Effect of parecoxib on postoperative pain after lumbar spine surgery: a bicenter, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial

The impact of perioperative nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs on the postoperative outcomes of spinal surgery: a meta-analysis of 23 randomized controlled trials

In recent years, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAIDs), which are considered to affect the prognosis of spinal surgery, have been widely used in perioperative analgesia in spinal surgery, but the relationship between these two factors remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to explore the effect of perioperative use of NSAIDs on the prognosis of patients treated with spinal surgery. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for relevant articles published on or before July 14, 2023. We used a random-effect model for the meta-analysis to calculate the standardized mean difference (SMD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Sensitivity analyses were conducted to analyze stability. A total of 23 randomized clinical trials including 1457 participants met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis showed that NSAIDs were significantly associated with postoperative morphine use (mg) (SMD = -0.90, 95% CI -1.12 to -0.68) and postoperative pain (SMD = -0.71, 95% CI -0.85 to -0.58). These results were further confirmed by the trim-and-fill procedure and leave-one-out sensitivity analyses. The current study shows that perioperative use of NSAIDs appears to be an important factor in reducing postoperative pain and morphine use in patients undergoing spinal surgery. However, well-designed, high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are still required.

Intravenous Ketorolac Substantially Reduces Opioid Use and Length of Stay After Lumbar Fusion: A Randomized Controlled Trial

STUDY DESIGN

A randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effect of intravenous ketorolac (IV-K) on hospital opioid use compared with IV-placebo (IV-P) and IV acetaminophen (IV-A).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Controlling postoperative pain while minimizing opioid use after lumbar spinal fusion is an important area of study.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients aged 18 to 75 years undergoing 1 to 2 level lumbar fusions between April 2016 and December 2019 were included. Patients with chronic opioid use, smokers, and those on systemic glucocorticoids or contraindications to study medications were excluded. A block randomization scheme was used, and study personnel, hospital staff, and subjects were blinded to the assignment. Patients were randomized postoperatively. The IV-K group received 15 mg (age > 65) or 30 mg (age < 65) every six hours (q6h) for 48 hours, IV-A received 1000 mg q6h, and IV-P received normal saline q6h for 48 hours. Demographic and surgical details, opioid use in morphine milliequivalents, opioid-related adverse events, and length of stay (LOS) were recorded. The primary outcome was in-hospital opioid use up to 72 hours.

RESULTS

A total of 171 patients were included (58 IV-K, 55 IV-A, and 58 IV-P) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis, with a mean age of 57.1 years. The IV-K group had lower opioid use at 72 hours (173 ± 157 mg) versus IV-A (255 ± 179 mg) and IV-P (299 ± 179 mg; P = 0.000). In terms of opiate use, IV-K was superior to IV-A ( P = 0.025) and IV-P ( P = 0.000) on ITT analysis, although on per-protocol analysis, the difference with IV-A did not reach significance ( P = 0.063). When compared with IV-P, IV-K patients reported significantly lower worst ( P = 0.004), best ( P = 0.001), average ( P = 0.001), and current pain ( P = 0.002) on postoperative day 1, and significantly shorter LOS ( P = 0.009) on ITT analysis. There were no differences in opioid-related adverse events, drain output, clinical outcomes, transfusion rates, or fusion rates.

CONCLUSIONS

By reducing opioid use, improving pain control on postoperative day 1, and decreasing LOS without increases in complications or pseudarthrosis, IV-K may be an important component of "enhanced recovery after surgery" protocols.

Efficacy and safety of perioperative use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for preemptive analgesia in lumbar spine surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Lumbar spine disorders have become an increasingly common health problem in recent years. Modern clinical studies have shown that perioperative analgesia at certain doses can reduce postoperative pain by inhibiting the process of peripheral sensitization and central sensitization, which is also known as "preemptive analgesia," Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are a class of drugs that achieve antipyretic and analgesic effects by inhibiting cyclooxygenase (COX) and affecting the production of prostaglandins. Our meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of perioperative preemptive analgesia with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in patients with lumbar spine surgery.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, ScienceDirect, the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that met the inclusion criteria. A total of 12 clinical studies were included to assess the efficacy and safety of perioperative NSAIDs preemptive analgesia for lumbar spine surgery.

RESULT

Twelve studies, including 845 patients, met the inclusion criteria. The results showed that perioperative receipt of NSAIDs for preemptive analgesia was effective and safe. Patient's postoperative morphine consumption (P < 0.05), visual analog scale (P < 0.05), and numerical rating scale (P < 0.05) were not statistically associated with postoperative complications (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that NSAIDs are effective and safe for preemptive analgesia in the perioperative period of lumbar spine surgery and that more and better quality RCTs and more in-depth studies of pain mechanics are still needed.

Etoricoxib Can Reduce Post-Operative Morphine Consumption and Pain Score in Patients Undergoing Lumbar Laminectomy Compare to Acetaminophen: A Randomized Trial

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES

This prospective trial aimed to compare the effectiveness of etoricoxib and acetaminophen in terms of post-operative morphine consumption and pain score in patients undergoing lumbar laminectomy.

METHODS

Forty lumbar-laminectomy patients aged between 18 and 50 years were enrolled, randomized, and allocated into either the etoricoxib group or the acetaminophen group. The measures assessed were the amount of morphine consumed and pain visual analog score (VAS) at 12, 24, and 48 hours after surgery. Adverse events were recorded.

RESULTS

Patients in the etoricoxib group had statistically significantly lower morphine consumption than those in the acetaminophen group at 12 hours (P-value = .006), 24 hours (P-value = .006) and 48 hours (P-value = .011). Patients in the etoricoxib group had lower VAS scores than those in the acetaminophen group at 0, 12, 24, 48 hours, the difference being statistically significant at 48 hours (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to acetaminophen, etoricoxib can significantly reduce post-operative morphine consumption and improve the pain score at 12, 24, and 48 hours.

Effect of bilateral ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block on postoperative pain after open lumbar spinal surgery: a double-blind, randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

The peripheral nerve blocks (PNB) are an important part of the multimodal analgesia for reducing postoperative pain, opioids consumption and its side effects. A new PNB, Erector spinae plane block (ESPB), has been revealed postoperative analgesic effect in various surgical procedures such as breast, thoracic and abdominal surgery, with the limitation of the studies for spine surgery. We aimed to evaluate the analgesic effect of ultrasound-guided bilateral erector spinae plane block (ESPB) after open lumbar spinal surgery.

METHODS

A double-blind, randomized controlled trial was conducted. Sixty-two patients undergoing posterior lumbar spinal surgery were randomly allocated into two groups. The ESPB group (n = 31) received ultrasound (US)-guided bilateral ESPB using 20 ml of 0.375% bupivacaine with adrenaline 5 mcg/ml per side. The control group (n = 31) received no intervention. The same postoperative analgesia regimen was applied by oral acetaminophen 10-15 mg/kg every 6 h, naproxen 250 mg twice daily, and intravenous (IV) morphine via patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) device. The postoperative morphine consumption, numerical pain score (NRS) and the side effects were recorded.

RESULTS

The bilateral ESPB group reduced the 24 h-morphine consumption by 42.9% (P < 0.001), decreased overall pain score at rest by 1.4 points (P = 0.02), and decreased overall pain score on movement by 2.2 points (P < 0.001). No severe complications related to the block technique or morphine used occurred.

CONCLUSION

The US-guided bilateral ESPB demonstrated the effectiveness for postoperative analgesia management after open lumbar spinal surgery regarding reduced opioid consumption and pain score without any serious complications.

Intravenous Parecoxib for Pain Relief after Orthopedic Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Orthopedic procedures have been associated with increased pain, making perioperative analgesia a major clinical concern. We assessed the efficacy and safety of intravenous parecoxib administration during the perioperative period for postoperative pain relief after orthopedic surgery in adults.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and clinicaltrial.gov were searched from inception to 23 August 2021 without language restrictions. Randomized controlled trials comparing intravenous parecoxib with placebo or another active treatment for acute postoperative pain in adults after orthopedic surgery were included. The primary outcomes were the pain scores and cumulative morphine consumption. The secondary outcomes included the proportion of patients requiring rescue analgesics and the incidence of adverse events. The meta-analysis followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines and was registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews Registration (PROSPERO).

