Pain management after ambulatory surgery

[Liposomal bupivacaine-No breakthrough in postoperative pain management]

One of the main limitations concerning the use of local anesthetics is due to their restricted duration of action. In recent years, liposomal formulations with prolonged release kinetics have been developed to extend the pharmacological duration of action of the 1‑stage peripheral regional anesthesia (single-shot procedure) and thus bring about a longer duration of action. The focus here is particularly on achieving postoperative freedom from pain for at least 24 h (or even better 48 h) and thus early mobilization of patients using on-demand medication causing (at most) minor local sensory blockade without causing motor impairments (at least that is the ideal). Therefore, methods of utilizing slow-release drugs as seen in liposomal carrier systems have experienced increasing scientific attention in the last few years. A common modern pharmacological example with a theoretically significantly longer duration of action is liposomal bupivacaine, an amide local anesthetic. Due to a multivesicular liposome structure, the retarded release of the active component bupivacaine HCl leads to a theoretical pharmacological effectiveness of up to 72 h. Previous studies consistently showed a safety profile comparable to conventional bupivacaine HCl. Liposomal bupivacaine has been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) under the trade name Exparel© (Pacira Pharmaceuticals, Parsippany, NJ, USA) since 2011; however, its use is currently limited to local wound infiltration, transverse abdominis plane (TAP) blocks, and interscalene nerve blocks of the brachial plexus. In 2020, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) also approved the use of liposomal bupivacaine for blockade of the brachial plexus or the femoral nerve and as a field block or for wound infiltration to treat postoperative pain. So far, studies on the clinical effectiveness of liposomal bupivacaine have been very heterogeneous and there have been no conclusive meta-analyses with sufficient rigor or significance. Recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses, combining the results of clinical studies regarding the analgesic efficiency of liposomal bupivacaine in different fields of application, consistently refuted any benefit of clinical relevance provided by the liposomal formulation. There is currently sufficient evidence to now end the ongoing debate around liposomal bupivacaine. The aim of this work is to give the reader a current, evidence-based overview of this substance.

Serratus Anterior Plane Block Versus Intercostal Block with Incision Infiltration in Robotic-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Trial

OBJECTIVES

Patients undergoing robotic video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (rVATS) report significant postoperative pain. Both the serratus anterior plane block (SAPB) and the surgical intercostal block (IB) (performed by a surgeon from within the thorax), along with incision infiltration (II), are distinct modalities that target the lateral cutaneous branches of intercostal nerves and are acceptable analgesic modalities in an enhanced recovery after rVATS surgery.

DESIGN

Prospective, double-blinded, randomized, controlled pilot trial with 65 patients to assess the difference in analgesia quality between the SAPB and IB+II in rVATS.

SETTING

Major academic teaching hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

The inclusion criteria included ASA physical status I-IV, ages 18-to-75 undergoing an elective, unilateral rVATS procedure.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomized to receive either an ultrasound-guided SAPB at the end of their surgery, using a 20-mL mixture consisting of 10 mL of liposomal bupivacaine (133 mg) and 10 mL 0.25% bupivacaine, or IB+II, using a 20-mL mixture consisting of 10 mL of liposomal bupivacaine (133 mg) and 10 mL 0.5% bupivacaine prior to skin closure by the surgeon.

RESULTS

The primary outcome was the amount of postoperative opioid consumption in morphine milliequivalents [MME] during the first 24 hours after surgery. Secondary outcomes were time to first analgesic request, VAS scores at zero, two, six, 18, or 24 hours at rest, and PACU, ICU, or hospital lengths of stay (LOS). There were no differences in any outcomes between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Both SAPB and IB+II are comparable analgesic modalities for rVATS procedures.

Preoperative analgesic instruction and prescription reduces early home pain after outpatient surgery: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Home pain remains the most common complication in outpatient surgery. Optimal management requires good information and early availability of analgesics. The main objective of this randomized controlled trial was to compare the effects of pre- vs postoperative analgesic instruction and prescription on postoperative home pain.

METHODS

Patients were randomized into an anesthesia consultation group (AC group) and a standard postoperative group (POP group). The AC group and the POP group received analgesic prescription and instruction during the anesthesia consultation and after surgery, respectively. The primary outcome was the incidence of home pain on postopertive day one (D1). Home pain was defined by at least one episode with a numeric rating scale score > 3/10 at rest. Treatment compliance and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) were also assessed on D1 and postoperative day 7 (D7).

