Effect of Intravenous Lidocaine on Postoperative Recovery of Patients Undergoing Mastectomy: A Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Randomized Trial

The analgesic effectiveness of perioperative lidocaine infusions for acute and chronic persistent postsurgical pain in patients undergoing breast cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women and tumour resection carries a high prevalence of chronic persistent postsurgical pain (CPSP). Perioperative i.v. lidocaine infusion has been proposed as protective against CPSP; however, evidence of its benefits is conflicting. This review evaluates the effectiveness of perioperative lidocaine infusions for breast cancer surgery.

METHODS

Randomised trials comparing perioperative lidocaine infusions with parenteral analgesia in breast cancer surgery patients were sought. The two co-primary outcomes were the odds of CPSP at 3 and 6 months after operation. Secondary outcomes included rest pain at 1, 6, 12, and 24 h; analgesic consumption at 0-24 and 25-48 h; quality of recovery; opioid-related side-effects; and lidocaine infusion side-effects. Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman (HKSJ) random effects modelling was used.

RESULTS

Thirteen trials (1039 patients; lidocaine: 518, control: 521) were included. Compared with control, perioperative lidocaine infusion did not decrease the odds of developing CPSP at 3 and 6 months. Lidocaine infusion improved postoperative pain at 1 h by a mean difference (95% confidence interval) of -0.65 cm (-0.73 to -0.57 cm) (P<0.0001); however, this difference was not clinically important (1.1 cm threshold). Similarly, lidocaine infusion reduced oral morphine consumption by 7.06 mg (-13.19 to -0.93) (P=0.029) over the first 24 h only; however, this difference was not clinically important (30 mg threshold). The groups were not different for any of the remaining outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results provide moderate-quality evidence that perioperative lidocaine infusion does not reduce CPSP in patients undergoing breast cancer surgery. Routine use of lidocaine infusions for perioperative analgesia and CPSP prevention is not supported in this population.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL

PROSPERO CRD42023420888.

Anesthesia-related intervention for long-term survival and cancer recurrence following breast cancer surgery: A systematic review of prospective studies

OBJECTIVE

Anesthesia is correlated with the prognosis of cancer surgery. However, evidence from prospective studies focusing on breast cancer is currently limited. This systematic review aimed to investigate the effect of anesthesia-related interventions on oncological outcomes following breast cancer surgery in prospective studies.

METHODS

Literature searches were performed from inception to June. 2023 in the Pubmed, Web of Science, Embase, and ClinicalTrials databases. The main inclusion criteria comprised a minimum of one-year follow-up duration, with oncological outcomes as endpoints. Anesthesia-related interventions encompassed, but were not limited to, type of anesthesia, anesthetics, and analgesics. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool.

RESULTS

A total of 9 studies were included. Anesthesia-related interventions included paravertebral nerve block (3), pectoral nerve block (1), sevoflurane (2), ketorolac (2), and infiltration of lidocaine (1). Cancer recurrence, metastasis, disease-free survival, or (and) overall survival were assessed. Among all included studies, only infiltration of lidocaine was found to prolong disease-free survival and overall survival.

CONCLUSION

Regional anesthesia and propofol did not improve oncological outcomes following breast cancer surgery. The anti-tumorigenic effect of ketorolac warrants future studies with larger sample sizes. Perioperative infiltration of lidocaine around the tumor may be a promising anti-tumorigenic intervention that can prolong overall survival in patients with early breast cancer.

Perioperative intravenous lidocaine for postoperative pain in patients undergoing breast surgery: a meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

The effectiveness of intravenous lidocaine infusion in managing acute and chronic pain following breast surgery has been a topic of debate. This meta-analysis aims to assess the impact of perioperative intravenous lidocaine on the relief of postoperative pain among patients undergoing breast surgery.

Methods

A systematic search of databases was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the effects of intravenous lidocaine infusion with placebo or routine care in patients undergoing breast surgery. The primary outcome of interest was the occurrence of chronic post-surgical pain (CPSP) at the longest follow-up. Meta-analyses, incorporating trial sequential analysis, were performed using a random-effects model to assess the overall effect.

Results

A total of twelve trials, involving 879 patients, were included in the analysis. Perioperative intravenous lidocaine demonstrated a significant reduction in the incidence of CPSP at the longest follow-up (risk ratio [RR] 0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.48-0.81; P = 0.0005; I2 = 6%). Trial sequential analysis (TSA) indicated that the cumulative z curve crossed the trial sequential monitoring boundary for benefit, providing sufficient and conclusive evidence. Furthermore, intravenous lidocaine was associated with decreased opioid consumption and a shorter length of hospital stay.

Conclusion

Perioperative intravenous lidocaine is effective in relieving acute and CPSP in patients undergoing breast surgery.

Systematic review registration

https://inplasy.com/, identifier INPLASY2022100033.

Lidocaine promotes apoptosis in breast cancer cells by affecting VDAC1 expression

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of lidocaine on the expression of voltage-dependent anion channel 1 (VDAC1) in breast invasive carcinoma (BRCA) and its impact on the apoptosis of breast cancer cells.

METHODS

We collected clinical data from patients with invasive breast cancer from 2010 to 2020 in the First affiliated hospital of Nanchang University, evaluated the prognostic value of VDAC1 gene expression in breast cancer, and detected the expression of VDAC1 protein in breast cancer tissues and paracancerous tissues by immunohistochemical staining of paraffin sections. Also, we cultured breast cancer cells (MCF-7) to observe the effect of lidocaine on the apoptosis of MCF-7 cells.

RESULTS

Analysis of clinical data and gene expression data of BRCA patients showed VDAC1 was a differentially expressed gene in BRCA, VDAC1 may be of great significance for the diagnosis and prognosis of BRCA patients. Administration of lidocaine 3 mM significantly decreased VDAC1 expression, the expression of protein Bcl-2 was significantly decreased (p < 0.05), and the expression of p53 increased significantly (p < 0.05). Lidocaine inhibited the proliferation of MCF-7 breast cancer cells, increased the percentage of G2 / M phase cells and apoptosis.

CONCLUSION

Lidocaine may inhibit the activity of breast cancer cells by inhibiting the expression of VDAC1, increasing the apoptosis in breast cancer cells.

Influence of Deep Serratus Anterior Plane Block on Chronic Pain at 3 Months After Breast-Conserving Surgery: Prospective, Cohort Study

OBJECTIVES

In 2015, we evaluated our practices regarding pain after breast-conserving surgery. Thereafter, we have adapted our practices by performing a systematic deep serratus plane block before the surgical incision. In 2019, we assessed the impact of these changes in terms of chronic pain. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of chronic pain 3 months after this type of surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients treated with breast-conserving surgery as outpatients were included in this prospective study between April and July 2019. After inducing general anesthesia, 20 mL of ropivacaine 3.75 mg/mL were injected under the serratus muscle. Morphine titration was performed in the recovery room according to pain scores. A pain and quality of life questionnaire was sent 3 months after surgery. A backward logistic regression model was applied to calculate the adjusted odds ratios.

