Peripheral nerve blocks for outpatient surgery: evidence-based indications

Addition of Liposomal Bupivacaine to Standard Bupivacaine versus Standard Bupivacaine Alone in the Supraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

The analgesic effect of adding liposomal bupivacaine to standard bupivacaine in supraclavicular brachial plexus block is not known. The authors hypothesized that addition of liposomal bupivacaine would reduce acute postoperative pain compared to standard bupivacaine alone.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial was conducted. Patients and outcome assessors were blinded. Eighty patients undergoing distal radial fracture fixation during regional anesthesia with supraclavicular brachial plexus block were randomized into two groups. The liposomal bupivacaine group received 10 ml 0.5% plain bupivacaine immediately followed by 10 ml 1.33% liposomal bupivacaine (n = 40). The standard bupivacaine group received 20 ml 0.5% plain bupivacaine (n = 40). The primary outcome was weighted area under curve (AUC) numerical rating scale pain score at rest during the first 48 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes included weighted AUC scores for pain with movement, overall benefit with analgesia score, and other functional scores.

RESULTS

For the primary outcome, the liposomal bupivacaine group was associated with statistically significantly lower weighted AUC pain score at rest (0.6 vs. 1.4; P < 0.001) in the first 48 h. Of the secondary outcomes, no difference between treatment groups reached statistical significance with the exception of weighted AUC score for pain with movement (2.3 vs. 3.7; adjusted P < 0.001) and overall benefit with analgesia score (1.1 vs. 1.7; adjusted P = 0.020) in the first 48 h, as well as numerical rating scale pain score at rest (0.5 vs. 1.9; adjusted P < 0.001) and with movement (2.7 vs. 4.9; adjusted P < 0.001) on postoperative day 1. Differences in numerical rating scale pain scores on postoperative days 2, 3, and 4 did not reach the level of statistical significance. There were no statistically significant differences in sensory function.

CONCLUSIONS

Liposomal bupivacaine given via supraclavicular brachial plexus block reduced pain at rest in the early postoperative period.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

Combination Preemptive Peripheral Nerve Block in Limb Surgery. A Prospective Study

Background and objectives: Patients often suffer from moderate to severe pain during the early recovery period in orthopedic surgery. We investigated the impact of a single-shot preoperative peripheral nerve block (PNB) on post-anesthesia recovery parameters and interleukin (IL)-6 level during limb surgery. Materials and Methods: A prospective randomized controlled study was conducted, and patients scheduled for limb surgery were recruited. Sixty patients were randomly assigned to either the PNB group or control group, who received morphine as a primary analgesic. The peak verbal numeric rating scale (NRS) score in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) was evaluated as a primary outcome. We also recorded rescue analgesics requirement and wake-up time from anesthesia in the PACU. In addition, the change of plasma IL-6 level after incision was measured. Results: Fifty-two patients completed the study, 27 and 25 cases in the PNB and control group, respectively. Preemptive PNB significantly reduced peak NRS score in the PACU compared to control group. Lower rescue analgesics requirement and rapid wake-up from anesthesia were also noted in PNB group. The IL-6 concentration increased less in the PNB group at 2 h after incision. Conclusions: Preemptive PNB attenuates IL-6 expression 2 h after incision and improves pain management in the PACU. PNB was considered as an essential part of pain management in limb surgery.

Analgesic efficacy of ultrasound-guided interscalene block vs. supraclavicular block for ambulatory arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: A randomised noninferiority study

BACKGROUND

Ultrasound-guided interscalene block (ISB) is the reference technique for pain control after ambulatory upper limb surgery, but supraclavicular block (SCB) is an alternative.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of SCB vs. ISB in patients undergoing ambulatory arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR), with the hypothesis of noninferiority of SCB analgesia compared with ISB.

DESIGN

A randomised, single-blind, noninferiority study.

SETTING

Hôpital Privé Jean Mermoz, Centre Paul Santy, Lyon, France.

PATIENTS

Ambulatory ARCR patients.

