Combination of Pregabalin and Dexamethasone for Postoperative Pain and Functional Outcome in Patients Undergoing Lumbar Spinal Surgery: A Randomized Placebo-controlled Trial

Evaluation of the effects of pregabalin and dexamethasone coadministration on preemptive multimodal analgesia and anxiety in third molar surgeries: a triple-blind randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of pregabalin and dexamethasone coadministration in preemptive analgesia and anxiety control in lower third molar surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A triple-blind, split-mouth clinical trial conducted with patients divided into two groups: control group, receiving placebo and dexamethasone, and test group, receiving pregabalin and dexamethasone preoperatively. The evaluated variables were pain, measured by the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), anxiety assessed through the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) questionnaires, hemodynamic parameters [Blood Pressure (BP), Heart Rate (HR), Oxygen Saturation (SpO2)], and sedation assessed by the Ramsay scale.

RESULTS

A total of 31 patients were included. The test group exhibited a significant reduction in pain at 2,4,6,8,12,16,24, and 48 h after surgery and in the consumption of rescue analgesics. Anxiety, evaluated by STAI and VAS, showed a significant decrease in the test group (p < 0.001). Additionally, there was a significant decrease in BP at most of the assessed time points (p < 0.05) and a significant reduction in HR at two different time intervals (p = 0.003 and p = 0.009), indicating a positive effect in the test group. There was no significant difference in SpO2 between the groups. Sedation assessment revealed a significant difference at all time points favoring the test group (p < 0.05). There were no significant postoperative adverse effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Pregabalin coadministered with dexamethasone demonstrated significant efficacy in controlling postoperative pain and anxiety, as well as a sedative effect.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The coadministration of pregabalin with dexamethasone may presents potential advantages in both pain modulation and psychological well-being of individuals undergoing third molar surgeries.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry (REBEC), No. RBR-378h6t6.

High dose glucocorticoids for treatment of postoperative pain: A systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Glucocorticoids as a component of multimodal analgesia have been studied for many years and their post-operative analgesic effects appear to be dose-dependent. We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the evidence of peri-operative high dose corticosteroid therapy in comparison to placebo (placebo drug) or control group (no treatment) for improving the quality of post-operative analgesia as indicated by a reduction of 10 mm in 100 mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) or reduction of 1 point in a 0-10 point VAS scale, or a reduction of 1 point in an 11-point Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) score, or reduction of rescue opioid analgesia, in patients undergoing all types of surgery.

DESIGN

Systematic review of RCTs with meta-analysis.

SETTING

Acute postoperative pain treatment in non-obese adult population.

INTERVENTIONS

Perioperative administration of high dose of Dexamethasone (≥ 0,2 mg/Kg or ≥ 15 mg), or a corresponding dose of a systemic glucocorticoid.

MEASUREMENTS

Primary outcomes were postoperative pain measured in 0-100 mm VAS score at 24 h after surgery upon rest and movement. Secondary outcomes were postoperative pain 0-100 mm VAS score 48 h after surgery, postoperative rescue analgesic requirement, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), relevant adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

47 RCT's were included (3943 patients). The Mean Difference (MD) of 100 mm VAS scores for pain at rest 24 h after surgery was -6.18 mm 95% CI [-8.53, -3.83], at motion -8.86 mm 95% CI [-11.82, -5.89]. Opioid analgesic requirements evaluated in Oral Morphine Equivalents (OME) was -10.00 mg 95% CI [-13.65, -6.34]. PONV events Odds Ratio of 0.29 95%CI [0.24, 0.36]. Major adverse events OR was 0.88 95% CI [0.65, 1.19]. Minor adverse events OR 1.29 95% CI [0.86, 1.92].

CONCLUSION

High doses of glucocorticoids are one of the many possible tools available in multimodal postoperative analgesia, possibly reducing opioids consumption and recurrence of PONV but with no relevant effects in terms of reduction of postoperative VAS score. Available data show a safe therapeutic profile, without increase adverse events.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

CRD42020137119.

Analgesic Effects of Preoperative Combination of Oral Pregabalin and Intravenous Magnesium Sulfate on Postoperative Pain in Patients Undergoing Posterolateral Spinal Fusion Surgery: A 4-arm, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Multimodal perioperative pain management including nonopioid analgesia is a major pillar of enhanced recovery after surgery programs. The aim of this study was to investigate the analgesic efficacy of the preoperative combination of 2 nonopioid drugs, oral pregabalin and intravenous magnesium sulfate, in patients undergoing posterolateral lumbar spinal fusion.

METHODS

This 4-arm, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial included 104 patients randomly allocated to receive: magnesium sulfate and pregabalin (MP), magnesium sulfate and oral placebo (M), 0.9% saline and oral pregabalin (P), and 0.9% saline and oral placebo (C). The study drugs were administered 1 hour preoperatively. The primary outcome was the cumulative morphine consumption on postoperative day 1. Secondary outcomes included visual analog scale scores for leg pain at rest and with movement, and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in the first 48 hours after surgery.

RESULTS

Cumulative morphine consumption on postoperative day 1 was lower in group MP (19.6±8.0 mg) compared with group M (32.6±9.5 mg; P <0.001), group P (28.9±9.4 mg; P =0.001), or group C (38.8±10.3 mg; P <0.001). Multiple linear regression demonstrated a significant association between group MP and cumulative morphine consumption (B=-5.4 [95% CI, -7.1, -3.7], P <0.001). Visual analog scale scores for leg pain at rest and with movement were lower in group MP compared with other groups ( P =0.006 and <0.001). The incidence of PONV was also lowest in group MP ( P =0.032).

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative administration of oral pregabalin and intravenous magnesium sulfate resulted in reduced morphine consumption and greater analgesic effect than the use of each drug individually or placebo in patients undergoing posterolateral lumbar spinal fusion.