RESULTS

The final analysis involved 137 patients. Three months after surgery, 43 patients (31%) reported persistent pain related to the surgery. Maximum pain in the last 24 hours was moderate to severe in 60% of cases, 16 patients (35%) took painkillers. Morphine titration in the recovery room was required in 25 patients (18%). Younger age and the use of lidocaine to prevent after injection of propofol during general anesthesia induction appeared to be protective factors for the risk of pain at 3 months (secondary endpoints).

DISCUSSION

No persistent pain at 3 months was reported in 69% of cases. Furthermore, the use of a deep serratus anterior plane block before the surgical incision has limited the need for morphine titration in the recovery room to <1 patient in 5. These evaluations of professional practices should be encouraged.

Management of Postoperative Pain in Patients Following Spine Surgery: A Narrative Review

Perioperative pain management is a unique challenge in patients undergoing spine surgery due to the increased incidence of both pre-existing chronic pain conditions and chronic postsurgical pain. Peri-operative planning and counseling in spine surgery should involve an interdisciplinary approach that includes consideration of patient-level risk factors, as well as pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic pain management techniques. Consideration of psychological factors and patient focused education as an adjunct to these measures is paramount in developing a personalized perioperative pain management plan. Understanding the currently available body of knowledge surrounding perioperative opioid management, management of opioid use disorder, regional/neuraxial anesthetic techniques, ketamine/lidocaine infusions, non-opioid oral analgesics, and behavioral interventions can be useful in developing a comprehensive, multi-modal treatment plan among patients undergoing spine surgery. Although many of these techniques have proved efficacious in the immediate postoperative period, long-term follow-up is needed to define the impact of such approaches on persistent pain and opioid use. Future techniques involving the use of precision medicine may help identify phenotypic and physiologic characteristics that can identify patients that are most at risk of developing persistent postoperative pain after spine surgery.

Association between perioperative intravenous lidocaine and subjective quality of recovery: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of perioperative intravenous lidocaine on the quality of recovery (QoR) following surgery.

DESIGN

Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

SETTING

Postoperative care.

INTERVENTION

Intravenous lidocaine during perioperative period.

PATIENTS

Adults undergoing surgery under general anesthesia.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was postoperative QoR measured with QoR-40 questionnaire, while the secondary outcomes included five individual dimensions (i.e., emotional, state, physical comfort, psychological support, physical independence, and pain) of QoR-40, intraoperative opioid consumption, and risk of chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP).

MAIN RESULTS

Medline, Cochrane Library, Google scholar, and EMBASE databases were searched from inception to June 2021. Fourteen RCTs involving 1148 patients in total undergoing elective surgery published from 2012 to 2021 were included. QoR-40 scores were evaluated at postoperative 24 h (12 trials), 72 h (one trial), and Day 5 (one trial), respectively. Pooled results revealed significantly higher global [mean difference (MD) = 9.65, 95% confidence interval (CI): 6.33 to 12.97; I² = 97%; 13 RCTs; n = 1085] and individual dimension QoR-40 scores in the lidocaine group than those in placebo group. Subgroup analysis demonstrated no significant impact of the type of surgery, age, gender, surgical time, anesthetic technique, lidocaine dosage, and time of assessment on global QoR-40 scores. The use of intravenous lidocaine was associated with a significant reduction in intraoperative remifentanil consumption compared with that in the placebo group (standardized MD = -0.91, 95%CI: -1.32 to -0.51; I² = 86%; 10 RCTs; n = 799). There was no difference in risk of CPSP between the two groups [relative risk (RR) = 0.65, 95%CI: 0.33 to 1.25; I² = 58%; 4 RCTs; n = 309].

CONCLUSION

Our results verified the efficacy of intravenous lidocaine for enhancing postoperative quality of recovery by using a validated subjective tool and reducing intraoperative remifentanil consumption in patients receiving elective surgery under general anesthesia. Further studies are warranted to verify its efficacy in the acute care setting.

Effect of Intravenous Lidocaine on Serum Interleukin-17 After Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery for Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

Purpose

Surgical stress promotes tumor metastasis. Interleukin (IL)-17 plays a pivotal role in cancer progression, and high IL-17 expression predicts poor prognosis of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Lidocaine may exert tumor-inhibiting effects. We hypothesize that intravenous lidocaine attenuates surgical stress and reduces serum IL-17 levels during video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) for NSCLC.

Methods

This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial included 60 early-stage NSCLC patients undergoing VATS, into a lidocaine group (n = 30; intravenous lidocaine bolus 1.0 mg/kg, and 1.0 mg/kg/h until the end of surgery) or a normal saline control group (n = 30). The primary outcome was serum IL-17 level at 24 hours postoperatively. The secondary outcomes included serum IL-17 level at the time of post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) discharge, serum cortisol level at PACU discharge and postoperative 24 hours, pain scores (0–10) from PACU discharge to 48 hours postoperatively, incidences of postoperative nausea and vomiting, dizziness, and arrhythmia during 0–48 hours postoperatively, and 30-day mortality. Long-term outcomes included chemotherapy, cancer recurrence, and mortality.

Results

The lidocaine group had lower serum IL-17 at 24 hours postoperatively compared with the control group (23.0 ± 5.8 pg/mL vs 27.3 ± 8.2 pg/mL, difference [95% CI] = −4.3 [−8.4 to −0.2] pg/mL; P = 0.038). The lidocaine group also had reduced serum IL-17 (difference [95% CI] = −4.6 [−8.7 to −0.5] pg/mL), serum cortisol (difference [95% CI] = −37 [−73 to −2] ng/mL), and pain scores (difference [95% CI] = −0.7 [−1.3 to −0.1] points) at PACU discharge. During a median follow-up of 10 (IQR, 9–13) months, 2 patients in the lidocaine group and 6 patients in the control group received chemotherapy, one patient in the control group had cancer recurrence, and no death event occurred.

Conclusion

Intravenous lidocaine was associated with reduced serum IL-17 and cortisol following VATS procedures in early-stage NSCLC patients.

Trial Registration

ChiCTR2000030629.

Regional anesthetics versus analgesia for stopping the persistent postsurgical pain: A meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Regional anesthesia might moderate the risk of persistent postsurgical pain, but its effect compared to systemic analgesia is still conflicting. This meta-analysis study was performed to assess the relationship between the efficiency of regional anesthesia versus systemic analgesia in reducing pain persisting longer than 3 months after surgery.

