

SETTING

Emergency department of a university hospital in the New Territories of Hong Kong.

PARTICIPANTS

148 adult patients with painful isolated limb injuries (limb injuries without other injuries).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome measure was a cost consequences analysis comparing the use of ketorolac with morphine; secondary outcome measures were pain relief at rest and with limb movement, adverse events, patients' satisfaction, and time spent in the emergency department.

RESULTS

No difference was found in the median time taken to achieve pain relief at rest between the group receiving ketorolac and the group receiving morphine, but with movement the median reduction in pain score in the ketorolac group was 1.09 per hour (95% confidence interval 1.05 to 2.02) compared with 0.87 (0.84 to 1.06) in the morphine group (P=0.003). The odds of experiencing adverse events was 144.2 (41.5 to 501.6) times more likely with morphine than with ketorolac. The median time from the initial delivery of analgesia to the participant leaving the department was 20 (4.0 to 39.0) minutes shorter in the ketorolac group than in the morphine group (P=0.02). The mean cost per person was $HK44 ( pound4; $5.6) in the ketorolac group and $HK229 in the morphine group (P<0.0001). The median score for patients' satisfaction was 6.0 for ketorolac and 5.0 for morphine (P<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Intravenous ketorolac is a more cost effective analgesic than intravenous morphine in the management of isolated limb injury in an emergency department in Hong Kong, and its use may be considered as the dominant strategy.

The pharmacological basis of contemporary pain management

Pain management has become an increasingly well researched area in medicine over recent years, and there have been advances in a number of areas. While opioids remain an integral part of pain-management strategies, there is now an emphasis on the use of adjuvant drugs, such as paracetamol and anti-inflammatory agents, which through physiological or pharmacological synergism, both enhance pain control and reduce opioid use. The management of neuropathic pain continues to be a challenge. Anti-epileptics and antidepressants, together with clonidine and ketamine, provide the foundations for treatment. Another area of interest has been the widespread use of patient-controlled analgesia and the administration of some drugs, especially opioids, by means other than traditional oral and parenteral routes. The number of new drugs that have reached the stage of clinical trials has been small, yet they offer exciting possibilities. The epibatidine analogue ABT-594 and zinconitide both offer novel approaches to the management of neuropathic pain states, while selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors and nitroaspirins may see advances in the management of nociceptive pain states.

Ketorolac. A reappraisal of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties and therapeutic use in pain management

Ketorolac is a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) with strong analgesic activity. The analgesic efficacy of ketorolac has been extensively evaluated in the postoperative setting, in both hospital inpatients and outpatients, and in patients with various other acute pain states. After major abdominal, orthopaedic or gynaecological surgery or ambulatory laparoscopic or gynaecological procedures, ketorolac provides relief from mild to severe pain in the majority of patients and has similar analgesic efficacy to that of standard dosages of morphine and pethidine (meperidine) as well as less frequently used opioids and other NSAIDs. The analgesic effect of ketorolac may be slightly delayed but often persists for longer than that of opioids. Combined therapy with ketorolac and an opioid results in a 25 to 50% reduction in opioid requirements, and in some patients this is accompanied by a concomitant decrease in opioid-induced adverse events, more rapid return to normal gastrointestinal function and shorter stay in hospital. In children undergoing myringotomy, hernia repair, tonsillectomy, or other surgery associated with mild to moderate pain, ketorolac provides comparable analgesia to morphine, pethidine or paracetamol (acetaminophen). In the emergency department, ketorolac attenuates moderate to severe pain in patients with renal colic, migraine headache, musculoskeletal pain or sickle cell crisis and is usually as effective as frequently used opioids, such as morphine and pethidine, and other NSAIDs and analgesics. Subcutaneous administration of ketorolac reduces pain in patients with cancer and seems particularly beneficial in pain resulting from bone metastases. The acquisition cost of ketorolac is greater than that of morphine or pethidine; however, in a small number of studies, the higher cost of ketorolac was offset when treatment with ketorolac resulted in a reduced hospital stay compared with alternative opioid therapy. The tolerability profile of ketorolac parallels that of other NSAIDs; most clinically important adverse events affect the gastrointestinal tract and/or renal or haematological function. The incidence of serious or fatal adverse events reported with ketorolac has decreased since revision of dosage guidelines. Results from a large retrospective postmarketing surveillance study in more than 20,000 patients demonstrated that the overall risk of gastrointestinal or operative site bleeding related to parenteral ketorolac therapy was only slightly higher than with opioids. However, the risk increased markedly when high dosages were used for more than 5 days, especially in the elderly. Acute renal failure may occur after treatment with ketorolac but is usually reversible on drug discontinuation. In common with other NSAIDs, ketorolac has also been implicated in allergic or hypersensitivity reactions. In summary, ketorolac is a strong analgesic with a tolerability profile which resembles that of other NSAIDs. When used in accordance with current dosage guidelines, this drug provides a useful alternative, or adjuvant, to opioids in patients with moderate to severe pain.