INTERVENTION

Patients were randomly allocated (1 : 1) to receive a single injection SCB or ISB, as well as general anaesthesia. All patients received a postoperative analgesic prescription for home use before leaving hospital (including fast-acting oral morphine sulphate). Patients completed a telephone questionnaire on days 1 and 2 postsurgery.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary endpoint was oral morphine consumption (mg) during the first 2 days postsurgery. If the difference between mean morphine consumption in the SCB vs. ISB group was less than 30 mg, noninferiority of SCB compared with ISB would be demonstrated. Secondary evaluation criteria included pain scores (numerical rating scale), duration of motor and sensory blockade, and satisfaction with treatment.

RESULTS

The per-protocol cohort included 103 patients (SCB = 52, ISB = 51) (57% men, median age 58 years). Mean morphine consumption in the 48 h postsurgery was 9.4 vs. 14.7 mg in the SCB and ISB groups, respectively (difference −5.3, P < 0.001). The upper limit of the 95% CI was less than 30 mg, demonstrating noninferiority of SCB compared with ISB. No difference was observed between the two groups in terms of pain scores or the duration of motor or sensory blockade. Overall, 98% of patients in the SCB group vs. 90% in the ISB group were satisfied with their treatment.

CONCLUSION

SCB is as effective as ISB in terms of postoperative analgesia based on oral morphine consumption in patients undergoing ambulatory ARCR.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

EudraCT number: 2016-A00747-47.

Intertruncal approach to the supraclavicular brachial plexus, current controversies and technical update: a daring discourse

We propose a new approach to local anesthetic injection for the supraclavicular brachial plexus block: an intertruncal approach by which local anesthetic is deposited in the two adipose tissue planes between the upper and middle and the middle and lower trunks. We present sonographic and microscopic images to illustrate the relevant anatomy. This approach offers potential advantages over the ‘corner pocket’ technique in that it results in consistent local anesthetic spread to the three plexus trunks and the needle endpoint lies farther away from the pleural surface which is important for the prevention of pneumothorax. It also offers an advantage over the ‘intracluster’ approach as it purposefully avoids intraneural injection respecting the integrity of the epineurium of individual trunks. Comparative studies are required to confirm that these anatomic and technical advantages result in improved outcomes.

Peripheral nerve blocks for postoperative analgesia: From traditional unencapsulated local anesthetic to liposomes, cryoneurolysis and peripheral nerve stimulation

Peripheral nerve blocks (PNBs) using local anesthetics either via single injection or continuous perineural catheter have been the mainstay for regional anesthesia and are a vital component of postoperative multimodal opioid-sparing pain management. There are some limitations to PNBs, however, mainly its limited duration of action, but also risk of catheter-associated infection and dislodgements. Furthermore, local anesthetic-based blocks can induce sensory deficits and motor weakness, possibly increasing the risk of falling and/or decreasing the ability to participate in postoperative rehabilitation. In this review, we first discuss various local anesthetic-based PNB techniques for major surgery and then review newer modalities, including liposome bupivacaine, cryoanalgesia, and peripheral nerve stimulation; all of which may offer advantages over single and continuous local anesthetic-based PNBs.

Ultrasound-Guided Nerve Blocks as Analgesia for Nonoperative Management of Distal Radius Fractures-Two Consecutive Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether a conventional fracture hematoma block (FHB) or an ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve block has more superior analgesic effect during nonoperative management of distal radius fractures in an emergency department setting. Two peripheral nerve block types were investigated, one at the level of the elbow, or cubital nerve block (CNB), and another an axillary nerve block (ANB).

DESIGN

Two prospective randomized controlled studies were performed to compare the difference in pain intensity during closed reduction of a distal radius fracture between FHB-, CNB-, and, ANB-treated patients.

SETTING

Level 2 trauma center.

PATIENTS

One hundred ten patients with radiographic displaced distal radius fractures were randomized. Fifty patients were randomized between FHB and CNB, and 60 patients were randomized between CNB and ANB.