METHODS

Through a systematic literature search up to August 2020, 31 studies included 2975 subjects who underwent surgery at baseline and reported a total of 1471 subjects using regional anesthesia and 1319 subjects using conventional anesthesia were found recording relationships between efficiency of regional anesthesia versus systemic analgesia in reducing pain persisting longer than 3 months after surgery. Odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was calculated between regional anesthesia versus systemic analgesia in reducing pain persisting longer than 3 months after surgery using the dichotomous methods with a random or fixed-effect model.

RESULTS

Number of subjects reporting persistent pain 3 months postsurgery was significantly lower in regional anesthesia compared to systemic analgesia in thoracotomy (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.29-0.65, P < .001); breast surgery (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.29-0.72, P < .001); and cesarean section (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.27-0.72, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Regional anesthesia might have an independent relationship with lower pain persisting longer than 3 months after thoracotomy, breast surgery, and cesarean section. Further studies are required to validate these findings.

Mechanisms of action of fascial plane blocks: a narrative review

BACKGROUND

Fascial plane blocks (FPBs) target the space between two fasciae, rather than discrete peripheral nerves. Despite their popularity, their mechanisms of action remain controversial, particularly for erector spinae plane and quadratus lumborum blocks.

OBJECTIVES

This narrative review describes the scientific evidence underpinning proposed mechanisms of action, highlights existing knowledge gaps, and discusses implications for clinical practice and research.

FINDINGS

There are currently two plausible mechanisms of analgesia. The first is a local effect on nociceptors and neurons within the plane itself or within adjacent muscle and tissue compartments. Dispersion of local anesthetic occurs through bulk flow and diffusion, and the resulting conduction block is dictated by the mass of local anesthetic reaching these targets. The extent of spread, analgesia, and cutaneous sensory loss is variable and imperfectly correlated. Explanations include anatomical variation, factors governing fluid dispersion, and local anesthetic pharmacodynamics. The second is vascular absorption of local anesthetic and a systemic analgesic effect at distant sites. Direct evidence is presently lacking but preliminary data indicate that FPBs can produce transient elevations in plasma concentrations similar to intravenous lidocaine infusion. The relative contributions of these local and systemic effects remain uncertain.

CONCLUSION

Our current understanding of FPB mechanisms supports their demonstrated analgesic efficacy, but also highlights the unpredictability and variability that result from myriad factors at play. Potential strategies to improve efficacy include accurate deposition close to targets of interest, injections of sufficient volume to encourage physical spread by bulk flow, and manipulation of concentration to promote diffusion.

Effect of perioperative intravenous lidocaine for patients undergoing spine surgery: A meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

Perioperative intravenous lidocaine has been reported to have analgesic and opioid-sparing effects in many kinds of surgery. Several studies have evaluated its use in the settings of spine surgery. The aim of the study is to examine the effect of intravenous lidocaine in patients undergoing spine surgery.

METHODS

We performed a quantitative systematic review. Databases of PubMed, Medline, Embase database and Cochrane library were investigated for eligible literatures from their establishments to June, 2019. Articles of randomized controlled trials that compared intravenous lidocaine to a control group in patients undergoing spine surgery were included. The primary outcome was postoperative pain intensity. Secondary outcomes included postoperative opioid consumption and the length of hospital stay.

RESULT

Four randomized controlled trials with 275 patients were included in the study. postoperative pain compared with control was reduced at 6 hours after surgery (WMD -0.50, 95%CI, -0.76 to -0.25, P < .001), at 24 hours after surgery (WMD -0.50, 95%CI, -0.70 to -0.29, P < .001) and at 48 hours after surgery (WMD -0.57, 95%CI, -0.96 to -0.17, P = .005). The effect of intravenous lidocaine on postoperative opioid consumption compared with control revealed a significant effect (WMD -15.36, 95%CI, -21.40 to -9.33 mg intravenous morphine equivalents, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

This quantitative analysis of randomized controlled trials demonstrated that the perioperative intravenous lidocaine was effective for reducing postoperative opioid consumption and pain in patients undergoing spine surgery. The intravenous lidocaine should be considered as an effective adjunct to improve analgesic outcomes in patients undergoing spine surgery. However, the quantity of the studies was very low, more research is needed.

What is the role of locoregional anesthesia in breast surgery? A systematic literature review focused on pain intensity, opioid consumption, adverse events, and patient satisfaction

BACKGROUND

Breast surgery in the United States is common. Pain affects up to 50% of women undergoing breast surgery and can interfere with postoperative outcomes. General anesthesia is the conventional, most frequently used anaesthetic technique. Various locoregional anesthetic techniques are also used for breast surgeries. A systematic review of the use of locoregional anesthesia for postoperative pain in breast surgery is needed to clarify its role in pain management.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review literature to establish the efficacy and the safety of locoregional anesthesia used in the treatment of pain after breast surgery.

METHODS

Embase, MEDLINE, Google Scholar and Cochrane Central Trials Register were systematically searched in Mars 2020 for studies examining locoregional anesthesia for management of pain in adults after breast surgery. The methodological quality of the studies and their results were appraised using the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist and specific measurement properties criteria, respectively.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies evaluating locoregional anesthesia were included: 1058 patients underwent lumpectomy/mastectomy, 142 breast augmentation and 79 breast reduction. Locoregional anesthesia provides effective anesthesia and analgesia in the perioperative setting, however no statistically significant difference emerged if compared to other techniques. For mastectomy only, the use of locoregional techniques reduces pain in the first hour after the end of the surgery if compared to other procedures (p = 0.02). Other potentially beneficial effects of locoregional anesthesia include decreased need for opioids, decreased postoperative nausea and vomiting, fewer complications and increased patient satisfaction. All this improves postoperative recovery and shortens hospitalization stay. In none of these cases, locoregional anesthesia was statistically superior to other techniques.

CONCLUSION

The results of our review showed no differences between locoregional anesthesia and other techniques in the management of breast surgery. Locoregional techniques are superior in reducing pain in the first hour after mastectomy.

Preventing pain after breast surgery: A systematic review with meta-analyses and trial-sequential analyses

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review was to indirectly compare the efficacy of any intervention, administered perioperatively, on acute and persistent pain after breast surgery.

DATABASES AND DATA TREATMENT

We searched for randomized trials comparing analgesic interventions with placebo or no treatment in patients undergoing breast surgery under general anaesthesia. Primary outcome was intensity of acute pain (up to 6 hr postoperatively). Secondary outcomes were cumulative 24-hr morphine consumption, incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), and chronic pain. We used an original three-step approach. First, meta-analyses were performed when data from at least three trials could be combined; secondly, trial sequential analyses were used to separate conclusive from unclear evidence. And thirdly, the quality of evidence was rated with GRADE.