RESULTS

One hundred and eighty-six patients were included between May 2017 and May 2018 at Rouen University Hospital, France. Ninety-four patients were randomized to the AC group and 92 to the POP group. On D1, the incidence of pain was 23/94 (24%) in the AC group and 44/92 (48%) in the POP group (P < 0.001). On D1, the rate of treatment compliance was significantly higher in the AC group than in the POP group (85% vs 69%; P = 0.02). There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of pain or treatment compliance between groups on D7 or in PONV on D1 and on D7.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative analgesic instruction and prescription during anesthesia consultation reduces the incidence of early postoperative home pain in outpatient surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

www.clinicaltrialsgov (NCT03205189); registered 2 July 2017.

Protocol of DEXPED trial: efficacy of intravenous dexamethasone, administered at the time of analgesic blocking of the lower limb, on postoperative pain in children: a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial

INTRODUCTION

Dexamethasone is a drug used to prolong the postoperative analgesia in children after peripheral nerve blockade, although the dose usually used (0.2 mg/kg) has not been studied yet. This study is a monocentric, prospective, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blinded study in a university hospital in France. The primary objective of the study is to evaluate the efficacy of 0.2 mg/kg intravenous dexamethasone on early postoperative pain in children aged 6-15 years, who require a lower limb peripheral nerve block following general anaesthesia.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Eighty children, aged 6-15 years, undergoing surgery for which peripheral nerve lower limb blockade with ropivacaine following general anaesthesia are included. The inclusion criteria are: children aged 6-15 years, with American Society of Anaesthesiologists physical status I or II and scheduled for surgery requiring a peripheral block of the lower limb for analgesic purposes, with a preoperative anaesthetic evaluation between 90 and 2 days before the surgery, with informed consent from legal representatives. General anaesthesia is performed. The patient receives, according to his group, either 0.2 mg/kg of dexamethasone intravenously at the start of anaesthetic induction or the same volume of placebo. Then, the peripheral block of the lower limb is performed with ropivacaine. The primary outcome is the total doses of opioid administered (in mg/kg of morphine equivalent) within 24 hours postoperatively. The secondary objectives are the evaluation of the effect of a single-dose intravenous dexamethasone at the time of anaesthetic induction, on the following parameters: onset of postoperative pain, duration of motor block, postoperative nausea and vomiting within 24 hours.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study is conducted according to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and has been approved by the French national ethics committee and the National Drug Safety Agency. Findings of this study will be widely disseminated through conference presentations, reports, factsheets and academic publications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03618173.

Pain relief after ambulatory surgery: Progress over the last decade

The concept of fast-track or ambulatory surgery appeared to facilitate early recovery and discharge from the hospital and early resumption of normal daily activities after elective surgical procedures as well to reduce the health-care costs. Multimodal/balanced analgesia is an increasingly popular approach for this. The use of conventional modalities including central neuraxial blockade and opioids cannot be extended to patients undergoing fast-track surgery. Hence, an aggressive perioperative analgesic regimen/protocol is required for effective pain relief, with minimal side effects and which could be managed easily by the patient or the relatives at home away from the hospital setting. Pharmacological therapy and regional anesthesia techniques have been utilized for postoperative pain management. The use of perineural, incisional, and intra-articular catheters and local anesthetic administration through elastomeric and electronic pumps is promising approach for effective pain management at home. The key to successful pain management of such procedures requires individually tailored education to patients or caregivers including information on treatment options for postoperative pain and use of multimodal analgesia. This review provides an overview of the current armamentarium of drugs and modalities available for effective management of patients undergoing day care surgeries and sheds light on newer modalities available.