Different Gabapentin and Pregabalin Dosages for Perioperative Pain Control in Patients Undergoing Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

IMPORTANCE

Patients undergoing spine surgery often experience severe pain. The optimal dosage of pregabalin and gabapentin for pain control and safety in these patients has not been well established.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the associations of pain, opioid consumption, and adverse events with different dosages of pregabalin and gabapentin in patients undergoing spine surgery.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane library, and Scopus databases were searched for articles until August 7, 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials conducted among patients who received pregabalin or gabapentin while undergoing spine surgery were included.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two investigators independently performed data extraction following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) reporting guideline. The network meta-analysis was conducted from August 2022 to February 2023 using a random-effects model.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was pain intensity measured using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and secondary outcomes included opioid consumption and adverse events.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven randomized clinical trials with 1861 patients (median age, 45.99 years [range, 20.00-70.00 years]; 759 women [40.8%]) were included in the systematic review and network meta-analysis. Compared with placebo, the VAS pain score was lowest with gabapentin 900 mg per day, followed by gabapentin 1200 mg per day, gabapentin 600 mg per day, gabapentin 300 mg per day, pregabalin 300 mg per day, pregabalin 150 mg per day, and pregabalin 75 mg per day. Additionally, gabapentin 900 mg per day was found to be associated with the lowest opioid consumption among all dosages of gabapentin and pregabalin, with a mean difference of -22.07% (95% CI, -33.22% to -10.92%) for the surface under the cumulative ranking curve compared with placebo. There was no statistically significant difference in adverse events (nausea, vomiting, and dizziness) among all treatments. No substantial inconsistency between direct and indirect evidence was detected for all outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These findings suggest that gabapentin 900 mg per day before spine surgery is associated with the lowest VAS pain score among all dosages. In addition, no differences in adverse events were noted among all treatments.

[Role of Dexamethasone for Pain Management in Intervertebral Disc Surgery]

Intervertebral disc operations are already among the most common and their frequency is increasing. The pain associated with these operations is one of the most common postoperative discomforts, has a significant impact on psychosocial aspects, and should therefore be treated effectively. Therefore, we present the importance of dexamethasone for multimodal pain management after intervertebral disc surgery.

Perioperative Care of Patients Undergoing Major Complex Spinal Instrumentation Surgery: Clinical Practice Guidelines From the Society for Neuroscience in Anesthesiology and Critical Care

Evidence-based standardization of the perioperative management of patients undergoing complex spine surgery can improve outcomes such as enhanced patient satisfaction, reduced intensive care and hospital length of stay, and reduced costs. The Society for Neuroscience in Anesthesiology and Critical Care (SNACC) tasked an expert group to review existing evidence and generate recommendations for the perioperative management of patients undergoing complex spine surgery, defined as surgery on 2 or more thoracic and/or lumbar spine levels. Institutional clinical management protocols can be constructed based on the elements included in these clinical practice guidelines, and the evidence presented.

Pharmacotherapy for the Prevention of Chronic Pain after Surgery in Adults: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic postsurgical pain can severely impair patient health and quality of life. This systematic review update evaluated the effectiveness of systemic drugs to prevent chronic postsurgical pain.

METHODS

The authors included double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized controlled trials including adults that evaluated perioperative systemic drugs. Studies that evaluated same drug(s) administered similarly were pooled. The primary outcome was the proportion reporting any pain at 3 or more months postsurgery.

RESULTS

The authors identified 70 new studies and 40 from 2013. Most evaluated ketamine, pregabalin, gabapentin, IV lidocaine, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and corticosteroids. Some meta-analyses showed statistically significant-but of unclear clinical relevance-reductions in chronic postsurgical pain prevalence after treatment with pregabalin, IV lidocaine, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Meta-analyses with more than three studies and more than 500 participants showed no effect of ketamine on prevalence of any pain at 6 months when administered for 24 h or less (risk ratio, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.36 to 1.07]; prevalence, 0 to 88% ketamine; 0 to 94% placebo) or more than 24 h (risk ratio, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.74 to 1.12]; 6 to 71% ketamine; 5 to 78% placebo), no effect of pregabalin on prevalence of any pain at 3 months (risk ratio, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.70 to 1.10]; 4 to 88% pregabalin; 3 to 80% placebo) or 6 months (risk ratio, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.47 to 1.28]; 6 to 68% pregabalin; 4 to 69% placebo) when administered more than 24 h, and an effect of pregabalin on prevalence of moderate/severe pain at 3 months when administered more than 24 h (risk ratio, 0.47 [95% CI, 0.33 to 0.68]; 0 to 20% pregabalin; 4 to 34% placebo). However, the results should be interpreted with caution given small study sizes, variable surgical types, dosages, timing and method of outcome measurements in relation to the acute pain trajectory in question, and preoperative pain status.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite agreement that chronic postsurgical pain is an important topic, extremely little progress has been made since 2013, likely due to study designs being insufficient to address the complexities of this multifactorial problem.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

Pain management after laminectomy: a systematic review and procedure-specific post-operative pain management (prospect) recommendations

PURPOSE

With lumbar laminectomy increasingly being performed on an outpatient basis, optimal pain management is critical to avoid post-operative delay in discharge and readmission. The aim of this review was to evaluate the available literature and develop recommendations for optimal pain management after one- or two-level lumbar laminectomy.

METHODS

A systematic review utilizing the PROcedure-SPECific Post-operative Pain ManagemenT (PROSPECT) methodology was undertaken. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in the English language from 1 January 2008 until 31 March 2020-assessing post-operative pain using analgesic, anaesthetic and surgical interventions-were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Databases.

RESULTS

Out of 65 eligible studies identified, 39 RCTs met the inclusion criteria. The analgesic regimen for lumbar laminectomy should include paracetamol and a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) or cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 selective inhibitor administered preoperatively or intraoperatively and continued post-operatively, with post-operative opioids for rescue analgesia. In addition, surgical wound instillation or infiltration with local anaesthetics prior to wound closure is recommended. Some interventions-gabapentinoids and intrathecal opioid administration-although effective, carry significant risks and consequently were omitted from the recommendations. Other interventions were also not recommended because there was insufficient, inconsistent or lack of evidence.

CONCLUSION

Perioperative pain management for lumbar laminectomy should include paracetamol and NSAID- or COX-2-specific inhibitor, continued into the post-operative period, as well as intraoperative surgical wound instillation or infiltration. Opioids should be used as rescue medication post-operatively. Future studies are necessary to evaluate the efficacy of our recommendations.