INTERVENTION

FHB, CNB, or ANB. These were performed by 3 physicians new to ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve blocks and trained before onset of this study.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENT

Pain was sequentially measured using an NRS during closed distal radius fracture reduction.

RESULTS

CNB patients experienced less pain during block procedure (P = 0.002), finger trap traction (P = 0.007), fracture reduction (P = 0.00001), after plaster cast application (P = 0.01), and after control radiography (P = 0.01). In our second study, ANB-treated patients reported less pain during block procedure (P = 0.04), during finger trap traction (P < 0.0001), fracture reduction (P < 0.0001), after plaster cast application (P = 0.0001), and after control radiography (P = 0.0005).

CONCLUSIONS

Although participating clinicians had minimal expertise using ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve blocks, nonoperative management of distal radius fracture using an ANB was less painful. These block types are expected to completely eradicate sensation the best. Future studies should address technical factors including adequate placement and time to let the block set up, as well as issues such as resource utilization including time and clinician availability to better determine the relative advantages and disadvantages to other analgesia techniques such as the FHB.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Dexamethasone as an adjuvant to peripheral nerve block

BACKGROUND

Peripheral nerve block (infiltration of local anaesthetic around a nerve) is used for anaesthesia or analgesia. A limitation to its use for postoperative analgesia is that the analgesic effect lasts only a few hours, after which moderate to severe pain at the surgical site may result in the need for alternative analgesic therapy. Several adjuvants have been used to prolong the analgesic duration of peripheral nerve block, including perineural or intravenous dexamethasone.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of perineural dexamethasone versus placebo, intravenous dexamethasone versus placebo, and perineural dexamethasone versus intravenous dexamethasone when added to peripheral nerve block for postoperative pain control in people undergoing surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, DARE, Web of Science and Scopus from inception to 25 April 2017. We also searched trial registry databases, Google Scholar and meeting abstracts from the American Society of Anesthesiologists, the Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society, the American Society of Regional Anesthesia, and the European Society of Regional Anaesthesia.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing perineural dexamethasone with placebo, intravenous dexamethasone with placebo, or perineural dexamethasone with intravenous dexamethasone in participants receiving peripheral nerve block for upper or lower limb surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 35 trials of 2702 participants aged 15 to 78 years; 33 studies enrolled participants undergoing upper limb surgery and two undergoing lower limb surgery. Risk of bias was low in 13 studies and high/unclear in 22. Perineural dexamethasone versus placeboDuration of sensory block was significantly longer in the perineural dexamethasone group compared with placebo (mean difference (MD) 6.70 hours, 95% confidence interval (CI) 5.54 to 7.85; participants1625; studies 27). Postoperative pain intensity at 12 and 24 hours was significantly lower in the perineural dexamethasone group compared with control (MD -2.08, 95% CI -2.63 to -1.53; participants 257; studies 5) and (MD -1.63, 95% CI -2.34 to -0.93; participants 469; studies 9), respectively. There was no significant difference at 48 hours (MD -0.61, 95% CI -1.24 to 0.03; participants 296; studies 4). The quality of evidence is very low for postoperative pain intensity at 12 hours and low for the remaining outcomes. Cumulative 24-hour postoperative opioid consumption was significantly lower in the perineural dexamethasone group compared with placebo (MD 19.25 mg, 95% CI 5.99 to 32.51; participants 380; studies 6). Intravenous dexamethasone versus placeboDuration of sensory block was significantly longer in the intravenous dexamethasone group compared with placebo (MD 6.21, 95% CI 3.53 to 8.88; participants 499; studies 8). Postoperative pain intensity at 12 and 24 hours was significantly lower in the intravenous