RESULTS

Twenty-seven trials (n = 2840) from more than 20 countries involving six types of orthopedic surgery met the inclusion criteria. Compared with placebo, intravenous parecoxib administration led to reductions in postoperative resting pain scores at 6, 12, 24, and 48 h [mean difference (MD) -0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.71 to -0.03; MD -0.86, 95% CI -1.26 to -0.46; MD -0.57, 95% CI -0.84 to -0.31; MD -0.40, 95% CI -0.69 to -0.11, respectively], postoperative movement pain scores at 24 and 48 h (MD -0.66, 95% CI -1.14 to -0.19; MD -0.78, 95% CI -1.16 to -0.39, respectively), cumulative morphine consumption (MD -11.30 mg, 95% CI -14.79 to -7.81 mg), and the proportion of patients requiring rescue analgesia (relative risk 0.83, 95% CI 0.77-0.89). There was no difference in the incidence of adverse events between groups.

CONCLUSION

Low to moderate evidence indicates that parecoxib might be an effective and safe analgesic in perioperative orthopedic settings. It relieves postoperative orthopedic pain while sparing opioid analgesic consumption without increasing the incidence of adverse events.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION

CRD42021274939.

Factors Causing Delay in Discharge in Patients Eligible for Ambulatory Lumbar Fusion Surgery

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review of prospectively collected data.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the postoperative factors that led delayed discharge in patients who would have been eligible for ambulatory lumbar fusion (ALF).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Assessing postoperative inefficiencies is vital to increase the feasibility of ALF.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent single-level minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and would have met the eligibility criteria for ALF were included. Length of stay (LOS); time in postanesthesia recovery unit (PACU); alertness and neurological examination, and pain scores at three and six hours; type of analgesia; time to physical therapy (PT) visit; reasons for PT nonclearance; time to per-oral (PO) intake; time to voiding; time to readiness for discharge were assessed. Time taken to meet each discharge criterion was calculated. Multiple regression analyses were performed to study the effect of variables on postoperative parameters influencing discharge.

RESULTS

Of 71 patients, 4% were discharged on the same day and 69% on postoperative day 1. PT clearance was the last-met discharge criterion in 93%. Sixty-six percent did not get PT evaluation on the day of surgery. Seventy-six percent required intravenous opioids and <60% had adequate pain control. Twenty-six percent had orthostatic intolerance. The median postoperative LOS was 26.9 hours, time in PACU was 4.2 hours, time to PO intake was 6.5 hours, time to first void was 6.3 hours, time to first PT visit was 17.7 hours, time to PT clearance was 21.8 hours, and time to discharge readiness was 21.9 hours. Regression analysis showed that time to PT clearance, time to PO intake, time to voiding, time in PACU, and pain score at three hours had a significant effect on LOS.

CONCLUSIONS

Unavailability of PT, surgery after 1  pm , orthostatic intolerance, inadequate pain control, prolonged PACU stay, and long feeding and voiding times were identified as modifiable factors preventing same-day discharge.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs versus tramadol in pain management following transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary adenomas: a randomized, double-blind, noninferiority trial

OBJECTIVE

Opioid-minimizing or nonopioid therapy using nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or tramadol has been encouraged for pain management. This study aimed to examine the noninferiority of NSAIDs to tramadol for pain management following transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary adenomas in terms of analgesic efficacy, adverse events, and rescue opioid use.

METHODS

This was a randomized, single-center, double-blind noninferiority trial. Patients 18-70 years old with planned transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary adenomas were randomly assigned (in a 1-to-1 ratio) to receive NSAIDs (parecoxib injection and subsequent loxoprofen tablets) or tramadol (tramadol injection and subsequent tramadol tablets). The primary outcome was pain score assessed by a visual analog scale (VAS) for 24 hours following surgery; the secondary outcomes were VAS scores for 48 and 72 hours. Other prespecified outcomes included nausea, vomiting, dizziness, upset stomach, skin rash, peptic ulcer, gastrointestinal bleeding, and pethidine use to control breakthrough pain. Noninferiority of NSAIDs to tramadol was established if the upper limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the VAS score difference was < 1 point and the rate difference of adverse events and pethidine use < 5%. The superiority of NSAIDs was assessed when noninferiority was verified. All analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis.

RESULTS

Two hundred two patients were enrolled between November 1, 2020, and May 31, 2021 (101 in the NSAIDs group, 101 in the tramadol group). Baseline characteristics between groups were well balanced. Mean VAS scores for 24 hours following transsphenoidal surgery were 2.6 ± 1.8 in the NSAIDs group and 3.5 ± 2.1 in the tramadol group (-0.9 difference, 95% CI -1.5 to -0.4; p value for noninferiority < 0.001, p value for superiority < 0.001). Noninferiority and superiority were also achieved for both secondary outcomes. VAS scores improved over time in both groups. Incidences of nausea (39.6% vs 61.4%, p = 0.002), vomiting (3.0% vs 42.6%, p < 0.001), and dizziness (12.9% vs 47.5%, p < 0.001) were significantly lower, while incidence of upset stomach (9.9% vs 2.0%, p = 0.017) was slightly higher in the NSAIDs group compared with the tramadol group. The percentage of opioid use was 4.0% in the NSAIDs group and 15.8% in the tramadol group (-11.8% difference, 95% CI -19.9% to -3.7%; p value for noninferiority < 0.001, p value for superiority = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

NSAIDs significantly reduced acute pain following transsphenoidal surgery, caused few adverse events, and limited opioid use compared with tramadol.

Perioperative Pain Management for Elective Spine Surgery: Opioid Use and Multimodal Strategies

In recent years, physicians and institutions have come to recognize the increasing opioid epidemic in the United States, thus prompting a dramatic shift in opioid prescribing patterns. The lack of well-studied alternative treatment regimens has led to a substantial burden of opioid addiction in the United States. These forces have led to a huge economic burden on the country. The spine surgery population is particularly high risk for uncontrolled perioperative pain, because most patients experience chronic pain preoperatively and many patients continue to experience pain postoperatively. Overall, there is a large incentive to better understand comprehensive multimodal pain management regimens, particularly in the spine surgery patient population. The goal of this review is to explore trends in pain symptoms in spine surgery patients, overview the best practices in pain medications and management, and provide a concise multimodal and behavioral treatment algorithm for pain management, which has since been adopted by a high-volume tertiary academic medical center.

Impact of intraoperative intravenous magnesium on spine surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness and safety of intraoperative intravenous magnesium (IIM) on spine surgery remain uncertain, as recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) yielded conflicting results. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of IIM on spine surgery.

METHODS

A literature search was performed on multiple electronic databases, ClinicalTrial.gov and Google Scholar on July 12th 2021, and reference lists were examined. We selected RCTs comparing the effects of IIM with placebo treatment on spine surgery. We calculated pooled standard mean difference (SMD) or risk ratio (RR) with 95% confident interval (CI) under a random-effect model. We assessed risk of bias using Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and Jadad score was applied to assess the quality of each included trial. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to determine the confidence in effect estimates. Sensitivity analysis was conducted by omitting each included study one by one from the pooled analysis. PROSPERO Registration: CRD42021266170.

FINDINGS

Fourteen trials of 781 participants were included. Low- to moderate-quality evidence suggested that IIM reduces postoperative morphine consumption at 24 h (SMD: -1·61 mg, 95% CI: -2·63 to -0·58) and intraoperative remifentanil requirement (SMD: -2·09 ug/h, 95% CI: -3·38 to -0·81). High-quality evidence suggested that IIM reduces the risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting compared with placebo (RR: 0·43, 95% CI: 0·26 to 0·71). Besides, moderate-quality evidence suggested that recovery orientation time in the IIM group is longer than control group (SMD: 1·13 min, 95% CI: 0·83 to 1·43).