RESULTS

Seventy-three trials (5,512 patients) tested loco-regional blocks (paravertebral, pectoralis), local anaesthetic infiltrations, oral gabapentinoids or intravenous administration of glucocorticoids, lidocaine, N-methyl-D-aspartate antagonists or alpha2 agonists. With paravertebral blocks, pectoralis blocks and glucocorticoids, there was conclusive evidence of a clinically relevant reduction in acute pain (visual analogue scale > 1.0 cm). With pectoralis blocks, and gabapentinoids, there was conclusive evidence of a reduction in the cumulative 24-hr morphine consumption (> 30%). With paravertebral blocks and glucocorticoids, there was conclusive evidence of a relative reduction in the incidence of PONV of 70%. For chronic pain, insufficient data were available.

CONCLUSIONS

Mainly with loco-regional blocks, there is conclusive evidence of a reduction in acute pain intensity, morphine consumption and PONV incidence after breast surgery. For rational decision making, data on chronic pain are needed.

SIGNIFICANCE

This quantitative systematic review compares eight interventions, published across 73 trials, to prevent pain after breast surgery, and grades their degree of efficacy. The most efficient interventions are paravertebral blocks, pectoralis blocks and glucocorticoids, with moderate to low evidence for the blocks. Intravenous lidocaine and alpha2 agonists are efficacious to a lesser extent, but with a higher level of evidence. Data for chronic pain are lacking.

Comparison of intravenous lidocaine versus epidural anesthesia for traumatic rib fracture pain: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Effective analgesia is essential in managing traumatic rib fractures. Intravenous lidocaine (IVL) is effective in treating perioperative pain, acute pain in the emergency department, cancer pain in hospice, and outpatient chronic neuropathic pain. Our study examined the associations between IVL versus epidural analgesia (EA) and pain for the treatment of acute rib fracture in the inpatient setting.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study involving adults admitted to an academic level I trauma center from June 1, 2011 to June 1, 2016 with consults to the pain service for acute rib fracture pain. Eighty-nine patients were included in the final analysis (54 IVL and 35 EA patients). Both groups had usual access to opioid medications. The primary outcome was absolute change in numeric pain scores during 0-24 and 24-48 hours after initiating IVL or EA, compared with baseline. Secondary outcomes include opioid consumption, incentive spirometry, supplemental oxygens, pneumonia, endotracheal intubation and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Numeric pain scores differed at baseline (mean 5.6 for IVL vs 4.5 for EA, p=0.01), while age, injury severity, and number of fractured ribs were similar. IVL and EA were associated with similar reductions in numeric pain scores within 0-24 and 24-48 hours (mean -2.9 for IVL vs -2.3 for EA during both periods, p=0.19 and p=0.17 respectively) . There was greater non-neuraxial opioid consumption with IVL compared with EA (98.6 vs 22.3 mg morphine equivalents (MME) at 0-24 hours, p=0.0005; 105.6 vs 18.9 MME at 24-48 hours, p<0.0001). When epidural opioids were analyzed, the EA group was exposed to higher total MME at 0-24 hours (655.2 vs 98.6 MME, p<0.0001) and 24-48 hours (586 vs 105.6 MME, p=0.0001), suggesting an opioid sparing effect of IVL.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that IVL is similar to EA in numeric pain score reduction, and that IVL may have an opioid sparing effect when taking neuraxial opioids into account. IVL may be an effective alternative to epidurals for the treatment of rib fracture pain. It should be considered for patients who have contraindications to epidurals or are unable to receive an epidural in a timely manner.

Comparison of ED95 of Butorphanol and Sufentanil for gastrointestinal endoscopy sedation: a randomized controlled trial

Background

Butorphanol, a synthetic opioid partial agonist analgesic, has been widely used to control perioperative pain. However, the ideal dose and availability of butorphanol for gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy are not well known. The aim of this study was to evaluated the 95% effective dose (ED₉₅) of butorphanol and sufentanil in GI endoscopy and compared their clinical efficacy, especially regarding the recovery time.

Methods

The study was divided into two parts. For the first part, voluntary patients who needed GI endoscopy anesthesia were recruited to measure the ED₉₅ of butorphanol and sufentanil needed to achieve successful sedation before GI endoscopy using the sequential method (the Dixon up-and-down method). The second part was a double-blind, randomized study. Two hundred cases of painless GI endoscopy patients were randomly divided into two groups (n = 100), including group B (butorphanol at the ED₉₅ dose) and group S (sufentanil at the ED₉₅ dose). Propofol was infused intravenously as the sedative in both groups. The recovery time, visual analogue scale (VAS) score, hand grip strength, fatigue severity scores, incidence of nausea and vomiting, and incidence of dizziness were recorded.

Results

The ED₉₅ of butorphanol for painless GI endoscopy was 9.07 μg/kg (95% confidence interval: 7.81–19.66 μg/kg). The ED₉₅ of sufentanil was 0.1 μg/kg (95% CI, 0.079–0.422 μg/kg). Both butorphanol and sufentanil provided a good analgesic effect for GI endoscopy. However, the recovery time for butorphanol was significantly shorter than that for sufentanil (P < 0.05, group B vs. group S:21.26 ± 7.70 vs. 24.03 ± 7.80 min).

Conclusions

Butorphanol at 9.07 μg/kg was more effective than sufentanil for GI endoscopy sedation and notably reduced the recovery time.

Trial registration

Chinese Clinical Trail Registry (Registration number # ChiCTR1900022780; Date of Registration on April 25rd, 2019).

Sodium homeostasis in the tumour microenvironment

The concentration of sodium ions (Na+) is raised in solid tumours and can be measured at the cellular, tissue and patient levels. At the cellular level, the Na+ gradient across the membrane powers the transport of H+ ions and essential nutrients for normal activity. The maintenance of the Na+ gradient requires a large proportion of the cell's ATP. Na+ is a major contributor to the osmolarity of the tumour microenvironment, which affects cell volume and metabolism as well as immune function. Here, we review evidence indicating that Na+ handling is altered in tumours, explore our current understanding of the mechanisms that may underlie these alterations and consider the potential consequences for cancer progression. Dysregulated Na+ balance in tumours may open opportunities for new imaging biomarkers and re-purposing of drugs for treatment.

Continuous Intravenous Lidocaine as an Effective Pain Adjunct for Opioid-Induced Bowel Dysfunction: A Case Report

This case study describes a patient with suspected opioid-induced bowel dysfunction who had improved pain control when treated with intravenous (IV) lidocaine. An 80-year-old man with failed back surgery syndrome managed with an intrathecal (IT) pump presented with protracted abdominal pain. The acute pain service initiated a lidocaine infusion at 1 mg·min, and the patient reported significant pain relief. The patient experienced refractory abdominal pain with 3 attempts to wean the lidocaine infusion. Eventually, a successful transitional regimen was achieved with methylnaltrexone and transdermal lidocaine patches. Lidocaine infusions may be an effective and underutilized multimodal adjunct for nonsurgical pain conditions.