dexamethasone group compared with placebo (MD -1.24, 95% CI -2.44 to -0.04; participants 162; studies 3) and (MD -1.26, 95% CI -2.23 to -0.29; participants 257; studies 5), respectively. There was no significant difference at 48 hours (MD -0.21, 95% CI -0.83 to 0.41; participants 172; studies 3). The quality of evidence is moderate for duration of sensory block and postoperative pain intensity at 24 hours, and low for the remaining outcomes. Cumulative 24-hour postoperative opioid consumption was significantly lower in the intravenous dexamethasone group compared with placebo (MD -6.58 mg, 95% CI -10.56 to -2.60; participants 287; studies 5). Perinerual versus intravenous dexamethasoneDuration of sensory block was significantly longer in the perineural dexamethasone group compared with intravenous by three hours (MD 3.14 hours, 95% CI 1.68 to 4.59; participants 720; studies 9). We found that postoperative pain intensity at 12 hours and 24 hours was significantly lower in the perineural dexamethasone group compared with intravenous, however, the MD did not surpass our pre-determined minimally important difference of 1.2 on the Visual Analgue Scale/Numerical Rating Scale, therefore the results are not clinically significant (MD -1.01, 95% CI -1.51 to -0.50; participants 217; studies 3) and (MD -0.77, 95% CI -1.47 to -0.08; participants 309; studies 5), respectively. There was no significant difference in severity of postoperative pain at 48 hours (MD 0.13, 95% CI -0.35 to 0.61; participants 227; studies 3). The quality of evidence is moderate for duration of sensory block and postoperative pain intensity at 24 hours, and low for the remaining outcomes. There was no difference in cumulative postoperative 24-hour opioid consumption (MD -3.87 mg, 95% CI -9.93 to 2.19; participants 242; studies 4). Incidence of severe adverse eventsFive serious adverse events were reported. One block-related event (pneumothorax) occurred in one participant in a trial comparing perineural dexamethasone and placebo; however group allocation was not reported. Four non-block-related events occurred in two trials comparing perineural dexamethasone, intravenous dexamethasone and placebo. Two participants in the placebo group required hospitalization within one week of surgery; one for a fall and one for a bowel infection. One participant in the placebo group developed Complex Regional Pain Syndrome Type I and one in the intravenous dexamethasone group developed pneumonia. The quality of evidence is very low due to the sparse number of events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low- to moderate-quality evidence suggests that when used as an adjuvant to peripheral nerve block in upper limb surgery, both perineural and intravenous dexamethasone may prolong duration of sensory block and are effective in reducing postoperative pain intensity and opioid consumption. There is not enough evidence to determine the effectiveness of dexamethasone as an adjuvant to peripheral nerve block in lower limb surgeries and there is no evidence in children. The results of our review may not apply to participants at risk of dexamethasone-related adverse events for whom clinical trials would probably be unsafe.There is not enough evidence to determine the effectiveness of dexamethasone as an adjuvant to peripheral nerve block in lower limb surgeries and there is no evidence in children. The results of our review may not be apply to participants who at risk of dexamethasone-related adverse events for whom clinical trials would probably be unsafe. The nine ongoing trials registered at ClinicalTrials.gov may change the results of this review.

Anesthesia and Analgesia in the Patient with an Unstable Shoulder

Introduction:

The patient with an unstable shoulder represents a challenge for the anesthesiologist. Most patients will be young individuals in good health but both shoulder dislocation reduction, a procedure that is usually performed under specific analgesia in an urgent setting, and instability surgery anesthesia and postoperative management present certain peculiarities.

Material and Methods:

For the purpose of the article, 78 references including clinical trials and reviews were included. The review was organized considering the patient that presents an acute shoulder dislocation and the patient with chronic shoulder instability that requires surgery. In both cases the aspects like general or regional anesthesia, surgical positions and postoperative pain management were analyzed.