INTERPRETATION

IIM as adjuvant analgesics showed overall benefits on spine surgery in terms of reducing analgesic requirement and postoperative nausea and vomiting; however, potential risks of IIM, such as delayed anesthetic awakening, should not be ignored. Future evidence will inform the optimal strategy of IIM administration for patients undergoing spine surgery.

FUNDING

This study was funded by Beijing Municipal Natural Science Foundation (Grant No :7212117).

Analysis of in-hospital analgesic pharmacotherapy costs and regimen and impact on postoperative pain-related function in degenerative lumbar intervertebral disc disease

BACKGROUND

Pain medication may affect clinical and economic outcomes, and a detailed description of pain medication use is advocated in the literautre for better assessment of clinical outcomes of spine surgery, which otherwise clould be misleading.

OBJECTIVES

To analyze the impact of in-hospital analgesic pharmacotherapy after spine surgery on subjective quality of life and pain relief in patients with degenerative lumbar intervertebral disc disease (DLIVD), and also to analyze pharmacotherapy costs.

DESIGN

A single-center study included 50 patients with L5/S1 or L4/L5 DLIVD, eligible for spine surgery.

INTERVENTION

Neurosurgery for DLIVD.

MAIN ENDPOINTS

Outcomes in terms of postoperative pain and function were recorded prospectively using standardized questionnaires. Data for cost analysis and pharmcotherapy regimen were obtained retrospectively from case histories, doctors' request cards and hospital discharge summaries.

RESULTS

Mean total pharmacotherapy cost amounted to €453.42±49.09. Mean pharmacotherapy cost amounted to €314.76±54.21 preoperatively, and €138.66±25.54 postoperatively. The greatest improvement in function and quality of life was in patients treated with non-opioids.

CONCLUSION

This study supports the notion that analgesic pharmacotherapies could be differentiated in terms of overall impact on quality of life, and that pain-related distress might be the most relevant factor in this setting.

The Efficacy of Intraoperative Freehand Erector Spinae Plane Block in Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: A Randomized Controlled Study

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective randomized comparative (controlled) study.

OBJECTIVE

Management of the severe postoperative back pain followed the major spinal surgeries remains a challenge. The search is going on to find simple, efficient, and reliable perioperative analgesia with low side effects. We aimed to investigate the efficacy of intraoperative freehand erector spinae plane block (ESBP) after spinal surgeries.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

A few case reports and randomized controlled studies demonstrated the analgesic efficacy of ESPB in spinal surgeries. Up-to-date, no randomized controlled studies investigated the effectiveness of ESPB on spinal instrumentation surgeries.

METHODS

We randomly divided 56 consecutive adult patients who underwent posterior spinal instrumentation and fusion for spondylolisthesis into two groups. The study (ESPB) group (n = 28) received intraoperative freehand bilateral ESPB with a 20-mL mixture solution of 0.25% bupivacaine and 1.0% lidocaine equally divided into all operating levels. In the control group (n = 28), 20 mL physiological saline was injected. Postoperatively, we ordered 1 g paracetamol thrice/day, besides patient-controlled analgesia pumps with morphine. We performed a postoperative evaluation with a visual analog scale (VAS), morphine consumption, ESPB-related adverse effects, and postoperative length of hospital stay (PLOS).

RESULTS

Morphine consumption was significantly higher in the controls within the first postoperative 24-hour 44.75 ± 12.3 mg versus 33.75 ± 6.81 mg in the ESPB participants (P < 0.001). Except for postoperative 24th-hour VAS (P = 0.127), all postoperative VAS scores recorded at all time-points were significantly higher in the controls (P < 0.05). In control individuals, the first analgesic demand time was shorter, and PLOS was longer (P < 0.001). Patient satisfaction was significantly higher in the ESPB group. We observed no significant difference regarding postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

Intraoperative ESPB as a part of multimodal analgesia was effective. For posterior instrumented patients with spondylolisthesis, it can relieve postoperative backache and reduce opioid consumption.Level of Evidence: 1.

Pain management after complex spine surgery: A systematic review and procedure-specific postoperative pain management recommendations

BACKGROUND

Complex spinal procedures are associated with intense pain in the postoperative period. Adequate peri-operative pain management has been shown to correlate with improved outcomes including early ambulation and early discharge.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to evaluate the available literature and develop recommendations for optimal pain management after complex spine surgery.

DESIGN AND DATA SOURCES

A systematic review using the PROcedure SPECific postoperative pain managemenT methodology was undertaken. Randomised controlled trials and systematic reviews published in the English language from January 2008 to April 2020 assessing postoperative pain after complex spine surgery using analgesic, anaesthetic or surgical interventions were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Databases.

RESULTS

Out of 111 eligible studies identified, 31 randomised controlled trials and four systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria. Pre-operative and intra-operative interventions that improved postoperative pain were paracetamol, cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2 specific-inhibitors or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), intravenous ketamine infusion and regional analgesia techniques including epidural analgesia using local anaesthetics with or without opioids. Limited evidence was found for local wound infiltration, intrathecal and epidural opioids, erector spinae plane block, thoracolumbar interfascial plane block, intravenous lidocaine, dexmedetomidine and gabapentin.

CONCLUSIONS

The analgesic regimen for complex spine surgery should include pre-operative or intra-operative paracetamol and COX-2 specific inhibitors or NSAIDs, continued postoperatively with opioids used as rescue analgesics. Other recommendations are intra-operative ketamine and epidural analgesia using local anaesthetics with or without opioids. Although there is procedure-specific evidence in favour of intra-operative methadone, it is not recommended as it was compared with shorter-acting opioids and due to its limited safety profile. Furthermore, the methadone studies did not use non-opioid analgesics, which should be the primary analgesics to ultimately reduce overall opioid requirements, including methadone. Further qualitative randomised controlled trials are required to confirm the efficacy and safety of these recommended analgesics on postoperative pain relief.

Consensus statement for perioperative care in lumbar spinal fusion: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society recommendations

BACKGROUND

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) evidence-based protocols for perioperative care have led to improvements in outcomes in numerous surgical areas, through multimodal optimization of patient pathway, reduction of complications, improved patient experience and reduction in the length of stay. ERAS represent a relatively new paradigm in spine surgery.

PURPOSE

This multidisciplinary consensus review summarizes the literature and proposes recommendations for the perioperative care of patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery with an ERAS program.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a review article.

METHODS

Under the impetus of the ERAS® society, a multidisciplinary guideline development group was constituted by bringing together international experts involved in the practice of ERAS and spine surgery. This group identified 22 ERAS items for lumbar fusion. A systematic search in the English language was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, and cohort studies were included, and the evidence was graded according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Consensus recommendation was reached by the group after a critical appraisal of the literature.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-six articles were included to develop the consensus statements for 22 ERAS items; one ERAS item (prehabilitation) was excluded from the final summary due to very poor quality and conflicting evidence in lumbar spinal fusion. From these remaining 21 ERAS items, 28 recommendations were included. All recommendations on ERAS protocol items are based on the best available evidence. These included nine preoperative, eleven intraoperative, and six postoperative recommendations. They span topics from preoperative patient education and nutritional evaluation, intraoperative anesthetic and surgical techniques, and postoperative multimodal analgesic strategies. The level of evidence for the use of each recommendation is presented.

CONCLUSION

Based on the best evidence available for each ERAS item within the multidisciplinary perioperative care pathways, the ERAS® Society presents this comprehensive consensus review for perioperative care in lumbar fusion.

Multimodal Analgesia in Spine Surgery: An Umbrella Review

OBJECTIVE

In recent years, there has been a growing interest regarding the implementation of multimodal analgesia as an important component of the ideal perioperative patient management. The aim of the current umbrella review was to establish the role of multimodal analgesia in patients undergoing spine surgery during the immediate postoperative period.