Gabapentin Decreases Narcotic Usage: Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Pathway in Free Autologous Breast Reconstruction

The opioid crisis is public health emergency, in part due to physician prescribing practices. As a result, there is an increased interest in reducing narcotic use in the postsurgical setting.

Local anaesthetics and regional anaesthesia versus conventional analgesia for preventing persistent postoperative pain in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Regional anaesthesia may reduce the rate of persistent postoperative pain (PPP), a frequent and debilitating condition. This review was originally published in 2012 and updated in 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To compare local anaesthetics and regional anaesthesia versus conventional analgesia for the prevention of PPP beyond three months in adults and children undergoing elective surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase to December 2016 without any language restriction. We used a combination of free text search and controlled vocabulary search. We limited results to randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We updated this search in December 2017, but these results have not yet been incorporated in the review. We conducted a handsearch in reference lists of included studies, review articles and conference abstracts. We searched the PROSPERO systematic review registry for related systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs comparing local or regional anaesthesia versus conventional analgesia with a pain outcome beyond three months after elective, non-orthopaedic surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data and adverse events. We contacted study authors for additional information. We presented outcomes as pooled odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), based on random-effects models (inverse variance method). We analysed studies separately by surgical intervention, but pooled outcomes reported at different follow-up intervals. We compared our results to Bayesian and classical (frequentist) models. We investigated heterogeneity. We assessed the quality of evidence with GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

In this updated review, we identified 40 new RCTs and seven ongoing studies. In total, we included 63 RCTs in the review, but we were only able to synthesize data on regional anaesthesia for the prevention of PPP beyond three months after surgery from 39 studies, enrolling a total of 3027 participants in our inclusive analysis.Evidence synthesis of seven RCTs favoured epidural anaesthesia for thoracotomy, suggesting the odds of having PPP three to 18 months following an epidural for thoracotomy were 0.52 compared to not having an epidural (OR 0.52 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.84, 499 participants, moderate-quality evidence). Simlarly, evidence synthesis of 18 RCTs favoured regional anaesthesia for the prevention of persistent pain three to 12 months after breast cancer surgery with an OR of 0.43 (95% CI 0.28 to 0.68, 1297 participants, low-quality evidence). Pooling data at three to 8 months after surgery from four RCTs favoured regional anaesthesia after caesarean section with an OR of 0.46, (95% CI 0.28 to 0.78; 551 participants, moderate-quality evidence). Evidence synthesis of three RCTs investigating continuous infusion with local anaesthetic for the prevention of PPP three to 55 months after iliac crest bone graft harvesting (ICBG) was inconclusive (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.09; 123 participants, low-quality evidence). However, evidence synthesis of two RCTs also favoured the infusion of intravenous local anaesthetics for the prevention of PPP three to six months after breast cancer surgery with an OR of 0.24 (95% CI 0.08 to 0.69, 97 participants, moderate-quality evidence).We did not synthesize evidence for the surgical subgroups of limb amputation, hernia repair, cardiac surgery and laparotomy. We could not pool evidence for adverse effects because the included studies did not examine them systematically, and reported them sparsely. Clinical heterogeneity, attrition and sparse outcome data hampered evidence synthesis. High risk of bias from missing data and lack of blinding across a number of included studies reduced our confidence in the findings. Thus results must be interpreted with caution.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that there is moderate-quality evidence that regional anaesthesia may reduce the risk of developing PPP after three to 18 months after thoracotomy and three to 12 months after caesarean section. There is low-quality evidence that regional anaesthesia may reduce the risk of developing PPP three to 12 months after breast cancer surgery. There is moderate evidence that intravenous infusion of local anaesthetics may reduce the risk of developing PPP three to six months after breast cancer surgery.Our conclusions are considerably weakened by the small size and number of studies, by performance bias, null bias, attrition and missing data. Larger, high-quality studies, including children, are needed. We caution that except for breast surgery, our evidence synthesis is based on only a few small studies. On a cautionary note, we cannot extend our conclusions to other surgical interventions or regional anaesthesia techniques, for example we cannot conclude that paravertebral block reduces the risk of PPP after thoracotomy. There are seven ongoing studies and 12 studies awaiting classification that may change the conclusions of the current review once they are published and incorporated.

Continuous intravenous perioperative lidocaine infusion for postoperative pain and recovery in adults