Conclusion:

The patient with an acutely dislocated shoulder is usually managed in the emergency room. Although reduction without analgesia is often performed in non-medical settings, an appropriate level of analgesia will ease the reduction procedure avoiding further complications. Intravenous analgesia and sedation is considered the gold standard but requires appropriate monitorization and airway control. Intraarticular local analgesic injection is considered also a safe and effective procedure. General anesthesia or nerve blocks can also be considered. The surgical management of the patient with shoulder instability requires a proper anesthetic management. This should start with an exhaustive preoperative evaluation that should be focused in identifying potential respiratory problems that might be complicated by local nerve blocks. Intraoperative management can be challenging, especially for patients operated in beach chair position, for the relationship with problems related to cerebral hypoperfusion, a situation related to hypotension events directly linked to patient positioning. Different nerve blocks will help attaining excellent analgesia both during and after the surgical procedure. An interescalene nerve block should be considered the best technique, but in certain cases, other blocks can be considered.

Ultrasound guided distal peripheral nerve block of the upper limb: A technical review

Upper extremity surgery is commonly performed under regional anesthesia. The advent of ultrasonography has made performing upper extremity nerve blocks relatively easy with a high degree of reliability. The proximal approaches to brachial plexus block such as supraclavicular plexus block, infraclavicular plexus block, or the axillary block are favored for the most surgical procedures of distal upper extremity. Ultrasound guidance has however made distal nerve blocks of the upper limb a technically feasible, safe and efficacious option. In recent years, there has thus been a resurgence of distal peripheral nerve blocks to facilitate hand and wrist surgery. In this article, we review the technical aspects of performing the distal blocks of the upper extremity and highlight some of the clinical aspects of their usage.

Which outcomes related to regional anesthesia are most important for orthopedic surgery patients?

An increasing body of evidence supports the benefits of regional anesthesia in orthopedic surgery. Compared with systemic anesthetic and analgesic approaches, these benefits include more focused and sustained pain control, less systemic side effects, improved patient comfort, earlier mobilization and hospital discharge, lower rates of advanced service requirements, and lower perioperative morbidity and mortality. However, there is discussion about the various outcomes as judged by patients and heath care practitioners. This article recapitulates the literature and presents an overview of endpoints.

Peripheral nerve blocks in shoulder arthroplasty: how do they influence complications and length of stay?

BACKGROUND

Regional anesthesia has proven to be a highly effective technique for pain control after total shoulder arthroplasty. However, concerns have been raised about the safety of upper-extremity nerve blocks, particularly with respect to the incidence of perioperative respiratory and neurologic complications, and little is known about their influence, if any, on length of stay after surgery.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

Using a large national cohort, we asked: (1) How frequently are upper-extremity peripheral nerve blocks added to general anesthesia in patients undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty? (2) Are there differences in the incidence of and adjusted risk for major perioperative complications and mortality between patients receiving general anesthesia with and without nerve blocks? And (3) does resource utilization (blood product transfusion, intensive care unit admission, length of stay) differ between groups?

METHODS

We searched a nationwide discharge database for patients undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty under general anesthesia with or without addition of a nerve block. Groups were compared with regard to demographics, comorbidities, major perioperative complications, and length of stay. Multivariable logistic regressions were performed to measure complications and resource use. A negative binomial regression was fitted to measure length of stay.

RESULTS

We identified 17,157 patients who underwent total shoulder arthroplasty between 2007 and 2011. Of those, approximately 21% received an upper-extremity peripheral nerve block in addition to general anesthesia. Patients receiving combined regional-general anesthesia had similar mean age (68.6 years [95% CI: 68.2-68.9 years] versus 69.1 years [95% CI: 68.9-69.3 years], p < 0.0043), a slightly lower mean Deyo (comorbidity) index (0.87 versus 0.93, p = 0.0052), and similar prevalence of individual comorbidities, compared to those patients receiving general anesthesia only. Addition of regional anesthesia was not associated with different odds ratios for complications, transfusion, and intensive care unit admission. Incident rates for length of stay were also similar between groups (incident rate ratio = 0.99; 95% CI: 0.97-1.02; p = 0.467) CONCLUSIONS: Addition of regional to general anesthesia was not associated with an increased complication profile or increased use of resources. In combination with improved pain control as known from previous research, regional anesthesia may represent a viable management option for shoulder arthroplasty. However, further research is necessary to better clarify the risk of neurologic complications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.