METHODS

A systematic review of the pertinent literature was performed. The evaluation was based on a multitude of primary endpoints including the postoperative requirements for patient-controlled analgesia, pain intensity, back-related disability, overall functionality, patient satisfaction, complications, length of hospitalization, and costs.

RESULTS

The results were summarized using a meta-analysis in the presence of quantitative data or in a narrative review, otherwise. There was a large body of high-quality evidence supporting that the implementation of multimodal analgesia improves patient outcome in terms of the intensity of postoperative pain, the requirements for postoperative opioid analgesia, and the opioid-associated side effects. Similarly, limited high-quality evidence supported that multimodal analgesia improved patients' functionality and satisfaction while decreasing the length of hospitalization and overall costs of surgery. However, the results were inconclusive as far as the disability was concerned.

CONCLUSIONS

Multimodal analgesia seems to have an essential role for the optimal management of patients undergoing spine surgery. Future research is required to optimize the multimodal analgesia protocols in this group of patients.

Trends in Pain Medication Prescriptions and Satisfaction Scores in Spine Surgery Patients at a Single Institution

BACKGROUND

As the opioid crisis has gained national attention, there have been increasing efforts to decrease opioid usage. Simultaneously, patient satisfaction has been a crucial metric in the American health care system and has been closely linked to effective pain management in surgical patients. The purpose of this study was to examine rates of pain medication prescription and concurrent patient satisfaction in spine surgery patients.

METHODS

A total of 1729 patients undergoing spine surgery between June 25, 2017, and June 30, 2018, at a single institution by surgeons performing ≥20 surgeries per quarter, with medication data during hospitalization available, were assessed. Patients were evaluated for nonopioid pain medication prescription rates and morphine milligram equivalents (MME) of opioids used during hospitalization. Of the total cohort, 198 patients were evaluated for Press Ganey Satisfaction Survey responses. A χ² test of independence was used to compare percentages, and 1-way analysis of variance was used to compare means across quarters.

RESULTS

The mean total MME per patient hospitalization was 574.46, with no difference between quarters. However, mean MME per day decreased over time (P = .048), with highest mean 91.84 in Quarter 2 and lowest 77.50 in Quarter 4. Among all procedures, acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and steroid prescription rates increased, whereas benzodiazepine and γ-aminobutyric acid-analog prescriptions decreased. There were no significant differences between quarters for mean hospital ratings (P = .521) nor for responses to questions from the Press Ganey Satisfaction Survey regarding how often staff talk about pain (P = .164), how often staff talk about pain treatment (P = .595), or whether patients recommended the hospital (P = .096). There were also no differences between quarters for responses in all other patient satisfaction questions (P value range, .359-.988).

CONCLUSIONS

Over the studied time period, opioid use decreased and nonopioid prescriptions increased during hospitalization, whereas satisfaction scores remained unchanged. These findings indicate an increasing effort in reducing opioid use among providers and suggest the ability to do so without affecting overall satisfaction rates.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The opioid epidemic has highlighted the need to reduce opioid usage in orthopedic spine surgery. This study reviews the trends for inpatient management of post-op pain in orthopedic spine surgery patients in relation to patient satisfaction. There was a significant increase in non-opioid analgesic pain medications, and a reduction in opioids during the study period. During this time, patient satisfaction as measured by Press-Ganey surveys did not show a decrease. This demonstrates that treatment of post-operative pain in orthopedic spine surgery patients can be managed with less opioids, more multimodal analgesia, and patient satisfaction will not be affected.

Multimodal Analgesia (MMA) Versus Patient-Controlled Analgesia (PCA) for One or Two-Level Posterior Lumbar Fusion Surgery

A multimodal analgesic method was known to avoid the high-dose requirements and dose-dependent adverse events of opioids, and to achieve synergistic effects. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of our multimodal analgesia (MMA) regimen with that of the patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) method for acute postoperative pain management. Patients who underwent one or two-level posterior lumbar fusion (PLF) followed by either MMA or PCA administration at our hospital were compared for pain score, additional opioid and non-opioid consumption, side effects, length of hospital stay, cost of pain control, and patient satisfaction. From 2016 through 2017, a total 146 of patients were screened. After propensity score matching, 66 remained in the PCA and 34 in the MMA group. Compared with the PCA group, the MMA group had a shorter length of hospital stay (median (interquartile range): 7 days (5-8) vs. 8 (7-11); P = 0.001) and lower cost of pain control (70.6 ± 0.9 USD vs. 173.4 ± 3.3, P < 0.001). Baseline data, clinical characteristics, pain score, additional non-opioid consumption, side effects, and patient subjective satisfaction score were similar between the two groups. The MMA seems to be a good alternative to the PCA after one or two-level PLF.

The Impact of Preventative Multimodal Analgesia on Postoperative Opioid Requirement and Pain Control in Patients Undergoing Lumbar Fusions

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective observational study with a historical reference group.

OBJECTIVES

The main objectives of this study were to determine the impact of preventative multimodal analgesia (PMA) on postoperative opioid requirements and analgesic effectiveness in patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

PMA addresses the multiple pathways of acute and chronic pain by interfering with peripheral and central sensitization and should provide a way to achieve safer and more effective pain management with reduced opioid medication use.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study compared postoperative opioid requirement and analgesic effect in a total of 101 patients undergoing elective, 1-level or 2-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion surgeries for symptomatic lumbar degenerative disk disease. The PMA patient group included 51 consecutive patients who received 1000 mg of acetaminophen, 300-900 mg of gabapentin, and 200-400 mg of celecoxib 1 hour before their index procedure. The reference group included 50 patients who received 15 mg of morphine-equivalent dose (MED) preoperatively.Multiple linear regression was used to evaluate the effect of PMA on postoperative pain and MED over 4 postoperative days, while controlling for all variables likely to influence these outcomes, including age, sex, baseline opioid use, duration of surgery, postoperative intrathecal morphine use and the administration of muscle relaxants and anticonvulsants.

RESULTS

The differences in opioid requirement and postoperative pain scores were statistically significant on all 4 postoperative days. The effect size varied from -0.54 to -0.99 (34.8%-54.2% MED reduction) for the postoperative opioid requirement and from -0.59 to -1.16 (28.9%-37.3% visual analog scale reduction) for postoperative pain indicating that these measures were reduced by about ½ to 1 SD in the PMA patient group.

CONCLUSIONS

PMA is a highly effective and safe method for postoperative pain management in patients undergoing elective lumbar fusion surgeries by improving pain control and reducing opioid requirement.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Posterior Vertebrectomy via the Unilateral Pedicle or Bilateral Pedicle Approach in the Treatment of Lumber Burst Fracture with Neurological Deficits: A Comparative Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND Posterior vertebrectomy with bilateral pedicle approach (BPA) is widely applied in lumber burst fracture (LBF). However, some disadvantages exist, such as a prolonged operation time, extensive soft tissue injury, and excessive blood loss. Posterior vertebrectomy with unilateral pedicle approach (UPA) is a novel technique for decompression of spinal canal. Thus, we explored the potential of UPA to achieve better outcomes than BPA. MATERIAL AND METHODS Of 47 patients who underwent posterior vertebrectomy for LBF, 23 patients were treated with UPA and 24 patients were treated with BPA. Clinical and radiographical outcomes were assessed with a follow-up of more than 24 months. Patients were evaluated before and after surgery according to the following parameter: duration of operation (DO), blood loss volume (BLV), the kyphotic angle (KA), the ratio of the height of anterior vertebral edge, the ratio of the sagittal injury, visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Frankel scores. RESULTS The follow-up time ranged from 24 to 37 months (average 26.4 months). The UPA group had significantly decreased DO and BLV (P<0.05). The 2 cohorts showed similar performance at 6 months (P>0.05), 12 months (P>0.05), and 24 months (P>0.05) post-surgery, in terms of parameters including KA, the ratio of the vertebral anterior, the ratio of sagittal damage, Frankel scores, ODI, and VAS. CONCLUSIONS UPA and BPA had a similar clinical performance for LBF. However, the shorter DO and lower BLV achieved in the UPA cohort suggested UPA is a better alternative for LBF.