Satisfactory Analgesia with Minimal Emesis in Day Surgeries (SAME DayS): a protocol for a randomised controlled trial of morphine versus hydromorphone

INTRODUCTION

There has been an exponential increase in the number of ambulatory surgeries (AS). Pain and postoperative nausea vomiting (PONV) affects the recovery, discharge and overall satisfaction of patients having AS. Opioids remain the primary modality for moderate to severe pain. Since there is no perfect opioid, physicians should ideally use the opioid that optimally balances benefits and risks. Present decisions on the choice between morphine (M) and hydromorphone (HM) are based on individual experience and observation. Our primary objective is to compare the proportion of patients having AS achieving satisfactory analgesia without significant PONV when using M compared with HM. Secondarily we will compare the proportion of patients with adverse events, analgesic used, patient satisfaction, time to discharge and postdischarge symptoms.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a two-arm, multicentre, parallel group, randomised controlled trial of 400 patients having AS. Eligible patients undergoing AS of the abdominal and pelvic regions with a potential to cause moderate to severe pain will be recruited in the preoperative clinic. Using a computer-generated randomization, with a 1:1 allocation ratio, patients will be randomised to M or HM. Patients, healthcare providers and research personnel will be blinded. Study interventions will be administered in the recovery using equianalgesic doses of M or HM in concealed syringes. Patients will be followed in hospital and up to 3 months. Intention-to-treat approach will be used for analysis.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has been approved by the Hamilton integrated research ethics board. We plan to publish our trial findings and present our findings at scientific meetings.

TRAIL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02223377; Pre-results.

Measuring satisfaction and anesthesia related outcomes in a surgical day care centre: A three-year single-centre observational study

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To evaluate patient satisfaction and patient reported anaesthesia related outcome parameters after outpatient surgery.

DESIGN

A three-year (2013-2016) observational study.

SETTING

A surgical day care centre embedded in a tertiary care, university hospital.

PATIENTS

Adult Dutch-speaking patients who underwent surgery under general or regional anaesthesia on an outpatient basis (n=5424).

INTERVENTIONS

A questionnaire was developed to evaluate patients' satisfaction with care during their hospitalisation in the surgical day centre, as well as to assess their reports of anaesthesia related outcomes.

MEASUREMENTS

Various aspects of care were measured, including care by nurses, care by doctors, organisational and safety items. Variation in satisfaction and surgery and anaesthesia related outcomes as a function of different categories (gender, age, education, type of anaesthesia, discipline and era) were also investigated.

MAIN RESULTS

Confirmatory factor analysis showed an excellent fit to the hypothesized factors of the survey. Satisfaction scores were very high for different aspects of care, resulting in 98% of patients being (very) satisfied (59.1% very satisfied, 38.9% satisfied). Male (p=0.0003), higher educated (p<0.0001) and older patients (p<0.0001) were more likely to be very satisfied. Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) were frequent (nausea: 13.9%, vomiting: 3.3%), and more present in female than in male patients (p<0.0001). Pain scores at the PACU differed among disciplines (p<0.0001) were higher in female patients compared to male patients (3.41% versus 2.54%, p<0.0001) and after general anaesthesia compared to regional anaesthesia (3.25% versus 0.39%, p<0.0001) and decreased with higher age (p=0.0001) and education level (p=0.0033).

CONCLUSIONS

Whereas satisfaction with all aspects of care is generally high, the results regarding pain and PONV should inspire quality improvement initiatives. The questionnaire developed in this study can be a vehicle to assess and improve the quality of care in surgical day care centres.

Anesthesia for ambulatory surgery

Ambulatory anesthesia allows quick recovery from anesthesia, leading to an early discharge and rapid resumption of daily activities, which can be of great benefit to patients, healthcare providers, third-party payers, and hospitals. Recently, with the development of minimally invasive surgical techniques and short-acting anesthetics, the use of ambulatory surgery has grown rapidly. Additionally, as the indications for ambulatory surgery have widened, the surgical methods have become more complex and the number of comorbidities has increased. For successful and safe ambulatory anesthesia, the anesthesiologist must consider various factors relating to the patient. Among them, appropriate selection of patients and surgical and anesthetic methods, as well as postoperative management, should be considered simultaneously. Patient selection is a particularly important factor. Appropriate surgical and anesthetic techniques should be used to minimize postoperative complications, especially postoperative pain, nausea, and vomiting. Patients and their caregivers should be fully informed of specific care guidelines and appropriate responses to emergency situations on discharge from the hospital. During this process, close communication between patients and medical staff, as well as postoperative follow-up appointments, should be ensured. In summary, safe and convenient methods to ensure the patient's return to function and recovery are necessary.