A Single Preoperative Administration of Dexamethasone, Low-dose Pregabalin, or a Combination of the 2, in Spinal Surgery, Does Not Provide a Better Analgesia Than a Multimodal Analgesic Protocol Alone

OBJECTIVES

A single perioperative dose of glucocorticoid or gabapentinoid, or a combination of the 2, may improve postoperative analgesia, but data are still insufficient to be conclusive. In this single-center, randomized, double-blind, and double-dummy trial, we aimed to test whether the analgesic effect of adding preoperative pregabalin, at a dose unlikely to induce side effects, to preoperative dexamethasone improves early mobilization after spinal surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 160 patients undergoing scheduled lumbar disk surgery (145 analyzed) comprised the study cohort. The patients received either 0.2 mg/kg intravenous dexamethasone before incision, or 150 mg oral pregabalin 1 hour before surgery, or a combination of the 2, or none of the above (control). Analgesia was supplemented by acetaminophen and ketoprofen, plus oxycodone ad libitum. The primary outcome was pain intensity during the first attempt to sit up, assessed the morning of the first postoperative day on an 11-point Numerical Rating Scale. Pain at rest and when standing up, opioid consumption, and tolerance were also assessed.

RESULTS

None of the treatments tested differed from the control group in terms of efficacy or tolerance, even 6 months after surgery. The overall quality of analgesia was good, with only 10% and 30% of pain scores exceeding 3/10 for pain at rest and during movement, respectively.

DISCUSSION

In this surgical model with the given anesthetic and analgesic environment, there was no advantage gained by adding low-dose pregabalin or dexamethasone. The multimodal analgesic protocol applied to all patients may have reduced the size of the effect.

Co-administration of Pregabalin and Curcumin Synergistically Decreases Pain-Like Behaviors in Acute Nociceptive Pain Murine Models

Analgesic drugs in a combination-form can achieve greater efficacy with lesser side effects compared to either drug alone. The combination of drugs acting at different targets or mechanisms of action has been recognized as an alternative approach for achieving optimal analgesia. In this study, the analgesic effects of pregabalin (30, 60, 100, 200 mg/kg), curcumin (15, 30, 60, 100, 120 mg/kg), and 1:1 fixed-dose ratio of the pregabalin-curcumin combination were assessed using two acute nociceptive pain models, the acetic acid-induced writhing and tail-flick tests in mice. The pregabalin-curcumin combination produced a dose-dependent decrease in mean of writhes and an increase in the percentage of antinociception by the acetic acid-induced writhing test. In the tail-flick test, the combination also showed an improvement in antinociception indicated by the tail-flick latency, % antinociception, and area under the curve (AUC). Isobolographic analysis of interactions demonstrated a significant synergistic interaction effect between pregabalin and curcumin in both acute nociceptive pain models with the experimental ED₅₀ below the predicted additive line and the combination index < 1. These findings demonstrate that the combination of pregabalin and curcumin exhibits a synergistic interaction in mouse models of acute nociceptive pain.

Consensus statements on the clinical uses of pregabalin for Hong Kong

To facilitate the understanding of pregabalin and optimize its clinical usage in Hong Kong, an expert panel (11 psychiatrists, one family physician and one anesthesiologist) experienced in treating anxiety and somatic symptoms was invited to establish a set of consensus statements based on several discussion areas. A non-systematic literature search for relevant articles was conducted. The panelists addressed the discussion areas by sharing their clinical experience and available literature in a couple of meetings. At the last meeting, consensus statements derived from the proceedings were discussed and finalized. A total of 11 statements were ultimately accepted by panel voting based on their practicability of recommendation in Hong Kong. These statements are aimed to act as a practical reference for local clinicians when they consider prescribing pregabalin in different clinical situations.

Effect of Adding Hydrocortisone to Intraperitoneal Bupivacaine in Laparoscopic Bariatric Surgery

Background:

Bariatric surgery is the effective management of obesity; however, postoperative pain is associated with a great morbidity. The management of pain is important for the enhancement of patient recovery. Local anesthetics can be injected during laparoscopic surgery into the peritoneum throughout the ports produced either before the beginning of laparoscopy or before the closure of the wound to reduce postoperative pain. Our aim is to evaluate if there is an additive analgesic effect by the administration of intraperitoneal hydrocortisone with streamed intraperitoneal bupivacaine as a method of postoperative pain relief in laparoscopic bariatric surgeries.

Patients and Methods:

One hundred patients listed for laparoscopic bariatric surgery were the subject of this study. Patients were randomly allocated into two groups: Group I received 100 mg of 0.5% isobaric bupivacaine plus 20 mL normal saline intraperitoneally and Group II received intraperitoneal 100 mg of 0.5% isobaric bupivacaine + 100 mg hydrocortisone + 20 mL of saline at the end of the laparoscopic procedure. The primary outcome was the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score for pain. The secondary outcomes were the time of first analgesic request, total opioid requirement, heart rate, and mean blood pressure.

Results:

VAS showed a significant decrease at 4, 6, and 12 h postoperative in Group II compared to Group I. There was a marked decrease in total meperidine requirement with prolonged time of the first analgesic request in Group II compared to Group I.

Conclusion:

Intraperitoneal hydrocortisone with bupivacaine had improved postoperative pain relief with a decrease in analgesic requirement.

Lidocaine as an element of multimodal analgesic therapy in major spine surgical procedures in children: a prospective, randomized, double-blind study

Background

Introducing the principles of multimodal analgesic therapy is necessary to provide appropriate comfort for the patient after surgery. The main objective of the study was evaluating the influence of perioperative intravenous (i.v.) lidocaine infusion on postoperative morphine requirements during the first 48 h postoperatively in children undergoing major spine surgery.

Materials and methods

Prospective, randomized, double-blind study: 41 children, qualified to multilevel spine surgery, were randomly divided into two treatment groups: lidocaine and placebo (control). The lidocaine group received lidocaine as a bolus of 1.5 mg/kg over 30 minutes, followed by a continuous infusion at 1 mg/kg/h to 6 hours after surgery. The protocol of perioperative management was identical for all patients. Measurements: morphine demand, intensity of postoperative pain (the Numerical Rating Scale), oral feeding initiation time, first attempts at assuming erect position, postoperative quality of life (the Acute Short-form /SF-12/ health survey).