Preoperative multimodal analgesia decreases 24-hour postoperative narcotic consumption in elective spinal fusion patients

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Effective postoperative pain management in patients undergoing elective spinal fusion surgery has been associated with shorter hospital stays, reduced rates of hospital readmissions due to pain, and decreased cost of care. Furthermore, preoperative multimodal analgesia regimens have been shown to decrease postoperative subjective pain measurements and narcotic consumption in patients undergoing spinal fusion and total arthroplasty surgeries.

PURPOSE

Compare the difference in effects on 24-hour postoperative narcotic consumption, reported pain, and early mobility with administration of preoperative celecoxib plus gabapentin, gabapentin alone, and a nonstandardized analgesia regimen in patients undergoing elective spinal fusion surgery involving ≤5 levels.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review, Level of Evidence III.

PATIENT SAMPLE

A total of 185 adult patients undergoing elective spinal fusion surgery involving ≤5 levels from 2013 to 2017 at one academic institution. Patients were excluded if the surgery was nonelective, for oncological purposes, or the patient was younger than 17 years old.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Twenty-four-hour postoperative morphine equivalent consumption, 24-hour postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores, postoperative day to ambulate, and postoperative day to clear physical therapy.

METHODS

A single-institution retrospective chart review was conducted. Patients meeting inclusion criteria were grouped by whether they had received preoperative celecoxib plus gabapentin, gabapentin alone, or neither of these medications. Opioid medication intake for the first 24 hours after the surgery end time was tabulated and converted to morphine equivalents. Visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores were also averaged over the first 24 hours. Finally, physical therapy notes were reviewed to determine the time taken for the patient to first ambulate and to clear physical therapy. No external funding was procured for this research and the authors' conflicts of interest are not pertinent to the present work.

RESULTS

Twenty-four-hour postoperative morphine equivalent consumption was significantly lower in the celecoxib plus gabapentin group compared with control (p=.004). Patients in the celecoxib plus gabapentin group had significantly lower mean VAS scores (p=.002) and had earlier mobility postoperatively (p=.012) than those in the control group. Early mobility and time to physical therapy clearance did differ between the celecoxib + gabapentin group compared with the gabapentin alone group. The gabapentin group had a significantly higher 24-hour morphine dose equivalent (p=.013) and a significantly higher VAS average (p=.009) compared with the celecoxib + gabapentin group. Gabapentin given alone compared with control did not show statistically significant improved outcomes in postoperative morphine equivalent consumption, pain scores or physical therapy goals.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that administering a selective COX-2 inhibitor and GABA-analogue preoperatively can significantly decrease 24-hour postoperative opioid consumption, VAS pain scores, and elapsed time to postoperative mobility in patients undergoing elective spine fusion surgery of ≤5 levels. Optimal standardized dosing and drug combination for preoperative multimodal analgesia remains to be elucidated.

Preoperative Chronic Opioid Therapy Negatively Impacts Long-term Outcomes Following Cervical Fusion Surgery

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective, observational.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to define the impact of preoperative chronic opioid therapy (COT) on outcomes following cervical spine fusions.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Opioid therapy is a commonly practiced method to control acute postoperative pain. However, concerns exist relating to use of prescription opioids, including inherent risk of abuse, tolerance, and inferior outcomes following major surgery.

METHODS

A commercial dataset was queried from 2007 to 2015 for patients undergoing primary cervical spine arthrodesis [ICD-9 codes 81.01-81.03]. Primary outcome measures were 1-year and 2-year reoperation rates, emergency department (ED) visits, adverse events, and prolonged postoperative opioid use. Secondary outcomes included short-term outcomes including 90-day complications (cardiac, renal, neurologic, infectious, etc.). COT was defined as a history of opioid prescription filling within 3 months before surgery and was the primary exposure variable of interest. Generalized linear models investigated the association of preoperative COT on primary/secondary endpoints following risk-adjustment.

RESULTS

Overall, 20,730 patients (51.3% female; 85.9% >50 years) underwent primary cervical spine arthrodesis. Of these, 10,539 (n = 50.8%) met criteria for COT. Postoperatively, 75.3% and 29.8% remained on opioids at 3 months and 1 year. Multivariable models identified an association between COT and an increased risk of 90-day ED visit [odds ratio (OR): 1.25; P < 0.001] and wound complications (OR: 1.24; P = 0.036). At 1 year, COT was strongly associated with reoperations (OR: 1.17; P = 0.043), ED visits (OR: 1.31; P < 0.001), and adverse events including wound complications (OR: 1.32; P < 0.001), infections (OR: 1.34; P = 0.042), constipation (OR: 1.11; P = 0.032), neurological complications (OR: 1.44; P = 0.01), acute renal failure (OR: 1.24; P = 0.004), and venous thromboembolism (OR: 1.20; P = 0.008). At 2 years, COT remained a significant risk factor for additional long-term negative outcomes such as reoperations, including adjacent segment disc disease (OR: 1.21; P = 0.005), ED visits (OR: 1.32; P < 0.001), and other adverse events. Preoperative COT was associated with prolonged postoperative narcotic use at 3 months (OR: 1.30; P < 0.001), 1 year (OR: 5.17; P < 0.001), and at 2 years (OR: 5.75; P < 0.001) after cervical arthrodesis.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative COT is a modifiable risk factor that is strongly associated with prolonged postoperative opioid use. In addition, COT was associated with inferior short-term and long-term outcomes after cervical spine fusion.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Implementation of a Standardized Multimodal Postoperative Analgesia Protocol Improves Pain Control, Reduces Opioid Consumption, and Shortens Length of Hospital Stay After Posterior Lumbar Spinal Fusion

BACKGROUND

Multimodal analgesia regimens have been suggested to improve pain control and reduce opioid consumption after surgery.

OBJECTIVE

To institutionally implement an evidence-based quality improvement initiative to standardize and optimize pain treatment following neurosurgical procedures. Our goal was to objectively evaluate efficacy of this multimodal protocol.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort analysis of pain-related outcomes after posterior lumbar fusion procedures was performed. We compared patients treated in the 6 mo preceding (PRE) and 6 mo following (POST) protocol execution.

RESULTS

A total of 102 PRE and 118 POST patients were included. The cohorts were well-matched regarding sex, age, surgical duration, number of segments fused, preoperative opioid consumption, and baseline physical status (all P &gt; .05). Average patient-reported numerical rating scale pain scores significantly improved in the first 24 hr postoperatively (5.6 vs 4.5, P &lt; .001) and 24 to 72 hr postoperatively (4.7 vs 3.4, P &lt; .001), PRE vs POST, respectively. Maximum pain scores and time to achieving appropriate pain control also significantly improved during these same intervals (all P &lt; .05). A concomitant decrease in opioid consumption during the first 72 hr was seen (110 vs 71 morphine milligram equivalents, P = .02). There was an observed reduction in opioid-related adverse events per patient (1.31 vs 0.83, P &lt; .001) and hospital length of stay (4.6 vs 3.9 days, P = .03) after implementation of the protocol.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of an evidence-based, multimodal analgesia protocol improved postoperative outcomes, including pain scores, opioid consumption, and length of hospital stay, after posterior lumbar spinal fusion.

[Efficacy of local infiltration of ropivacaine combined with multimodal analgesia with parecoxib for perioperative analgesia in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy]

OBJECTIVE

To explore the effect of local infiltration of ropivacaine combined with multimodal analgesia with parecoxib for perioperative pain management in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy.