Combination of general anesthesia and peripheral nerve block with low-dose ropivacaine reduces postoperative pain for several days after outpatient arthroscopy: A randomized controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Effective methods for postoperative pain relief are an important concern in outpatient surgery. For arthroscopies we combine a single-shot peripheral nerve block using low-volume, low-concentration ropivacaine with general anesthesia. We hypothesized that the patients would have less postoperative pain and be more rapidly home ready than after general anesthesia alone.

METHODS

Patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists I-III, 18-80 years old) scheduled for outpatient arthroscopy on the upper or lower extremity were randomized to have either a combination of peripheral nerve block and general anesthesia (NB + GA, study group) or general anesthesia alone (GA, control group). The relevant nerve was localized by ultrasound and 10 mL ropivacaine 0.2% was injected. General anesthesia was with propofol and remifentanil. Numeric rating scales were used to assess pain and patient satisfaction in the recovery room, on the evening of surgery, and on the following 2 days.

RESULTS

A total of 120 patients participated in the study (NB + GA: 61; GA: 59). The percentage of patients reporting relevant pain in the recovery room were 0% versus 44% (P < 0.001), on the evening after surgery 3% versus 80% (P < 0.001), and on days 1 and 2 postsurgery 12% versus 73% and 12% versus 64% (NB + GA vs GA, respectively). Median time to home discharge was NB + GA 34.5 min (range 15-90) versus GA 55 min (20-115) (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of a peripheral nerve block with low-dose ropivacaine and general anesthesia reduced postoperative pain compared with general anesthesia alone for several days after outpatient arthroscopy. It also shortened the time to home discharge.

[Pain therapy with metamizole after ambulatory surgery?]

One third of operations are performed on an outpatient basis in Germany, but methods of postoperative pain therapy are less studied. We observed 126 patients with ambulatory and planned surgery in the field of orthopedics and trauma surgery. They were treated with the analgesic metamizole intra- and postoperatively and completed the patients' questionnaire QUIPS on the first postoperative day. In all, 79 patients (61.7%) reported current pain ≥4 on the numerical rating scale (NRS); 84 (66.6%) had restrictions in mobility, 48 (38.1%) described sleep disorders, and 26 (20.6%) wished for more or stronger analgesics. However, 91 (72.2%) of our patients were satisfied with the their pain therapy. Chances are that the treatment of nociceptive pain during movement with NSAID or COX-2-inhibitors is more successful. Further investigations should follow.

Effect of adding intrathecal morphine to a multimodal analgesic regimen for postoperative pain management after laparoscopic bariatric surgery: a prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Pain control after bariatric surgery is a major challenge. Our objective was to study the efficacy and safety of intrathecal (IT) morphine 0.3 mg added to bupivacaine 0.5% for postoperative pain after laparoscopic bariatric surgery.

METHODS

After local ethics committee approval, 100 morbidly obese patients scheduled for laparoscopic bariatric surgery were enrolled in this study. Patients were randomly assigned into two groups: Group I received IT 0.3 mg morphine (0.3 mL) added to 1.2 mL of bupivacaine 0.5%; Group II received IT 0.3 mL saline added to 1.2 mL of bupivacaine 0.5%, immediately before induction of general anaesthesia. For both groups, 60 mg ketorolac and 1000 mg paracetamol were infused 30 minutes before the end of surgery. After wound closure, 20 mL bupivacaine 0.25% was infiltrated at wound edges.

RESULTS

Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score was significantly lower in group I immediately, 30 minutes and 1 hour postoperatively. Time to first ambulation, return of intestinal sounds and hospital stay were shorter in group I than group II (p < 0.05); total morphine consumption was significantly lower in group I than group II (p < 0.05). Sedation score was significantly higher in group I immediately postoperatively, while at 30 minutes, 1, 2 and 6 hours postoperatively sedation scores were significantly higher in group II. Itching was significantly higher in group I.

CONCLUSION

The addition of IT morphine to a multimodal analgesic regimen after laparoscopic bariatric surgery was an effective and safe method that markedly reduced postoperative pain, systemic opioid consumption and length of hospital stay.