BACKGROUND

The management of postoperative pain and recovery is still unsatisfactory in a number of cases in clinical practice. Opioids used for postoperative analgesia are frequently associated with adverse effects, including nausea and constipation, preventing smooth postoperative recovery. Not all patients are suitable for, and benefit from, epidural analgesia that is used to improve postoperative recovery. The non-opioid, lidocaine, was investigated in several studies for its use in multimodal management strategies to reduce postoperative pain and enhance recovery. This review was published in 2015 and updated in January 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects (benefits and risks) of perioperative intravenous (IV) lidocaine infusion compared to placebo/no treatment or compared to epidural analgesia on postoperative pain and recovery in adults undergoing various surgical procedures.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and reference lists of articles in January 2017. We searched one trial registry contacted researchers in the field, and handsearched journals and congress proceedings. We updated this search in February 2018, but have not yet incorporated these results into the review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials comparing the effect of continuous perioperative IV lidocaine infusion either with placebo, or no treatment, or with thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) in adults undergoing elective or urgent surgery under general anaesthesia. The IV lidocaine infusion must have been started intraoperatively, prior to incision, and continued at least until the end of surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used Cochrane's standard methodological procedures. Our primary outcomes were: pain score at rest; gastrointestinal recovery and adverse events. Secondary outcomes included: postoperative nausea and postoperative opioid consumption. We used GRADE to assess the quality of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 23 new trials in the update. In total, the review included 68 trials (4525 randomized participants). Two trials compared IV lidocaine with TEA. In all remaining trials, placebo or no treatment was used as a comparator. Trials involved participants undergoing open abdominal (22), laparoscopic abdominal (20), or various other surgical procedures (26). The application scheme of systemic lidocaine strongly varies between the studies related to both dose (1 mg/kg/h to 5 mg/kg/h) and termination of the infusion (from the end of surgery until several days after).The risk of bias was low with respect to selection bias (random sequence generation), performance bias, attrition bias, and detection bias in more than 50% of the included studies. For allocation concealment and selective reporting, the quality assessment yielded low risk of bias for only approximately 20% of the included studies.IV Lidocaine compared to placebo or no treatment We are uncertain whether IV lidocaine improves postoperative pain compared to placebo or no treatment at early time points (1 to 4 hours) (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.72 to -0.28; 29 studies, 1656 participants; very low-quality evidence) after surgery. Due to variation in the standard deviation (SD) in the studies, this would equate to an average pain reduction of between 0.37 cm and 2.48 cm on a 0 to 10 cm visual analogue scale . Assuming approximately 1 cm on a 0 to 10 cm pain scale is clinically meaningful, we ruled out a clinically relevant reduction in pain with lidocaine at intermediate (24 hours) (SMD -0.14, 95% CI -0.25 to -0.04; 33 studies, 1847 participants; moderate-quality evidence), and at late time points (48 hours) (SMD -0.11, 95% CI -0.25 to 0.04; 24 studies, 1404 participants; moderate-quality evidence). Due to variation in the SD in the studies, this would equate to an average pain reduction of between 0.10 cm to 0.48 cm at 24 hours and 0.08 cm to 0.42 cm at 48 hours. In contrast to the original review in 2015, we did not find any significant subgroup differences for different surgical procedures.We are uncertain whether lidocaine reduces the risk of ileus (risk ratio (RR) 0.37, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.87; 4 studies, 273 participants), time to first defaecation/bowel movement (mean difference (MD) -7.92 hours, 95% CI -12.71 to -3.13; 12 studies, 684 participants), risk of postoperative nausea (overall, i.e. 0 up to 72 hours) (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.91; 35 studies, 1903 participants), and opioid consumption (overall) (MD -4.52 mg morphine equivalents , 95% CI -6.25 to -2.79; 40 studies, 2201 participants); quality of evidence was very low for all these outcomes.The effect of IV lidocaine on adverse effects compared to placebo treatment is uncertain, as only a small number of studies systematically analysed the occurrence of adverse effects (very low-quality evidence).IV Lidocaine compared to TEAThe effects of IV lidocaine compared with TEA are unclear (pain at 24 hours (MD 1.51, 95% CI -0.29 to 3.32; 2 studies, 102 participants), pain at 48 hours (MD 0.98, 95% CI -1.19 to 3.16; 2 studies, 102 participants), time to first bowel movement (MD -1.66, 95% CI -10.88 to 7.56; 2 studies, 102 participants); all very low-quality evidence). The risk for ileus and for postoperative nausea (overall) is also unclear, as only one small trial assessed these outcomes (very low-quality evidence). No trial assessed the outcomes, 'pain at early time points' and 'opioid consumption (overall)'. The effect of IV lidocaine on adverse effects compared to TEA is uncertain (very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are uncertain whether IV perioperative lidocaine, when compared to placebo or no treatment, has a beneficial impact on pain scores in the early postoperative phase, and on gastrointestinal recovery, postoperative nausea, and opioid consumption. The quality of evidence was limited due to inconsistency, imprecision, and study quality. Lidocaine probably has no clinically relevant effect on pain scores later than 24 hours. Few studies have systematically assessed the incidence of adverse effects. There is a lack of evidence about the effects of IV lidocaine compared with epidural anaesthesia in terms of the optimal dose and timing (including the duration) of the administration. We identified three ongoing studies, and 18 studies are awaiting classification; the results of the review may change when these studies are published and included in the review.

Local anaesthetics and regional anaesthesia versus conventional analgesia for preventing persistent postoperative pain in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Regional anaesthesia may reduce the rate of persistent postoperative pain (PPP), a frequent and debilitating condition. This review was originally published in 2012 and updated in 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To compare local anaesthetics and regional anaesthesia versus conventional analgesia for the prevention of PPP beyond three months in adults and children undergoing elective surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase to December 2016 without any language restriction. We used a combination of free text search and controlled vocabulary search. We limited results to randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We updated this search in December 2017, but these results have not yet been incorporated in the review. We conducted a handsearch in reference lists of included studies, review articles and conference abstracts. We searched the PROSPERO systematic review registry for related systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs comparing local or regional anaesthesia versus conventional analgesia with a pain outcome beyond three months after elective, non-orthopaedic surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data and adverse events. We contacted study authors for additional information. We presented outcomes as pooled odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), based on random-effects models (inverse variance method). We analysed studies separately by surgical intervention, but pooled outcomes reported at different follow-up intervals. We compared our results to Bayesian and classical (frequentist) models. We investigated heterogeneity. We assessed the quality of evidence with GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

In this updated review, we identified 40 new RCTs and seven ongoing studies. In total, we included 63 RCTs in the review, but we were only able to synthesize data on regional anaesthesia for the prevention of PPP beyond three months after surgery from 41 studies, enrolling a total of 3143 participants in our inclusive analysis.Evidence synthesis of seven RCTs favoured epidural anaesthesia for thoracotomy, suggesting the odds of having PPP three to 18 months following an epidural for thoracotomy were 0.52 compared to not having an epidural (OR 0.52 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.84, 499 participants, moderate-quality evidence). Simlarly, evidence synthesis of 18 RCTs favoured regional anaesthesia for the prevention of persistent pain three to 12 months after breast cancer surgery with an OR of 0.43 (95% CI 0.28 to 0.68, 1297 participants, low-quality evidence). Pooling data at three to 8 months after surgery from four RCTs favoured regional anaesthesia after caesarean section with an OR of 0.46, (95% CI 0.28 to 0.78; 551 participants, moderate-quality evidence). Evidence synthesis of three RCTs investigating continuous infusion with local anaesthetic for the prevention of PPP three to 55 months after iliac crest bone graft harvesting (ICBG) was inconclusive (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.09; 123 participants, low-quality evidence). However, evidence synthesis of two RCTs also favoured the infusion of intravenous local anaesthetics for the prevention of PPP three to six months after breast cancer surgery with an OR of 0.24 (95% CI 0.08 to 0.69, 97 participants, moderate-quality evidence).We did not synthesize evidence for the surgical subgroups of limb amputation, hernia repair, cardiac surgery and laparotomy. We could not pool evidence for adverse effects because the included studies did not examine them systematically, and reported them sparsely. Clinical heterogeneity, attrition and sparse outcome data hampered evidence synthesis. High risk of bias from missing data and lack of blinding across a number of included studies reduced our confidence in the findings. Thus results must be interpreted with caution.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that there is moderate-quality evidence that regional anaesthesia may reduce the risk of developing PPP after three to 18 months after thoracotomy and three to 12 months after caesarean section. There is low-quality evidence that regional anaesthesia may reduce the risk of developing PPP three to 12 months after breast cancer surgery. There is moderate evidence that intravenous infusion of local anaesthetics may reduce the risk of developing PPP three to six months after breast cancer surgery.Our conclusions are considerably weakened by the small size and number of studies, by performance bias, null bias, attrition and missing data. Larger, high-quality studies, including children, are needed. We caution that except for breast surgery, our evidence synthesis is based on only a few small studies. On a cautionary note, we cannot extend our conclusions to other surgical interventions or regional anaesthesia techniques, for example we cannot conclude that paravertebral block reduces the risk of PPP after thoracotomy. There are seven ongoing studies and 12 studies awaiting classification that may change the conclusions of the current review once they are published and incorporated.