METHODS

This randomized controlled trial was conducted among 98 patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy in the Department of Biliary Surgery of West China Hospital between March, 2017 and August, 2018. The patients were randomized to receive perioperative analgesia with local infiltration anesthesia with ropivacaine combined with multimodal analgesia with parecoxib (experimental group, n=50) or postoperative analgesia with dizosin (control group, n=48). The regimens for intraoperative anesthesia and postoperative pain relief were identical in the two groups. The differences in NRS pain score, use of pain relief agents, the incidences of adverse reactions to analgesia and wound infection, and the time to first ambulation and first flatus passage after the operation were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

At 12, 24 h, 48 h, 72 h and 7 days after the operation, the patients in the experimental group had significantly lower NRS scores (P < 0.05) than those in the control group. The rate of use of rescue analgesics was significantly lower in the experimental group than in the control group (32% vs 66.67%, P < 0.05); the rate of tramadol hydrochloride use was also significantly lower in the experimental group (P < 0.05). Compared with those in the control group, the patients in the experimental group showed a significantly lower total incidence of adverse reactions (22% vs 54.17%, P < 0.05) as well as a lower incidence of nausea and vomiting (P < 0.05), an earlier time of first ambulation and first flatus passage after the operation (P < 0.05), and a shorter postoperative hospital stay (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy, local infiltration of ropivacaine combined with multimodal analgesia with ropivacaine can effectively relieve perioperative pain, reduce the use of relief analgesics, lower the incidence of adverse reactions, and promote the recovery after the surgery.

A prospective randomized study to analyze the efficacy of balanced pre-emptive analgesia in spine surgery

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Surgical procedures involving the spine are known to cause moderate to severe postoperative pain. Inadequate management of acute pain in the postoperative period results in higher morbidity, and consequently may lead to chronic pain caused by central sensitization. The role of pre-emptive analgesia (PA) and intraoperative analgesia in management of postoperative pain has gained precedence over recent years. Pathophysiology of postoperative pain in spine surgery is unique, as it is a combination of nociceptive, inflammatory, and neuronal stimuli. Blockage of all three stimuli in the perioperative period by pre-emptively administrating a combination of paracetamol (P), ketorolac (K), and pregabalin (PR) might help in adequate management and alleviation of acute postoperative pain.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the analgesic effect of a combination of P, K, and PR as pre-emptive multimodal analgesia, aimed to block or reduce acute postoperative pain after spine surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective, randomized, controlled, and double-blinded clinical trial.

PATIENT SAMPLE

After Institutional Review Board approval, 100 consecutive patients requiring single- or double level spinal fusion procedures were randomized into two groups-PA and control (C).

METHODS

The PA group received P, K, and PR 4 hours before surgery, as PA. Both groups underwent identical anesthetic and postoperative pain management protocol.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Demographic and surgical data, 4 hourly postoperative pain levels-Numeric Pain Rating scale (NRS), Ambulatory NRS scores; level of consciousness-Ramsay sedation scale, total amount of opioids consumed (TOC) through patient-controlled analgesia; functional levels-Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), surgical satisfaction index-North American Spine Society (NASS) satisfaction scale, duration of hospital stay, and all complications were recorded and analyzed. A research grant of 6,032 USD was obtained from AO Spine toward this work. There is no conflict to disclose.

RESULTS

Both the groups had identical demographic backgrounds and surgical profiles. The average NRS score within the first 48-hour period in the PA group (2.7±0.79) was significantly less than the C group (3.4±0.98) and the differences were more in the first 12 hours following surgery. Similarly, Ambulatory NRS scores were significantly low in the PA group during the first and second postoperative days. The PA group individuals were found to be more physically motivated, as 95.7% were able to ambulate 50 m on the first postoperative day compared with 30% in the C group. The PA group had significantly low TOC (3.02±2.29 mg) in comparison to the C group (4.94±3.08 mg). The duration of hospital stay was 4.17±1.02 and 4.84±1.62 days in the PA and C groups (p=.017), respectively. No major complications occurred in either groups and were found to be similar in percentage between both the groups, except for nausea and vomiting which were more in C group. Dry mouth was the most common side effect noted irrespective of the groups. All patients had significant improvement in ODI with better results in PA group at first month follow up. The PA group (97.90%) was extremely satisfied compared with C group (72%, p=.002) according to NASS scale.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative pain management in spine surgery is maximized if perioperative painful stimuli can be inhibited, which requires adequate blood levels of analgesic, anti-inflammatory, and neuropathic drugs intraoperatively. The employed strategy of preoperative administration of balanced analgesia with a combination of P, K, and PR, each having different mechanisms of action, resulted in lesser pain intensity, allowed better ambulation tolerance, improved functional outcomes and has also reduced the requirement of opioids and duration of hospital stay with no additional complications. Thus, this balanced analgesia administered preoperatively would address the complicated postsurgical pain.

Novel multimodal analgesia regimen improves post-TACE pain in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUD

Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is the primary palliative treatment for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, it is often accompanied by postoperative pain which hinder patient recovery. This study was to examine whether preemptive parecoxib and sufentanil-based patient controlled analgesia (PCA) could improve the pain management in patients receiving TACE for inoperable HCC.

METHODS

From June to December 2016, 84 HCC patients undergoing TACE procedure were enrolled. Because of the willingness of the individuals, it is difficult to randomize the patients to different groups. We matched the patients' age, gender and pain scores, and divided the patients into the multimodal group (n = 42) and control group (n = 42). Patients in the multimodal group received 40 mg of parecoxib, 30 min before TACE, followed by 48 h of sufentanil-based PCA. Patients in the control group received a routine analgesic regimen, i.e., 5 mg of dezocine during operation, and 100 mg of tramadol or equivalent intravenous opioid according to patient's complaints and pain intensity. Postoperative pain intensity, percentage of patients as per the pain category, adverse reaction, duration of hospital stay, cost-effectiveness, and patient's satisfaction were all taken into consideration when evaluated.

RESULTS

Compared to the control group, the visual analogue scale scores for pain intensity was significantly lower at 2, 4, 6, and 12 h (all P < 0.05) in the multimodal group and a noticeably lower prevalence of post-operative nausea and vomiting in the multimodal group (31.0% vs. 59.5%). Patient's satisfaction in the multimodal group was also significantly higher than that in the control group (95.2% vs. 69.0%). No significant difference was observed in the duration of hospital stay between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Preemptive parecoxib and sufentanil-based multimodal analgesia regime is a safe, efficient and cost-effective regimen for postoperative pain control in HCC patients undergoing TACE.

Comparison of Preoperative and Postoperative Parecoxib Administration for Pain Control Following Major Spine Surgery

Study Design

Prospective randomized, double-blind controlled trial.

Purpose

Here, we aim to compare the efficacy and safety of pain control between pre- and postoperative parecoxib administration in patients who have undergone major spine surgery.

Overview of Literature

Several studies have compared the efficacy of pre- and postoperative administration of parecoxib, which led to inconclusive results owing to variation in operative time. Preincisional parecoxib administration reduces inflammatory response in major spine surgery requiring longer operative time; however, it may not reduce pain as much as parecoxib administration immediately after surgery would.

Methods

Totally, 127 patients who underwent major spine surgery were randomly divided into three groups: pre-group, which received 40 mg parecoxib before skin incision and at 12 and 24 hours after the first dose; post-group, which received the same dose at wound closure and at 12 and 24 hours after the first dose; and control group, which did not receive any parecoxib. Efficacy and safety of parecoxib were measured based on pain score, morphine consumption, and side effects from both morphine and parecoxib at 24 hours after surgery.

Results

Initial postoperative pain score, postoperative pain score at rest, and accumulative morphine consumption at 24 hours after surgery were similar between the pre- and post-groups. Despite the significantly lower pain score and morphine consumption in both pre- and post-groups compared with the control group, cumulative morphine consumption at 24 hours after surgery was reduced by approximately 50% in the pre-group and 46% in the post-group compared. Analgesic-related complication incidence was similar in all groups.

Conclusions

The timing of parecoxib administration, either before or after major spinal surgery, did not affect the safety and analgesic efficacy of pain management.