Effect of preoperative pregabalin on postoperative pain relief in thyroidectomy patients: A prospective observational study

Background:

Effective management of postoperative pain leads to increased patient satisfaction, earlier mobilization, reduced hospital stay and costs. One of the methods used for management of postoperative pain is preemptive analgesia-blockade of afferent nerve fibers before a painful stimulus. It modifies peripheral and central nervous system processing of noxious stimuli and reduces postoperative opioid consumption. In this study, we sought to determine whether the preoperative use of pregabalin reduced postoperative pain and morphine consumption in thyroidectomy.

Materials and Methods:

The observation was conducted on patients undergoing thyroidectomy surgery in two groups of 30 each. Of the two groups, one received a single oral dose of pregabalin 1 h preoperatively. Both the group of patients undergoes anesthesia in a similar manner. Following surgery the efficacy of the preoperative dose of pregabalin is observed by measuring the total opioid consumption 6 h postoperatively and assessing verbal numeric pain scales.

Results:

The mean time to request of rescue analgesia in pregabalin group was 322.07 ± 69.106 min when compared to morphine group 256.33 ± 111.978 min (P < 0.05). The mean pain scores in the postoperative period were also significantly lower in patients receiving pregabalin.

Conclusion:

Single oral dose of pregabalin was effective in reducing acute postoperative pain in thyroidectomy patients. It prolongs the time to the request of rescue analgesia and also results in lower postoperative pain scores in the immediate postoperative period. However a statistically significant low opioid consumption could not be proved.

[QUIPSambulant. An instrument for quality assurance in acute pain therapy after outpatient operations]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Up until recently no tool for quality assurance (QA) of outpatient pain therapy after outpatient surgery, which currently constitutes one third of all operations, was available with benchmarking capacity. The QUIPS (German abbreviation for quality assurance in postoperative pain therapy) questionnaire, that had primarily been developed and established for inpatient postoperative pain therapy, was to be optimized to not only incorporate the issues with regard to outpatient operations but also a revision for use in the clinical routine.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An interdisciplinary task force reviewed and optimized the QUIPS questionnaire. The optimized questionnaire was then used within the scope of outpatient surgery in their clinics. A total of 121 patients and 12 surgeons received a questionnaire on the first postoperative day containing questions on acceptance and understandability of the QUIPS patient outcome questionnaire.

RESULTS

Of the patients 12 (9.9 %) did not understand the original question on special pain therapy procedures stated during the preoperative counseling. For 15 patients (12.4 %) the original questions on chronic or pre-existing pain were misleading and 4 out of the 12 surgeons (33 %) did not conclusively understand these questions. The optimized questionnaire modified the questions in the preoperative counseling in the segment of postoperative pain as follows: question E1 was changed to a yes/no answer. Question E13 was modified to "how content were you with respect to your post-operative pain therapy?" Question E14 was modified to "did you suffer from other pain prior to the operation, hence pain that continued in addition to the postoperative pain?" These changes improved the understandability of the QUIPS patient outcome questionnaire. Surgeons required on average 9.7 min (SD ±3.2 min) to complete the QUIPS documentation sheets and 83 % of the surgeons rated the optimized QUIPS module as usable in the daily routine. The new module QUIPSambulant will soon be available for download on the QUIPS internet website.

DISCUSSION

By reducing items on the QUIPS documentation sheets with respect to items relevant for outpatient surgery and redesigning three questions in the patient outcome questionnaire, a new QUIPS module for the QA of postoperative pain in an ambulatory setting is now available for both patients and surgeons. The necessity for quality management (QM) with regard to postoperative pain therapy after outpatient surgery can be considered assured. To what extent the newly adapted QM tool QUIPSambulant will be deemed suitable in a routine hospital setting remains to be seen and requires ongoing investigation.

Postoperative pain management with transdermal fentanyl after forefoot surgery: a randomized, placebo-controlled study

Background

Quality of life is decreased in patients with hallux valgus deformity, mainly because of pain. Significant improvement is usually achieved by surgery. However, postoperative pain can be moderate to severe for 2–3 days. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the use of transdermal fentanyl for postoperative pain management after forefoot surgery.

Methods

Sixty patients undergoing hallux valgus or hallux rigidus surgery were allocated to receive a patch delivering either fentanyl 12 μg/hour or placebo for postoperative pain. The consumption of rescue opioid oxycodone, the primary outcome measure, was evaluated daily until the fourth postoperative day. Total consumption of oxycodone during the study period was also assessed. Pain scores and possible adverse effects were evaluated every 6 hours during the first 24 hours and on the fourth postoperative day.