Results

Patient data did not differ demographically. Compared to the control group, lidocaine treatment reduced the demand for morphine during the first 24h [95% CI 0.13 (0.11-0.28) mg/kg, p = 0.0122], 48h [95% CI 0.46 (0.22-0.52) mg/kg, p = 0.0299] after surgery and entire hospitalization [95% CI 0.58 (0.19-0.78) mg/kg, p = 0.04]; postoperative pain intensity; nutritional withdrawal period [introduction of liquid diet (p = 0.024) and solid diet (p = 0.012)], and accelerated the adoption of an upright position [sitting (p = 0.048); walking (p = 0.049)]. The SF-12 generic health survey did not differ between groups before operation, 2 months and 4 years after surgery.

Conclusions

Perioperative lidocaine administration, as a part of the applied analgesic therapy regimen, may decrease postoperative opioid demand and accelerates convalescence of children undergoing major surgery.

The effect of preemptive use of pregabalin on postoperative morphine consumption and analgesia levels after laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a controlled randomized trial

PURPOSE

In order to reduce postoperative opioid administration and pain levels in patients submitted to laparoscopic colectomy, we assessed the efficacy of preemptive use of pregabalin (PG), as part of a multimodal analgesia scheme, in a randomized controlled trial setting.

METHODS

Overall, fifty adult patients scheduled for elective laparoscopic colectomy were included and randomized in our trial. In the experimental group, 23 patients received preoperatively 2 doses of 150 mg PG per os, whereas the control group consisted of 27 cases, where a matching to PG placebo was administered at the same scheme. The two groups had identical analgesia and anesthesia regimens otherwise. Our study endpoints included postoperative morphine consumption, postoperative pain, and complication rates.

RESULTS

Patients in the PG group displayed a significantly reduced morphine consumption at 8 h, 24 h, and 48 h postoperatively. The two groups were comparable in terms of postoperative pain (rest and movement assessment) and side effects.

CONCLUSIONS

The preoperative addition of PG resulted in a significant reduction of the postoperative opioid consumption in patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy. However, an association with the postoperative pain scores was not identified.

State-of-the-Art Reviews: Safety in Complex Spine Surgery

The surgical correction of spinal deformities carries a high risk of perioperative morbidity. As the incidence of debilitating spinal deformities continues to increase, so too does our obligation to search for ways to enhance safety in our delivery of surgical care. Standardized work processes and other lean manufacturing methodologies have the potential to improve efficiency, safety, and hence value in our delivery of surgical care to patients with complex spine pathologies by reducing variability in our work processes. These principles can be applied to patient care from the initial preoperative assessment to long-term postoperative follow-up in the creation of comprehensive protocols that guide the management of these complex patients. Early evidence suggests that short-term outcomes can be improved by implementing packages of systems reform aimed at reducing variability in our work processes; however, contradicting evidence exists on the utility of several specific components of these systems-reform packages.

Comparative Evaluation of Pregabalin and Clonidine as Preemptive Analgesics for the Attenuation of Postoperative Pain Following Thoracolumbar Spine Surgery

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled study.

PURPOSE

To compare clonidine and pregabalin with placebo for the attenuation of postoperative pain after thoracolumbar spinal surgery and instrumentation.

OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE

Spine surgery is associated with moderate to severe postoperative pain that needs to be controlled to improve patient's outcome. Alpha 2 agonists (e.g., clonidine) and gabapentenoids (e.g., pregabalin) are successfully used as part of a multimodal analgesic regimen.

METHODS

Total 75 patients were enrolled and randomly allocated into three groups. Group P received pregabalin (150 mg), group C received clonidine (150 mcg), and group N received placebo 90 minutes preoperatively. A standard anesthesia protocol comprising fentanyl, thiopentone, vecuronium, nitrous oxide, and oxygen in isoflurane was used for all patients. Postoperative recovery profile, pain, time for first analgesic, 24-hour analgesic requirement, sedation, and hemodynamic parameters were noted.

RESULTS

Recovery profile was similar in all three groups; however, the patients in group P and C were more sedated (p<0.05). Group N patients had a higher Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score (p<0.05) and the time for first analgesic was also lower (p=0.02). Postoperative (24-hour) analgesic requirement was maximum in group N, followed by that in group C and group P. The VAS score was highest in the control group; however, after 12 hours, it was similar in all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative pain and analgesic requirement is significantly attenuated by preoperative administration of a single dose of clonidine (150 mcg) or pregabalin (150 mg); pregabalin was more effective. Thus, their use offers a reasonable strategy for pain management in patients undergoing spine surgery.

Can Preoperative Intravenous Corticosteroids Administration Reduce Postoperative Pain Scores Following Spinal Fusion?: A Meta-Analysis

Objective: This meta-analysis aimed to assess whether preoperative intravenous corticosteroids reduced postoperative pain in patients undergoing spinal fusion surgery. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science and Google databases, from inception to March 29, 2018. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared preoperative intravenous glucocorticoids against a control treatment for the effect on pain following spinal fusion surgery were included. A meta-analysis was performed to generate a pooled risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) for discontinuous outcomes (the occurrence of postoperative nausea and vomiting [PONV] as well as surgical-site infections) and continuous outcomes (visual analog scale [VAS] scores at 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h; total morphine consumption and the length of hospital stay), respectively. Results: Ten RCTs that compared intravenous corticosteroids versus placebo were included in our final meta-analysis. Compared with controls, intravenous corticosteroids were associated with a statistically significant reduction in pain VAS scores at 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h. Additionally, intravenous corticosteroids decreased total morphine consumption, PONV, and the length of hospital stay. There was no significant difference between intravenous corticosteroids and controls, regarding the occurrence of infection (p > 0.05). Conclusions: In summary, our results indicated that intravenous corticosteroids not only reduce pain but also have anti-emetic effects. More studies should focus on the adverse effects of administering intravenous corticosteroids.