Efficacy and Safety of Postoperative Pain Relief by Parecoxib Injection after Laparoscopic Surgeries: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of parecoxib injection in pain relief after laparoscopic surgeries.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search based on 4 online databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science) was applied to retrieve all related randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Two independent reviewers screened each article for eligibility according to the predetermined inclusion criteria. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool was applied to evaluate the methodological quality of included studies. A standardized data collection sheet was designed to extract data from included studies. RevMan version 5.3 (The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark) was selected to perform meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 1,060 participants who were scheduled for gynecological laparoscopic surgery or laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) were enrolled in 12 selected RCTs. The methodological qualities of the studies were evaluated as moderate to high. The combined data showed that perioperative parecoxib injection could significantly reduce the proportion of patients who required adjuvant pain relieve after laparoscopic surgeries. Significantly lower pain scores in the parecoxib groups were observed, which proved that preoperative or intraoperative injection of 40 mg parecoxib was more effective than placebo for immediate pain relief after LC. But preoperative injection of 40 mg parecoxib showed no improvement compared with placebo in the management of immediate pain following gynecological laparoscopic surgery. The occurrence of adverse events showed no differences between perioperative parecoxib administration and placebo control.

CONCLUSION

Perioperative parecoxib administration was effective in reducing the proportion of patients who required adjuvant pain relief after laparoscopic surgeries without significant adverse events compared with placebo. The effect of parecoxib injection on immediate pain relief remains in question. Future RCTs with larger sample sizes are encouraged.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for postoperative pain control after lumbar spine surgery: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) play a role in pain relief, especially in postoperative pain caused by inflammation. They have demonstrated significant opioid dose-sparing effects, which help in reducing postoperative effects and opioid side effects. The objective of this meta-analysis was to explore the role of NSAIDs in reducing postoperative pain at different time intervals and provide reference for medication after lumbar spine surgery by a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT).

DESIGN

A meta-analysis study of randomized controlled trials.

SETTING

Postoperative recovery area.

PATIENTS

Adult patients who have undergone lumbar spine surgery.

INTERVENTION

Patients received NSAIDs for pain control after lumbar spine surgery.

MEASUREMENTS

Standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95%CI were used to evaluate the visual analog scale of postoperative pain.

MAIN RESULTS

Four hundred and eight participants from eight studies were included in this study. The difference between the NSAIDs group and placebo is significant in 0-6, 12, and 24h groups (overall: SMD=-0.72, 95%CI -0.98 to -0.45; 0-6h: SMD=0.50, 95%CI -0.81 to -0.19; 12h: SMD=-1.07, 95%CI -1.45 to -0.70; 24h: SMD=-1.16, 95%CI -1.87 to -0.45). Heterogeneity and publication bias were observed in the 0-6 and 24h groups.

CONCLUSION

NSAIDs are effective in postoperative analgesia after lumbar spine surgery. The study type, NSAID dose, different surgery types, and analgesic type might influence the efficacy of NSAIDs.

Effect of intermediate dose dexamethasone on post-operative pain in lumbar spine surgery: A randomized, triple-blind, placebo-controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

Dexamethasone has demonstrated analgesic properties and is used as an adjunctive pain agent for many procedures. We evaluated the efficacy of a single, intermediate dose of dexamethasone on post-operative analgesic consumption, and pain scores for lumbar spine surgery.

METHODS

Eighty patients aged between 18 and 70 scheduled for lumbar decompressive laminectomy were randomly allocated into two groups to receive either intravenous 0.2 mg/kg dexamethasone (group D = 40) or normal saline (group P = 40) before anesthetic induction. Post-operative total morphine consumption and the respective pain score at the PACU, 4, 6, 12, 24 and 48 h were evaluated. In addition, any adverse events were recorded.

RESULTS

Total post-operative morphine consumption within 48 h was significantly lower in group D (34.5 vs. 42.5 mg, p = 0.031); however, the respective morphine consumption at each assessment was similar between groups. The respective NRS pain score at rest and upon movement in both groups was not significantly different for any time comparison. The average NRS pain score at rest and upon movement within 48 h was similar in both groups (i.e., NRS at rest Group D 3.6 vs. Group P 3.8, p = 0.936, and NRS for movement Group D 6.2 vs. Group P 6.3, p = 0.791). The adverse events within 48 h were also similar and serious complications (i.e., respiratory depression or surgical infection) were not found in either group.

CONCLUSION

A single, intermediate dose of dexamethasone before anesthetic induction could minimally decrease post-operative morphine consumption within 48 h after lumbar decompressive laminectomy without any effect on the pain score.

The Role of Multimodal Analgesia in Spine Surgery

Optimal postoperative pain control allows for faster recovery, reduced complications, and improved patient satisfaction. Historically, pain management after spine surgery relied heavily on opioid medications. Multimodal regimens were developed to reduce opioid consumption and associated adverse effects. Multimodal approaches used in orthopaedic surgery of the lower extremity, especially joint arthroplasty, have been well described and studies have shown reduced opioid consumption, improved pain and function, and decreased length of stay. A growing body of evidence supports multimodal analgesia in spine surgery. Methods include the use of preemptive analgesia, NSAIDs, the neuromodulatory agents gabapentin and pregabalin, acetaminophen, and extended-action local anesthesia. The development of a standard approach to multimodal analgesia in spine surgery requires extensive assessment of the literature. Because a substantial number of spine surgeries are performed annually, a standardized approach to multimodal analgesia may provide considerable benefits, particularly in the context of the increased emphasis on accountability within the healthcare system.

Randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial comparing two multimodal opioid-minimizing pain management regimens following transsphenoidal surgery

OBJECTIVE Pain control is an important clinical consideration and quality-of-care metric. No studies have examined postoperative pain control following transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary lesions. The study goals were to 1) report postoperative pain scores following transsphenoidal surgery, 2) determine if multimodal opioid-minimizing pain regimens yielded satisfactory postoperative pain control, and 3) determine if intravenous (IV) ibuprofen improved postoperative pain scores and reduced opioid use compared with placebo. METHODS This study was a single-center, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled intervention trial involving adult patients with planned transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary tumors randomized into 2 groups. Group 1 patients were treated with scheduled IV ibuprofen, scheduled oral acetaminophen, and rescue opioids. Group 2 patients were treated with IV placebo, scheduled oral acetaminophen, and rescue opioids. The primary end point was patient pain scores (visual analog scale [VAS], rated 0-10) for 48 hours after surgery. The secondary end point was opioid use as estimated by oral morphine equivalents (OMEs). RESULTS Of 136 patients screened, 62 were enrolled (28 in Group 1, 34 in Group 2). The study was terminated early because the primary and secondary end points were reached. Baseline characteristics between groups were well matched except for age (Group 1, 59.3 ± 14.4 years; Group 2, 49.8 ± 16.2 years; p = 0.02). Mean VAS pain scores were significantly different, with a 43% reduction in Group 1 (1.7 ± 2.2) compared with Group 2 (3.0 ± 2.8; p < 0.0001). Opioid use was significantly different, with a 58% reduction in Group 1 (26.3 ± 28.7 mg OME) compared with Group 2 (62.5 ± 63.8 mg OME; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS Multimodal opioid-minimizing pain-management protocols resulted in acceptable pain control following transsphenoidal surgery. IV ibuprofen resulted in significantly improved pain scores and significantly decreased opioid use compared with placebo. Postoperative multimodal pain management, including a nonsteroidal antiinflammatory medication, should be considered after surgery to improve patient comfort and to limit opioid use. Clinical trial registration no.: NCT02351700 (clinicaltrials.gov) ■ CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE Type of question: therapeutic; study design: randomized, controlled trial; evidence: Class III.

Parecoxib Provides Analgesic and Opioid-Sparing Effects Following Major Orthopedic Surgery: A Subset Analysis of a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial

Introduction

Orthopedic surgeries are among the most common and most painful surgeries performed. A multimodal analgesic approach is recommended to reduce opioid consumption, provide effective pain relief, and improve outcomes following surgery. This study examined the efficacy and opioid-sparing effects of parecoxib following major orthopedic surgery.

Methods

This subset analysis of a large, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of parecoxib examined treatment effects on postoperative pain severity, pain interference with function, opioid consumption, occurrence of opioid-related symptoms, safety, and patient satisfaction following major orthopedic surgery.