Results

The use of rescue opioid was low in both groups, the median (range) consumption of oxycodone being 10 (0–50) mg on the day of surgery (no difference between the groups, P=0.31) and 0 (0–35) mg thereafter. The total combined consumption was 10 (0–105) mg in the fentanyl group and 20 (0–70) mg in the placebo group (P=0.23). There were no statistically significant differences in pain scores or adverse effects between the groups.

Conclusion

As a part of multimodal analgesia with ibuprofen and acetaminophen, a patch delivering fentanyl 12 μg/hour did not significantly decrease the consumption of rescue opioid or pain scores after forefoot surgery.

Neonatal pain: What's age got to do with it?

Background:

The neurobiology of neonatal pain processing, especially in preterm infants, differs significantly from older infants, children, adolescence, and adults. Research suggests that strong painful procedures or repeated mild procedures may permanently modify individual pain processing. Acute injuries at critical developmental periods are risk factors for persistent altered neurodevelopment. The purpose of this narrative review is to present the seminal and current literature describing the unique physiological aspects of neonatal pain processing.

Methods:

Articles describing the structures and physiological processes that influence neonatal pain were identified from electronic databases Medline, PubMed, and CINAHL.

Results:

The representation of neonatal pain physiology is described in three processes: Local peripheral nervous system processes, referred to as transduction; spinal cord processing, referred to as transmission and modulation; and supraspinal processing and integration or perception of pain. The consequences of undermanaged pain in preterm infants and neonates are discussed.

Conclusion:

Although the process and pain responses in neonates bear some similarity to processes and pain responses in older infants, children, adolescence, and adults; there are some pain processes and responses that are unique to neonates rendering them at risk for inadequate pain treatment. Moreover, exposure to repeated painful stimuli contributes to adverse long-term physiologic and behavioral sequelae. With the emergence of studies showing that painful experiences are capable of rewiring the adult brain, it is imperative that we treat neonatal pain effectively.

The effects of intra-operative dexmedetomidine on postoperative pain, side-effects and recovery in colorectal surgery

In this double-blind, randomised study, 100 patients undergoing open or conventional laparoscopic colorectal surgery received an intra-operative loading dose of dexmedetomidine 1 μg.kg(-1) followed by an infusion of 0.5 μg.kg(-1) .h(-1) , or a bolus and infusion of saline 0.9% of equivalent volume. Forty-six patients in the dexmedetomidine group and 50 in the saline group completed the study. The area under the curve of numerical rating scores for pain at rest for 1-48 h postoperatively was significantly lower in the patients receiving dexmedetomidine (p = 0.041). There was no difference in morphine consumption, duration of recovery ward or hospital stay. From the data obtained in this study, we calculated a number needed to treat for effective pain relief of 4. Intra-operative dexmedetomidine in colorectal surgery resulted in a reduction in resting pain scores, but there was no morphine-sparing effect or improvement in patients' recovery outcome measures.

The effect of preoperative intravenous dexketoprofen trometamol on postoperative pain in minor outpatient urologic surgery

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this prospective double-blind randomized study was to compare the effectiveness of preoperative dexketoprofen trometamol for acute postoperative pain in patients undergoing minor outpatient urologic surgery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Sixty male patients (ASA I and II) undergoing varicocelectomy and testicular sperm extraction (TESE) with standard laryngeal mask airway (LMA) anesthesia were randomly divided into two groups. Patients in Group I (n=30) received 50 mg of dexketoprofen trometamol iv before induction, whereas patients in Group II (n=30) received saline. All patients received standard LMA anesthesia (propofol, sevoflurane and N2O/O2). Analgesic efficacy was evaluated by self-assessment of pain intensity (VAS) at regular intervals. Vital signs, side effects and time to reach a postanesthesia discharge score (PADS) of ≥9 were also recorded. Paracetamol 1 gr iv and tramadol 100 mg iv were used for rescue analgesia.

RESULTS

Demographic data and duration of surgery were similar in both groups. There was no significant difference between groups with respect to postoperative pain scores and side effects. Although more patients in Group II (60%) required rescue analgesia compared to Group I (33.3%), the difference did not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative IV use of dexketoprofen trometamol iv did not decrease the need for rescue analgesia in patients undergoing minor outpatient urological surgery.