Adverse side effects of dexamethasone in surgical patients

BACKGROUND

In the perioperative period, dexamethasone is widely and effectively used for prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), for pain management, and to facilitate early discharge after ambulatory surgery.Long-term treatment with steroids has many side effects, such as adrenal insufficiency, increased infection risk, hyperglycaemia, high blood pressure, osteoporosis, and development of diabetes mellitus. However, whether a single steroid load during surgery has negative effects during the postoperative period has not yet been studied.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of a steroid load of dexamethasone on postoperative systemic or wound infection, delayed wound healing, and blood glucose change in adult surgical patients (with planned subgroup analysis of patients with and without diabetes).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), in the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science for relevant articles on 29 January 2018. We searched without language or date restriction two clinical trial registries to identify ongoing studies, and we handsearched the reference lists of relevant publications to identify all eligible trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for randomized controlled trials comparing an incidental steroid load of dexamethasone versus a control intervention for adult patients undergoing surgery. We required that studies include a follow-up of 30 days for proper assessment of the number of postoperative infections, delayed wound healing, and the glycaemic response.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data from relevant studies, and assessed all included studies for bias. We resolved differences by discussion and pooled included studies in a meta-analysis. We calculated Peto odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes. Our primary outcomes were postoperative systemic or wound infection, delayed wound healing, and glycaemic response within 24 hours. We created a funnel plot for the primary outcome postoperative (wound or systemic) infection. We used GRADE to assess the quality of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included in the meta-analysis 37 studies that included adults undergoing a large variety of surgical procedures (i.e. abdominal surgery, cardiac surgery, neurosurgery, and orthopaedic surgery). We excluded one previously included study, as this study was recently retracted. Age range of participants was 18 to 80 years. There is probably little or no difference in the risk of postoperative (wound or systemic) infection with dexamethasone compared with no treatment, placebo, or active control (ramosetron, ondansetron, or tropisetron) (Peto OR 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80 to 1.27; 4603 participants, 26 studies; I² = 32%; moderate-quality evidence). The effects of dexamethasone on delayed wound healing are unclear because the wide confidence interval includes both meaningful benefit and harm (Peto OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.28 to 3.43; 1072 participants, eight studies; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence). Dexamethasone may produce a mild increase in glucose levels among participants without diabetes during the first 12 hours after surgery (MD 13 mg/dL, 95% CI 6 to 21; 10 studies; 595 participants; I² = 50%; low-quality evidence). We identified two studies reporting on glycaemic response after dexamethasone in participants with diabetes within 24 hours after surgery (MD 32 mg/dL, 95% CI 15 to 49; 74 participants; I² = 0%; very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

A single dose of dexamethasone probably does not increase the risk for postoperative infection. It is uncertain whether dexamethasone has an effect on delayed wound healing in the general surgical population owing to imprecision in trial results. Participants with increased risk for delayed wound healing (e.g. participants with diabetes, those taking immunosuppressive drugs) were not included in the randomized studies reporting on delayed wound healing included in this meta-analysis; therefore our findings should be extrapolated to the clinical setting with caution. Furthermore, one has to keep in mind that dexamethasone induces a mild increase in glucose. For patients with diabetes, very limited evidence suggests a more pronounced increase in glucose. Whether this influences wound healing in a clinically relevant way remains to be established. Once assessed, the two studies awaiting classification and three that are ongoing may alter the conclusions of this review.

Adverse side effects of dexamethasone in surgical patients

BACKGROUND

In the perioperative period, dexamethasone is widely and effectively used for prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), for pain management, and to facilitate early discharge after ambulatory surgery.Long-term treatment with steroids has many side effects, such as adrenal insufficiency, increased infection risk, hyperglycaemia, high blood pressure, osteoporosis, and development of diabetes mellitus. However, whether a single steroid load during surgery has negative effects during the postoperative period has not yet been studied.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of a steroid load of dexamethasone on postoperative systemic or wound infection, delayed wound healing, and blood glucose change in adult surgical patients (with planned subgroup analysis of patients with and without diabetes).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), in the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science for relevant articles on 29 January 2018. We searched without language or date restriction two clinical trial registries to identify ongoing studies, and we handsearched the reference lists of relevant publications to identify all eligible trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for randomized controlled trials comparing an incidental steroid load of dexamethasone versus a control intervention for adult patients undergoing surgery. We required that studies include a follow-up of 30 days for proper assessment of the number of postoperative infections, delayed wound healing, and the glycaemic response.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data from relevant studies, and assessed all included studies for bias. We resolved differences by discussion and pooled included studies in a meta-analysis. We calculated Peto odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes. Our primary outcomes were postoperative systemic or wound infection, delayed wound healing, and glycaemic response within 24 hours. We created a funnel plot for the primary outcome postoperative (wound or systemic) infection. We used GRADE to assess the quality of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included in the meta-analysis 38 studies that included adults undergoing a large variety of surgical procedures (i.e. abdominal surgery, cardiac surgery, neurosurgery, and orthopaedic surgery). Age range of participants was 18 to 80 years. There is probably little or no difference in the risk of postoperative (wound or systemic) infection with dexamethasone compared with no treatment, placebo, or active control (ramosetron, ondansetron, or tropisetron) (Peto OR 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80 to 1.27; 4931 participants, 27 studies; I² = 27%; moderate-quality evidence). The effects of dexamethasone on delayed wound healing are unclear because the wide confidence interval includes both meaningful benefit and harm (Peto OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.28 to 3.43; 1072 participants, eight studies; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence). Dexamethasone may produce a mild increase in glucose levels among participants without diabetes during the first 12 hours after surgery (MD 13 mg/dL, 95% CI 6 to 21; 10 studies; 595 participants; I² = 50%; low-quality evidence). We identified two studies reporting on glycaemic response after dexamethasone in participants with diabetes within 24 hours after surgery (MD 32 mg/dL, 95% CI 15 to 49; 74 participants; I² = 0%; very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

A single dose of dexamethasone probably does not increase the risk for postoperative infection. It is uncertain whether dexamethasone has an effect on delayed wound healing in the general surgical population owing to imprecision in trial results. Participants with increased risk for delayed wound healing (e.g. participants with diabetes, those taking immunosuppressive drugs) were not included in the randomized studies reporting on delayed wound healing included in this meta-analysis; therefore our findings should be extrapolated to the clinical setting with caution. Furthermore, one has to keep in mind that dexamethasone induces a mild increase in glucose. For patients with diabetes, very limited evidence suggests a more pronounced increase in glucose. Whether this influences wound healing in a clinically relevant way remains to be established. Once assessed, the three studies awaiting classification and two that are ongoing may alter the conclusions of this review.

Pregabalin and dexmedetomidine conscious sedation for flexible bronchoscopy: a randomized double-blind controlled study

BACKGROUND

Conscious sedation is usually required during flexible bronchoscopy. Sedation should be achieved without respiratory depression or loss of consciousness. The present study was designed to evaluate the effect of pregabalin premedication on reducing the amount of sedatives and to show its advantages for patients undergoing flexible bronchoscopy with dexmedetomidine.