Pharmacologic interventions for fatigue in cancer and transplantation: a meta-analysis

Background

Our objective was to determine whether, compared with control interventions, pharmacologic interventions reduce the severity of fatigue in patients with cancer or recipients of hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (hsct).

Methods

For a systematic review, we searched medline, embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, cinahl, and Psychinfo for randomized trials of systemic pharmacologic interventions for the management of fatigue in patients with cancer or recipients of hsct. Two authors independently identified studies and abstracted data. Methodologic quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. The primary outcome was fatigue severity measured using various fatigue scales. Data were synthesized using random-effects models.

Results

In the 117 included trials (19,819 patients), the pharmacologic agents used were erythropoietins (n = 31), stimulants (n = 19), l-carnitine (n = 6), corticosteroids (n = 5), antidepressants (n = 5), appetite stimulants (n = 3), and other agents (n = 48). Fatigue was significantly reduced with erythropoietin [standardized mean difference (smd): -0.52; 95% confidence interval (ci): -0.89 to -0.14] and with methylphenidate (smd: -0.36; 95% ci: -0.56 to -0.15); modafinil (or armodafinil) and corticosteroids were not effective.

Conclusions

Erythropoietin and methylphenidate significantly reduced fatigue severity in patients with cancer and in recipients of hsct. Concerns about the safety of those agents might limit their usefulness. Future research should identify effective interventions for fatigue that have minimal adverse effects.

The Amide Local Anesthetic Lidocaine in Cancer Surgery-Potential Antimetastatic Effects and Preservation of Immune Cell Function? A Narrative Review

Surgical removal of the primary tumor in solid cancer is an essential component of the treatment. However, the perioperative period can paradoxically lead to an increased risk of cancer recurrence. A bimodal dynamics for early-stage breast cancer recurrence suggests a tumor dormancy-based model with a mastectomy-driven acceleration of the metastatic process and a crucial role of the immunosuppressive state during the perioperative period. Recent evidence suggests that anesthesia could also influence the progress of the disease. Local anesthetics (LAs) have long been used for their properties to block nociceptive input. They also exert anti-inflammatory capacities by modulating the liberation or signal propagation of inflammatory mediators. Interestingly, LAs can reduce viability and proliferation of many cancer cells in vitro as well. Additionally, retrospective clinical trials have suggested that regional anesthesia for cancer surgery (either with or without general anesthesia) might reduce the risk of recurrence. Lidocaine, a LA, which can be administered intravenously, is widely used in clinical practice for multimodal analgesia. It is associated with a morphine-sparing effect, reduced pain scores, and in major surgery probably also with a reduced incidence of postoperative ileus and length of hospital stay. Systemic delivery might therefore be efficient to target residual disease or reach cells able to form micrometastasis. Moreover, an in vitro study has shown that lidocaine could enhance the activity of natural killer (NK) cells. Due to their ability to recognize and kill tumor cells without the requirement of prior antigen exposure, NKs are the main actor of the innate immune system. However, several perioperative factors can reduce NK activity, such as stress, pain, opioids, or general anesthetics. Intravenous lidocaine as part of the perioperative anesthesia regimen would be of major interest for clinicians, as it might bear the potential to reduce the risk of cancer recurrence or progression patients undergoing cancer surgery. As a well-known pharmaceutical agent, lidocaine might therefore be a promising candidate for oncological drug repurposing. We urgently need clinical randomized trials assessing the protective effect of lidocaine on NKs function and against recurrence after cancer surgery to achieve a “proof of concept.”

Perioperative Use of Intravenous Lidocaine

Perioperative lidocaine infusion improves analgesia and recovery after some surgical procedures, possibly through systemic antiinflammatory effects. This commentary provides the clinician with evidence for rational use of perioperative lidocaine infusion in procedures where it is of demonstrated benefit.

Effects of systemic lidocaine versus magnesium administration on postoperative functional recovery and chronic pain in patients undergoing breast cancer surgery: A prospective, randomized, double-blind, comparative clinical trial

Introduction

We aimed to compare the effects of intraoperative lidocaine and magnesium on postoperative functional recovery and chronic pain after mastectomy due to breast cancer. Systemic lidocaine and magnesium reduce pain hypersensitivity to surgical stimuli; however, their effects after mastectomy have not been evaluated clearly.

Methods

In this prospective, double-blind, clinical trial, 126 female patients undergoing mastectomy were randomly assigned to lidocaine (L), magnesium (M), and control (C) groups. Lidocaine and magnesium were administered at 2 mg/kg and 20 mg/kg for 15 minutes immediately after induction, followed by infusions of 2 mg/kg/h and 20 mg/kg/h, respectively. The control group received the same volume of saline. Patient characteristics, perioperative parameters, and postoperative recovery profiles, including the Quality of Recovery 40 (QoR-40) survey, pain scales, length of hospital stay, and the short-form McGill pain questionnaire (SF-MPQ) at postoperative 1 month and 3 months were evaluated.

Results

The global QoR-40 scores on postoperative day 1 were significantly higher in group L than in group C (P = 0.003). Moreover, in sub-scores of the QoR-40 dimensions, emotional state and pain scores were significantly higher in group L than those in groups M and C (P = 0.027 and 0.023, respectively). At postoperative 3 months, SF-MPQ and SF-MPQ-sensitive scores were significantly lower in group L than in group C (P = 0.046 and 0.036, respectively).

Conclusions

Intraoperative infusion of lidocaine improved the quality of recovery and attenuated the intensity of chronic pain in patients undergoing breast cancer surgery.

Endogenous Opiates and Behavior: 2015

This paper is the thirty-eighth consecutive installment of the annual review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system. It summarizes papers published during 2015 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides, opioid receptors, opioid agonists and opioid antagonists. The particular topics that continue to be covered include the molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors related to behavior, and the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia, stress and social status, tolerance and dependence, learning and memory, eating and drinking, drug abuse and alcohol, sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology, mental illness and mood, seizures and neurologic disorders, electrical-related activity and neurophysiology, general activity and locomotion, gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions, cardiovascular responses, respiration and thermoregulation, and immunological responses.