Postoperative fentanyl patch versus subacromial bupivacaine infusion in arthroscopic shoulder surgery

PURPOSE

The purpose of our study was to compare the effectiveness of subacromial bupivacaine infusion and a transdermal fentanyl patch in the treatment of postoperative pain after arthroscopic shoulder surgery.

METHODS

Sixty patients with rotator cuff disease scheduled for elective arthroscopic shoulder surgery were enrolled in the study. For the treatment of postoperative pain, 30 patients constituted group F and received a 12.0-μg/h fentanyl patch for 72 hours and saline solution infusion in a subacromial manner at the rate of 4 mL/h. The remaining 30 patients constituted group B and received a placebo patch and an infusion of 2.5-mg/mL bupivacaine in a subacromial manner for 72 hours. The primary outcome measure was the postoperative numerical rating scale pain score. The consumption of opioids, ibuprofen, and acetaminophen was also recorded. The Constant scores and general recovery were followed up until the 90th postoperative day.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference in the numerical rating scale scores (P = .60) between the groups. No differences in the use of rescue analgesic were observed except that the patients receiving bupivacaine used more ibuprofen (median, 1,200 mg v 600 mg) during the day of surgery (P = .042). No difference was found in general recovery between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

A fentanyl patch delivering 12-μg/h fentanyl offers an easy and safe treatment option as a part of multimodal analgesia with few adverse effects in the treatment of postoperative pain in a carefully selected patient group after arthroscopic shoulder surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, randomized controlled trial.

Paravertebral blockade for day-case breast augmentation: a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Bilateral breast augmentation is an increasingly popular day-case procedure. Local infiltration with sedation is routinely used for its ease of application compared with the more complex and potentially riskier paravertebral blockade (PVB). We hypothesized that ropivacaine injected by experienced anesthesia providers into the paravertebral space as a PVB was more effective than ropivacaine injected by the operating surgeon (plastic surgeon) directly into the zone of surgical dissection.

METHODS

Forty female patients who were ASA physical status I or II and undergoing bilateral subpectoral cosmetic breast augmentation were recruited for participation in a prospective, randomized, single-blind study. Patients were randomized to 1 of 2 groups: ropivacaine via PVB, or surgical infiltration of ropivacaine. In both groups, the surgeon was asked to infiltrate the appropriate area with either saline (PVB group) or ropivacaine (local infiltration group). Both groups were sedated with propofol, titrated to effect. The plastic surgeon was blinded to the solution injected. Data collected included demographic characteristics, intraoperative cooperation scores, recovery room postoperative nausea and vomiting, analgesia use, and visual analog scale pain scores. All patients were asked to complete a preoperative anxiety and quality of recovery questionnaire and to record their pain scores and analgesia requirements on discharge. The outcome measures were (i) intraoperative patient cooperation as assessed by the plastic surgeon, (ii) propofol requirement, (iii) postoperative pain, and (iv) quality of recovery.

RESULTS

Forty patients completed the study. PVB improved intraoperative cooperation (significance of difference P < 0.001, WMWodds = 6.69 with 95% 1-sided confidence interval CI ≥2.85), reduced propofol requirement (significance of difference P = 0.005, WMWodds = 0.35, CI <0.69), and decreased average postoperative pain in the home environment (significance of difference P = 0.007, WMWodds = 0.38, CI <0.73). There were no PVB complications. Only patients from the surgical infiltration group required rescue analgesics (30%, significance of difference = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

In a limited number of patients, we found that PVB is superior to direct surgical infiltration of ropivacaine for bilateral breast augmentation in same-day surgery. These advantages need to be balanced against the potential risks of PVB, especially in an office setting.

Perioperative single dose ketorolac to prevent postoperative pain: a meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Preventive analgesia using non-opioid analgesic strategies is recognized as a pathway to improve postoperative pain control while minimizing opioid-related side effects. Ketorolac is a nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug frequently used to treat postoperative pain. However, the optimal dose and route of administration for systemic single dose ketorolac to prevent postoperative pain is not well defined. We performed a quantitative systematic review to evaluate the efficacy of a single dose of perioperative ketorolac on postoperative analgesia.