METHODS

Seventy patients undergoing elective flexible bronchoscopy were randomly divided into two groups of 35 patients each. All patients received premedication one hour before the procedure. PG group received 150 mg pregabalin and C group received placebo. All patients were sedated with dexmedetomidine infusion to achieve optimum sedation. During the procedure peripheral oxygen saturation, respiratory rate, hemodynamics, Ramsay sedation Score, cough score, and total amount of dexmedetomidine used were recoded. After the procedure patients' and pulmonologists' satisfaction were compared.

RESULTS

The total amount of dexmedetomidine used in PG was less compared to C group (P=0.01). Sedation score was higher in PG group at the time of theatre admission (P<0.001). Cough score was higher, but insignificant in group C (P=0.08). Patients' and pulmonologists' satisfaction scores were higher in group PG (P=0.007 and 0.001 respectively). The heart rate and mean arterial pressure were lower in the C group (P=0.02 and 0.03 respectively). Postoperative care unit stay was less in group PG with less analgesic requirements.

CONCLUSIONS

Conscious sedation facilitates flexible bronchoscopy. Premedication with pregabalin can reduce the amount of sedatives. Dexmedetomidine with pregabalin premedication has many advantages over dexmedetomidine alone.

Management of complex spine surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The main objective of this article is to present the updated data regarding the perioperative management of patients undergoing major spine surgery in an era where the surgical techniques are changing and there is a high demand for these surgeries in older and high-risk patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Preoperative assessment and stabilization is now more structured protocol and it is based on a multidisciplinary approach to the patient. The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programs and the Perioperative Surgical Home on major spine surgery are not yet fully evidence based but it seems that the use of a perioperative optimization of patients and use of a drugs' bundle is more effective than using single drugs or interventions on the postoperative pain reduction and faster recovery from surgery. Fluid and pain-control protocols combined with an accurate blood management represent the key to success.

SUMMARY

A tailored approach to patients undergoing major spine surgeries seems to be effective improving the outcome and quality of life of patients. Future studies should aim to understand which elements of the ERAS can be improved to allow the patient to have a long-term good outcome. VIDEO ABSTRACT.

Intravenous glucocorticoid for pain control after spinal fusion: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

Postoperative pain was a common symptom after spinal surgery. This meta-analysis aimed to assess whether intravenous glucocorticoids has a beneficial role in reducing pain in patients following spinal fusion.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Google databases, from inception to March 2, 2018. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that comparing intravenous glucocorticoids with control treatment for spinal fusion were included. A meta-analysis was performed to generate pooled risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) for discontinuous outcomes (the occurrence of nausea and infection) and continuous outcomes (visual analog scale [VAS] at 12, 24, and 48 h; total morphine consumption; and the length of hospital stay), respectively.

RESULTS

Eight clinical trials involving 918 patients (glucocorticoid group = 449, control group = 469) were finally included in this meta-analysis. Compared with control, intravenous glucocorticoids had significantly reduced VAS at 12, 24, and 48 hours with statistically significance (P < .05). Intravenous glucocorticoids can decrease the occurrence of nausea (RR = 0.42, 95% CI 0.29-0.62, P = .000; I = 0.0%) and the length of hospital stay. No difference was noticed in the occurrence of infection between glucocorticoids intravenous and control (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

Existing evidence indicated that intravenous glucocorticoids have a beneficial role in decreasing early pain and the occurrence of nausea after spinal fusion surgery. In consideration of the limitation in current meta-analysis, more high-quality RCTs were needed to identify the optimal dose of glucocorticoids in spinal fusion patients.

Is perioperative pregabalin effective for reducing postoperative pain in major surgery?

INTRODUCTION

Pregabalin is a structural analog of γ-aminobutyric acid that may have a role in acute pain management. It has been used in the perioperative context, but there is controversy regarding its real clinical utility.

METHODS

To answer this question we used Epistemonikos, the largest database of systematic reviews in health, which is maintained by screening multiple information sources, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, among others. We extracted data from the systematic reviews, reanalyzed data of primary studies, conducted a meta-analysis and generated a summary of findings table using the GRADE approach.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

We identified 21 systematic reviews including 77 randomized trials. We concluded the use of perioperative pregabalin in major surgeries probably does not produce a clinically important decrease in acute postoperative pain. Although it could decrease nausea, postoperative vomiting and opioid requirements, it also produces an increase in sedation.

A meta-analysis of the preoperative use of gabapentinoids for the treatment of acute postoperative pain following spinal surgery

BACKGROUND

Gabapentinoid drugs, which include gabapentin and pregabalin, play an established role in the management of neuropathic pain. However, whether preoperative administration of gabapentinoids has a beneficial role in controlling acute pain after spinal surgery is unknown. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine the efficacy and safety of the preoperative use of gabapentinoids (gabapentin and pregabalin) for the treatment of acute postoperative pain following spinal surgery.

METHODS

In March 2017, a systematic computer-based search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Google databases. RCTs comparing gabapentinoids (gabapentin and pregabalin) with placebo in patients undergoing spine surgery were retrieved. The primary endpoint was the visual analogue scale (VAS) score with rest or mobilization at 6, 12, 24, and 48 hours and cumulative morphine consumption at 24 and 48 hours. The secondary outcomes were complications of nausea, vomiting, sedation, dizziness, headache, urine retention, pruritus, and visual disturbances. After tests for publication bias and heterogeneity among studies were performed, data were aggregated for random-effects models when necessary.

RESULTS

Sixteen clinical studies (gabapentin group n = 8 and pregabalin group n = 8) were ultimately included in the meta-analysis. Gabapentinoids were associated with reduced pain scores at 6, 12, 24, and 48 hours. Similarly, gabapentinoids were associated with a reduction in cumulative morphine consumption at 24 and 48 hours. Furthermore, gabapentinoids can significantly reduce the occurrence of nausea, vomiting, and pruritus. There were no significant differences in the occurrence of sedation, dizziness, headache, visual disturbances, somnolence, or urine retention.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative use of gabapentinoids was able to reduce postoperative pain, total morphine consumption, and morphine-related complications following spine surgery. Further studies should determine the optimal dose and whether pregabalin is superior to gabapentin in controlling acute pain after spine surgery.

Preoperative use of pregabalin for acute pain in spine surgery: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pregabalin for pain management following spine surgery.