Quality of postoperative recovery after breast surgery. General anaesthesia combined with paravertebral versus serratus-intercostal block

INTRODUCTION

The quality of postoperative recovery is one of the most important among all the quality indicators used in clinical situations. This is even more important after cancer surgery. Our aim was to evaluate this after non-reconstructive breast surgery under general anesthesia and paravertebral blockade or serratus-intercostal plane blockade, in the early and late post-operative period.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A prospective observational study was conducted on 60 patients (25 paravertebral blockade group and 35 serratus-intercostal plane blockade group) scheduled for non-reconstructive breast surgery during a 6 month period. Every patient received general anaesthesia and were randomised to receive either paravertebral blockade or serratus-intercostal plane blockade. The quality of post-anaesthetic recovery was quantified by Postoperative Quality Recovery Scale, which is used to assess physiological, nociceptive, emotional, autonomy, cognitive and general state domains at different times: baseline (before surgery), 15min after the end of surgery, at discharge to home, and one month after surgery.

RESULTS

A total recovery of 95.93% was achieved in the early postoperative period (15min PACU), 99.07% at discharge to home, and 99.25% at one month after the intervention. No significant differences were found between groups in total score or in each evaluated area.

CONCLUSIONS

A progressive improvement was observed in the scores assessed with the Postoperative Quality Recovery Scale, reaching values that would allow the discharge to home and early return to usual active life from the immediate postoperative period, with no significant differences between the 2 analgesic techniques. Savings in opioid use and the excellent recovery were observed in all measured domains observed.

A review of postoperative analgesia for breast cancer surgery

An online database search with subsequent article review was performed in order to review the various analgesic modalities for breast cancer surgery. Of 514 abstracts, 284 full-length manuscripts were reviewed. The effect of pharmacologic interventions is varied (NSAIDS, opioids, anticonvulsants, ketamine, lidocaine). Likewise, data from high-quality randomized, controlled studies on wound infiltration (including liposome encapsulated) and infusion of local anesthetic are minimal and conflicting. Conversely, abundant evidence demonstrates paravertebral blocks and thoracic epidural infusions provide effective analgesia and minimize opioid requirements, while decreasing opioid-related side effects in the immediate postoperative period. Other techniques with promising – but extremely limited – data include cervical epidural infusion, brachial plexus, interfascial plane and interpleural blocks. In conclusion, procedural interventions involving regional blocks are more conclusively effective than pharmacologic modalities in providing analgesia to patients following surgery for breast cancer.

Managing Opioid-Tolerant Patients in the Perioperative Surgical Home

Management of acute postoperative pain is important to decrease perioperative morbidity and improve patient satisfaction. Opioids are associated with potential adverse events that may lead to significant risk. Uncontrolled pain is a risk factor in the transformation of acute pain to chronic pain. Balancing these issues can be especially challenging in opioid-tolerant patients undergoing surgery, for whom rapidly escalating opioid doses in an effort to control pain can be associated with increased complications. In the perioperative surgical home model, anesthesiologists are positioned to coordinate a comprehensive perioperative analgesic plan that begins with the preoperative assessment and continues through discharge.

Memantine before Mastectomy Prevents Post-Surgery Pain: A Randomized, Blinded Clinical Trial in Surgical Patients

BACKGROUND

Neuropathic pain following surgical treatment for breast cancer with or without chemotherapy is a clinical burden and patients frequently report cognitive, emotional and quality of life impairment. A preclinical study recently showed that memantine administered before surgery may prevent neuropathic pain development and cognitive dysfunction. With a translational approach, a clinical trial has been carried out to evaluate whether memantine administered before and after mastectomy could prevent the development of neuropathic pain, the impairment of cognition and quality of life.

METHOD

A randomized, pilot clinical trial included 40 women undergoing mastectomy in the Oncology Department, University Hospital, Clermont-Ferrand, France. Memantine (5 to 20 mg/day; n = 20) or placebo (n = 20) was administered for four weeks starting two weeks before surgery. The primary endpoint was pain intensity measured on a (0-10) numerical rating scale at three months post-mastectomy.

RESULTS

Data analyses were performed using mixed models and the tests were two-sided, with a type I error set at α = 0.05. Compared with placebo, patients receiving memantine showed at three months a significant difference in post-mastectomy pain intensity, less rescue analgesia and a better emotional state. An improvement of pain symptoms induced by cancer chemotherapy was also reported.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows for the first time the beneficial effect of memantine to prevent post-mastectomy pain development and to diminish chemotherapy-induced pain symptoms. The lesser analgesic consumption and better well-being of patients for at least six months after treatment suggests that memantine could be an interesting therapeutic option to diminish the burden of breast cancer therapy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01536314.

The in vitro mechanisms and in vivo efficacy of intravenous lidocaine on the neuroinflammatory response in acute and chronic pain

INTRODUCTION

The neuroinflammatory response plays a key role in several pain syndromes. Intravenous (iv) lidocaine is beneficial in acute and chronic pain. This review delineates the current literature concerning in vitro mechanisms and in vivo efficacy of iv lidocaine on the neuroinflammatory response in acute and chronic pain.

DATABASES AND DATA TREATMENT

We searched PUBMED and the Cochrane Library for in vitro and in vivo studies from July 1975 to August 2014. In vitro articles providing an explanation for the mechanisms of action of lidocaine on the neuroinflammatory response in pain were included. Animal or clinical studies were included concerning iv lidocaine for acute or chronic pain or during inflammation.

RESULTS

Eighty-eight articles regarding iv lidocaine were included: 36 in vitro studies evaluating the effect on ion channels and receptors; 31 animal studies concerning acute and chronic pain and inflammatory models; 21 clinical studies concerning acute and chronic pain. Low-dose lidocaine inhibits in vitro voltage-gated sodium channels, the glycinergic system, some potassium channels and Gαq-coupled protein receptors. Higher lidocaine concentrations block potassium and calcium channels, and NMDA receptors. Animal studies demonstrate lidocaine to have analgesic effects in acute and neuropathic pain syndromes and anti-inflammatory effects early in the inflammatory response. Clinical studies demonstrate lidocaine to have advantage in abdominal surgery and in some neuropathic pain syndromes.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous lidocaine has analgesic, anti-inflammatory and antihyperalgesic properties mediated by an inhibitory effect on ion channels and receptors. It attenuates the neuroinflammatory response in perioperative pain and chronic neuropathic pain.

Best practice in the administration of analgesia in postoncological surgery

The rationale for using multimodal analgesia after any major surgery is achievement of adequate analgesia while avoiding the unwanted effects of large doses of any analgesic, in particular opioids. There are two reasons why we can hypothesize that multimodal analgesia might have a significant impact on cancer-related outcomes in the context of oncological orthopedic surgery. First, because multimodal analgesia is a key component of enhanced-recovery pathways and can accelerate return to intended oncological therapy. And second, because some of the analgesic used in multimodal analgesia (i.e., COX inhibitors, local analgesics and dexamethasone) can induce apoptosis in cancer cells and/or diminish the inflammatory response during surgery which itself can facilitate tumor growth.