METHODS

We followed the PRISMA statement guidelines. A wide search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials that evaluated the effects of a single dose of systemic ketorolac on postoperative pain and opioid consumption. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model. Effects of ketorolac dose were evaluated by pooling studies into 30- and 60-mg dosage groups. Asymmetry of funnel plots was examined using Egger regression. The presence of heterogeneity was assessed by subgroup analysis according to the route of systemic administration (IV versus IM) and the time of drug administration (preincision versus postincision).

RESULTS

Thirteen randomized clinical trials with 782 subjects were included. The weighted mean difference (95% confidence interval [CI]) of combined effects showed a difference for ketorolac over placebo for early pain at rest of -0.64 (-1.11 to -0.18) but not at late pain at rest, -0.29 (-0.88 to 0.29) summary point (0-10 scale). Opioid consumption was decreased by the 60-mg dose, with a mean (95% CI) IV morphine equivalent consumption of -1.64 mg (-2.90 to -0.37 mg). The opioid-sparing effects of ketorolac compared with placebo were greater when the drug was administered IM compared with when the drug was administered IV, with a mean difference (95% CI) IV morphine equivalent consumption of -2.13 mg (-4.1 to -0.21 mg). Postoperative nausea and vomiting were reduced by the 60-mg dose, with an odds ratio (95% CI) of 0.49 (0.29-0.81).

CONCLUSIONS

Single dose systemic ketorolac is an effective adjunct in multimodal regimens to reduce postoperative pain. Improved postoperative analgesia achieved with ketorolac was also accompanied by a reduction in postoperative nausea and vomiting. The 60-mg dose offers significant benefits but there is a lack of current evidence that the 30-mg dose offers significant benefits on postoperative pain outcomes.

Postoperative pain management after ambulatory surgery: role of multimodal analgesia

Multimodal (or balanced) analgesia represents an increasingly popular approach to preventing postoperative pain. The approach involves administering a combination of opioid and nonopioid analgesics. Nonopioid analgesics are increasingly being used as adjuvants before, during, and after surgery to facilitate the recovery process after ambulatory surgery. Early studies evaluating approaches to facilitating the recovery process have demonstrated that the use of multimodal analgesic techniques can improve early recovery as well as other clinically meaningful outcomes after ambulatory surgery. The potential beneficial effects of local anesthetics, NSAIDs, and gabapentanioids in improving perioperative outcomes continue to be investigated.

Effects of perioperative S (+) ketamine infusion added to multimodal analgesia in patients undergoing ambulatory haemorrhoidectomy

Background and objective

Perioperative low-dose ketamine has been useful for postoperative analgesia. In this study we wanted to assess the analgesic effect and possible side-effects of perioperative low-dose S (+) ketamine when added to a regime of non-opioid multimodal pain prophylaxis.

Methods

Seventy-seven patients scheduled for haemorrhoidectomy were enrolled in this randomized, double-blind, controlled study. They received oral paracetamol 1–2 g, total intravenous anaesthesia, intravenous 8 mg dexamethasone, 30 mg ketorolac and local infiltration with bupivacaine/epinephrine. Patients randomized to S (+) ketamine received an intravenous bolus dose of 0.35 mg kg−1 S (+) ketamine before start of surgery followed by continuous infusion of 5 μg kg−1 min−1 until 2 min after end of surgery. Patients in the placebo group got isotonic saline (bolus and infusion). BISTM monitoring was used. Pain intensity and side-effects were assessed by blinded nursing staff during PACU stay and by phone 1, 7 and 90 days after surgery.

Results

In patients randomized to S (+) ketamine emergence from anaesthesia was significantly longer (13.1 min vs. 9.3 min; p < 0.001). BIS values were significantly higher during anaesthesia (maximal value during surgery: 62 vs. 57; p = 0.01) and when opening eyes (81 vs. 70, p < 0.001). Pain scores (NRS and VAS) did not differ significantly between groups.

Conclusions

The addition of perioperative S (+) ketamine for postoperative analgesia after haemorrhoidectomy on top of multimodal non-opioid pain prophylaxis does not seem to be warranted, due to delayed emergence and recovery, more side-effects, altered BIS readings and absence of additive analgesic effect.