METHODS

In September 2016, a systematic computer-based search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. RCTs of patients prepared for spine surgery that compared pregabalin with placebo were retrieved. The primary endpoint was the VAS score with rest or mobilization at 12 hours, 24 hours, and 48 hours and cumulative morphine consumption at 24 hours and 48 hours. The secondary outcomes were complications of nausea, sedation, dizziness, headache, and visual disturbances. After testing for publication bias and heterogeneity between studies, data were aggregated for random-effects models when necessary.

RESULTS

Ten clinical studies with 535 patients (pregabalin group = 294, control group = 241) were included in the meta-analysis. Pregabalin was associated with reduced pain scores at 12 hours, 24 hours, and 48 hours, corresponding to a reduction of 1.91 points (95% CI, -4.07 to 0.24 point) at 12 hours, 2.66 points (95% CI, -4.51 to -0.81 point) at 24 hours, and 4.33 points (95% confidence interval, -6.38 to -2.99 point) at 48 hours on a 100-point numeric rating scale. There was no significant difference between VAS scores with mobilization at 12 hours, 24 hours, or 48 hours. Similarly, pregabalin was associated with a reduction in cumulative morphine consumption at 24 hours (-7.07, 95% CI -9.84, -4.30) and 48 hours (-6.52, 95% CI -7.78, -5.25, P = 0.000). Furthermore, pregabalin can reduce the occurrence of nausea (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.41, 0.79, P = 0.001, number needed to treat = 8.4). There were no significant differences in the occurrence of sedation, dizziness, headache, or visual disturbances.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative use of pregabalin was efficacious in reduction of postoperative pain, total morphine consumption, and the occurrence of nausea following spine surgery. Because the sample size and the number of included studies were limited, a multicenter RCT is needed to identify the effects and optimal dose of pregabalin for reducing acute pain after spine surgery.

Perioperative use of pregabalin for acute pain-a systematic review and meta-analysis

Evidence supporting postoperative pain management using pregabalin as an adjunct intervention across various surgical pain models is lacking. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate "model-specific" comparative effectiveness and harms of pregabalin following a previously published systematic review protocol. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception through August 2013. Data were screened and single extraction with independent verification and dual risk of bias assessment was performed. Quality of evidence (QoE) was rated using the GRADE approach. Primary outcomes were pain relief at rest and on movement and reduction in postoperative analgesic consumption. A total of 1423 records were screened, and 43 studies were included. Perioperative pregabalin resulted in: 16% (95% confidence interval [CI], 9%-21%) reduction in analgesic consumption (moderate QoE, 24 trials) and a small reduction in the magnitude of pain in surgeries associated with pronociceptive pain. Per 1000 patients, 10 more will experience blurred vision (95% CI, 5-20 more; moderate QoE, 17 trials) and 41 more sedation (95% CI, 13-77 more, 17 trials). To prevent 1 case of perioperative nausea and vomiting, the number needed to treat is 11 (95% CI: 7-28, 25 trials). Inadequate evidence addressed outcomes of enhanced recovery and serious harms. Pregabalin analgesic effectiveness is largely restricted to surgical procedures associated with pronociceptive mechanisms. The clinical significance of observed pregabalin benefits must be weighed against the uncertainties about serious harms and enhanced recovery to inform the careful selection of surgical patients. Recommendations for future research are proposed.

Efficacy of Pregabalin in Acute Postoperative Pain Under Different Surgical Categories: A Meta-Analysis

The efficacy of pregabalin in acute postsurgical pain has been demonstrated in numerous studies; however, the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of using pregabalin in various surgical procedures remain uncertain. We aim to assess the postsurgical analgesic efficacy and adverse events after pregabalin administration under different surgical categories using a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.A search of the literature was performed between August 2014 to April 2015, using PubMed, Ovid via EMBASE, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov with no limitation on publication year or language. Studies considered for inclusion were randomized controlled trials, reporting on relevant outcomes (2-, 24-hour pain scores, or 24 hour morphine-equivalent consumption) with treatment with perioperative pregabalin.Seventy-four studies were included. Pregabalin reduced pain scores at 2 hours in all categories: cardiothoracic (Hedge's g and 95%CI, -0.442 [-0.752 to -0.132], P = 0.005), ENT (Hedge g and 95%CI, -0.684 [-1.051 to -0.316], P < 0.0001), gynecologic (Hedge g, 95%CI, -0.792 [-1.235 to -0.350], P < 0.0001), laparoscopic cholecystectomy (Hedge g, 95%CI, -0.600 [-0.989 to -0.210], P = 0.003), orthopedic (Hedge g, 95%CI, -0.507 [-0.812 to -0.202], P = 0.001), spine (Hedge g, 95%CI, -0.972 [-1.537 to -0.407], P = 0.001), and miscellaneous procedures (Hedge g, 95%CI, -1.976 [-2.654 to -1.297], P < 0.0001). Pregabalin reduced 24-hour morphine consumption in gynecologic (Hedge g, 95%CI, -1.085 [-1.582 to -0.441], P = 0.001), laparoscopic cholecystectomy (Hedge g, 95%CI, -0.886 [-1.652 to -0.120], P = 0.023), orthopedic (Hedge g, 95%CI, -0.720 [-1.118 to -0.323], P < 0.0001), spine (Hedge g, 95%CI, -1.016 [-1.732 to -0.300], P = 0.005), and miscellaneous procedures (Hedge g, 95%CI, -1.329 [-2.286 to -0.372], P = 0.006). Pregabalin resulted in significant sedation in all surgical categories except ENT, laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and gynecologic procedures. Postoperative nausea and vomiting was only significant after pregabalin in miscellaneous procedures.Analgesic effects and incidence of adverse effects of using pregabalin are not equal in different surgical categories.

Comparing the impact of intraperitoneal hydrocortisone with bupivacaine on postoperative pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Background:

Postoperative pain is a major complaint following laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Objectives:

The aim of this study was to compare the impact of intraperitoneal hydrocortisone with intraperitoneal bupivacaine on pain relief after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Patients and Methods:

In a double blind clinical trial, 63 candidates for laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomly allocated to receive intraperitoneal instillation of either 100 mg bupivacaine in 250 mL normal saline (n = 32) or 100 mg hydrocortisone in 250 mL normal saline (n = 31) before insufflation of CO₂ into the peritoneum for postoperative pain relief. Patients were investigated regarding abdominal and shoulder pain using (visual analog scale) VAS in recovery room and at 6, 12 and 24 hours postoperatively. Patients were also followed regarding postoperative analgesic requirements, nausea and vomiting, and return of bowel function.

Results:

Sixty patients completed the study. Patients in the hydrocortisone group had no statistically significant abdominal and shoulder pain scores compared to the bupivacaine group. The patients were similar regarding postoperative analgesic requirements, return of bowel function, nausea and vomiting. No adverse effect was detected in either group.

Conclusions:

Intraperitoneal administration of hydrocortisone is as effective as bupivacaine to reduce pain and analgesic requirements after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Pregabalin in neuropathic pain: evidences and possible mechanisms

Pregabalin is an antagonist of voltage gated Ca2+ channels and specifically binds to alpha-2-delta subunit to produce antiepileptic and analgesic actions. It successfully alleviates the symptoms of various types of neuropathic pain and presents itself as a first line therapeutic agent with remarkable safety and efficacy. Preclinical studies in various animal models of neuropathic pain have shown its effectiveness in treating the symptoms like allodynia and hyperalgesia. Clinical studies in different age groups and in different types of neuropathic pain (peripheral diabetic neuropathy, fibromyalgia, post-herpetic neuralgia, cancer chemotherapy-induced neuropathic pain) have projected it as the most effective agent either as monotherapy or in combined regimens in terms of cost effectiveness, tolerability and overall improvement in neuropathic pain states. Preclinical studies employing pregabalin in different neuropathic pain models have explored various molecular targets and the signaling systems including Ca2+ channel-mediated neurotransmitter release, activation of excitatory amino acid transporters (EAATs), potassium channels and inhibition of pathways involving inflammatory mediators. The present review summarizes the important aspects of pregabalin as analgesic in preclinical and clinical studies as well as focuses on the possible mechanisms.

Effect of pregabalin and dexamethasone addition to multimodal analgesia on postoperative analgesia following rhinoplasty surgery

BACKGROUND

We investigated the effect of a combination of pregabalin and dexamethasone, when used as part of a multimodal analgesic regimen, on pain control after rhinoplasty operations.

METHODS

Sixty patients were enrolled in this study. They were randomly assigned into three groups: Group C (placebo + placebo), Group P (pregabalin + placebo), and Group PD (pregabalin + dexamethasone). Patients received either pregabalin 300 mg orally 1 h before surgery, dexamethasone 8 mg intravenously during induction, or placebo according to their allocation. Postoperative pain was treated with intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (tramadol, 20-mg bolus dose, 45-min lockout time). The numeric rating scale (NRS), side effects, and consumption of tramadol, pethidine, and ondansetron were assessed.

RESULTS

The median NRS scores at 0, 1, and 6 h after surgery were significantly higher in Group C than in Group PD (p < 0.001 for all). The 24-h consumption of tramadol and pethidine was significantly reduced in Groups P and PD compared to Group C (p < 0.01 and p < 0.01). The total tramadol consumption was decreased by 54.5 % in Group P and 81.9 % in Group PD compared to Group C (p < 0.001 for both). The incidence of nausea was higher in Group C than in Groups P and PD between the postoperative 0-2 and 0-24-h periods (p < 0.05 for both). The frequency of blurred vision was significantly higher in Groups P and PD than in Group C within the 0-24-h period (p < 0.05 for both).

CONCLUSION

We found that the addition of a single dose of pregabalin and dexamethasone to multimodal analgesia in rhinoplasty surgeries provided efficient analgesia and thus decreased opioid consumption.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE I

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Intraperitoneal hydrocortisone for pain relief after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Background:

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is associated with shorter hospital stay and less pain in comparison to open surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of intraperitoneal hydrocortisone on pain relief following laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Methods:

Sixty two patients were enrolled in a double-blind, randomized clinical trial. Patients randomly received intraperitoneal instillation of either 250 ml normal saline (n=31) or 100 mg hydrocortisone in 250 ml normal saline (n=31) before insufflation of CO₂ into the peritoneum. Abdominal and shoulder pain were evaluated using VAS after surgery and at 6, 12, and 24 hours postoperatively. The patients were also followed for postoperative analgesic requirements, nausea and vomiting, and return of bowel function.

Results:

Sixty patients completed the study. Patients in the hydrocortisone group had significantly lower abdominal and shoulder pain scores (10.95 vs 12.95; P<0.01). The patients were similar regarding analgesic requirements in the recovery room. However, those in the hydrocortisone group required less meperidine than the saline group (151.66 (±49.9) mg vs 61.66 (±38.69) mg; P=0.00). The patients were similar with respect to return of bowel function, nausea and vomiting. No adverse reaction was observed in either group.

Conclusion:

Intraperitoneal administration of hydrocortisone can significantly decrease pain and analgesic requirements after laparoscopic cholecystectomy with no adverse effects.

The efficacy of a glial inhibitor, minocycline, for preventing persistent pain after lumbar discectomy: a randomized, double-blind, controlled study

Minocycline strongly inhibits microglial activation, which contributes to central sensitization, a major mechanism underlying chronic pain development. We hypothesized that the perioperative administration of minocycline might decrease persistent pain after lumbar discectomy. We randomly assigned 100 patients undergoing scheduled lumbar discectomy to placebo and minocycline groups. The minocycline group received 100mg minocycline orally, twice daily, beginning the evening before surgery and continuing for 8 days. The primary outcome was the change in lower limb pain intensity at rest between baseline and 3 months. Secondary outcomes were pain intensity on movement, the incidence of persistent pain and chronic neuropathic pain, back pain intensity at rest and on movement, and changes in Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory, Brief Pain Inventory, and Roland-Morris scores at 3 months. An intention-to-treat analysis was performed for patients assessed from the day before surgery to 3 months. The decrease in lower limb pain intensity was similar in the placebo and minocycline groups, both at rest -1.7 ± 1.6 vs -2.3 ± 2.4 and on movement -2.5 ± 2.1 vs -3.4 ± 2.9. The incidence and intensity of neuropathic pain and functional scores did not differ between the minocycline and placebo groups. Exploratory analysis suggested that minocycline might be effective in a subgroup of patients with predominantly deep spontaneous pain at baseline. Perioperative minocycline administration for 8 days does not improve persistent pain after lumbar discectomy.