Results

Pain scores were significantly lower in the parecoxib group (n = 142) compared with placebo (n = 139) on day 2 (−22%; p < 0.001) and day 3 (−17%; p = 0.004). Pain interference with function scores were also significantly lower in the parecoxib group on day 2 (−32%; p < 0.001) and day 3 (−27%; p = 0.003) relative to placebo. Additionally, significantly less supplemental morphine was required in the parecoxib group relative to placebo through 24 h (−28%; p = 0.008) and 48 h (−33%; p < 0.001). Patients in the parecoxib group had a reduced risk of experiencing opioid-related symptoms including fatigue, drowsiness, inability to concentrate, confusion, nausea, constipation, and confusion on day 2 and/or day 3. Finally, more patients receiving parecoxib (42%) rated treatment as “excellent” compared to those receiving placebo (21%).

Conclusions

These findings support the use of parecoxib for the management of pain following major orthopedic surgery.

Efficacy of a single 40-mg intravenous dose of parecoxib for postoperative pain control after elective cesarean delivery: A double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial

AIM

The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of a single 40-mg intravenous (i.v.) dose of parecoxib as an adjunctive analgesia to intrathecal morphine after elective cesarean delivery (CD).

METHODS

A total of 82 low-risk term pregnant women who were scheduled for elective CD during the June 2014-June 2015 study period were enrolled. Two hours after surgery, subjects were randomly assigned to receive either i.v. injection of 2 mL (40 mg) parecoxib (study group; n = 41) or 2 mL normal saline solution (control group; n = 41). Patient randomization into groups was determined by the hospital's central computer system. Outcome measurements included total postoperative supplemental meperidine consumption, recorded pain score by numeric pain rating scale at 6, 12, 18, and 24 h, postoperatively, and patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

Patient characteristics and pregnancy outcomes were comparable between groups. Total postoperative meperidine consumption was not significantly different between groups (12.7 ± 18.8 mg vs 8.3 ± 16.7 mg; P > 0.05). Compared with control, the study group was significantly less likely to experience moderate to severe postoperative pain (score ≥ 4) at 6 h (0% vs 21.9%; P = 0.002). Study group patients reported higher satisfaction than control group patients (median score: 8 vs 6; P < 0.01). No patients in either group reported adverse effects from their assigned intervention.

CONCLUSION

Parecoxib did not demonstrate effectiveness in reducing patient requirement for supplementary meperidine after CD. However, administration of a single 40-mg dose of i.v. parecoxib after elective CD demonstrated effectiveness in reducing pain scores, with a resulting increase in patient satisfaction.

Risk of perioperative bleeding related to highly selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Several literatures reported that highly selective cycloxygenase-2 inhibitors (COX-2 inhibitors) had no effect on platelet function. However, some experts suggested stopping all non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), including COX-2 inhibitors at least five elimination half-lives prior to surgery. We, therefore, systematically summarized the risk of clinical bleeding or platelet dysfunction in healthy or surgical subjects who received COX-2 inhibitors.

METHODS

Two electronic databases, MEDLINE and EMBASE, were searched for randomized, controlled studies published during 1980-December 2015. Additionally, manual search was performed to identify potential eligible studies. Intervention was perioperative use of any available COX-2 inhibitors in current practice (celecoxib, parecoxib, or etoricoxib), compared to non-selective NSAIDs, analgesics, or placebo. Two independent reviewers selected eligible studies, extracted the data, and assessed the quality of the included studies. The primary outcome was postoperative bleeding. All analyses were performed using RevMan-5.3.

RESULTS

Of 3900 abstracts reviewed, 35 studies met the inclusion criteria. The data from 16 out of 35 studies were used in this meta-analysis, and outcomes of other 19 remaining studies were descriptively summarized. COX-2 inhibitors did not significantly increase the risk of postoperative bleeding events (relative risk or RR = 0.92; 95% confidence interval or CI: 0.63-1.33; p = 0.65), intraoperative blood loss (mL) (weighted mean difference or WMD = -4.38; 95% CI: -14.69 to 5.92; p = 0.4), postoperative blood loss (mL) (WMD = -13.89; 95% CI: -30.24 to 2.47; p = 0.10), and 24-h postoperative hemoglobin loss (g/dL) (WMD = 0.47; 95% CI: -0.14 to 1.09; p = 0.13). Platelet function analyzer closure time (second) significantly decreased with the use of COX-2 inhibitors (WMD = -22.22; 95% CI: -44.03 to -0.41; p < 0.00001). In the 19 remaining studies, COX-2 inhibitors did not significantly increase risk of bleeding in both clinical and laboratory outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Highly selective COX-2 inhibitors did not significantly increase the risk of intraoperative, postoperative bleeding, or blood loss. They also had no significant effect on platelet function. Therefore, perioperative, single dose, or short course of COX-2 inhibitors can be safely used in individuals who are undergoing surgery.

Effect of perioperative parecoxib sodium on postoperative pain control for transcatheter arterial chemoembolization for inoperable hepatocellular carcinoma: a prospective randomized trial

OBJECTIVES

Pain is one of the most common side effects of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) treatment. This study aimed to assess the analgesic effect of parecoxib sodium for postoperative pain control in patients with inoperable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) undergoing TACE.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This randomized placebo-controlled prospective clinical study was conducted at a single cancer centre. Patients were randomly assigned to receive parecoxib sodium (experimental group; n = 60) or 0.9 % sodium chloride (control group; n = 60) 1 h before TACE and once every 12 h for 2 days after TACE. Pain level, morphine consumption, adverse events, and quality of life were evaluated and compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Pain scores, percentage distribution of pain categories, and morphine consumption were significantly lower in the experimental group than in the control group (P < 0.05). Fever score comparisons revealed significantly better body temperature balance in the experimental group than in the control group (P = 0.024). Quality-of-life scores in the experimental group were significantly better than those in the control group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrate that the perioperative administration of parecoxib significantly improved its effectiveness in the control of postoperative pain after TACE.

KEY POINTS

• Perioperative administration of parecoxib is effective for control of pain after TACE. • COX-2 inhibitors provide effective and safe pain control. • Parecoxib helps improve quality-of-life after TACE for patients with inoperable hepatocellular carcinoma.

Analgesic Effects of Intra-Articular Bupivacaine/Intravenous Parecoxib Combination Therapy versus Intravenous Parecoxib Monotherapy in Patients Receiving Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomized, Double-Blind Trial

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this double-blind, randomized study was to investigate whether the addition of intra-articular bupivacaine to intravenous parecoxib could improve pain relief in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty.

METHODS

A total of 36 patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty were enrolled into our study. These patients were randomly allocated either to a placebo-controlled group or study group. Postoperative pain cores and analgesic consumption were evaluated.

RESULTS

Numeric rating scale (NRS) data of bupivacaine group in postoperative room were significantly lower than that of control group (control group versus bupivacaine group, 7.9 (6.7-9.1) (mean and 95% confidence interval) versus 4.5 (3.2-5.8) (mean and 95% confidence interval), p = 0.001). NRS data of bupivacaine group in ward were also significantly lower than that of control group. A significantly lower dose of meperidine was used in the study group postoperatively during the first 24 hours (control group versus bupivacaine group, 3.08 ± 0.80 mg/Kg versus 2.34 ± 0.42 mg/Kg, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Intra-articular bupivacaine in combination with intravenous parecoxib may improve pain relief and reduce the demand for rescue analgesics in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty. The trial is registered with Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12615000463572).

Comparing parecoxib and ketorolac as preemptive analgesia in patients undergoing posterior lumbar spinal fusion: a prospective randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled trial

Background

Poor postoperative pain control is frequently associated with complications and delayed discharge from a hospital. Preemptive analgesia is one of the methods suggested for reducing postoperative pain. Opioids are effective for pain control, but there known addictive properties make physicians cautious about using them. Parecoxib and ketorolac are potent non-opioid NSAIDs that are attractive alternative drugs to opioids to avoid opioid-related side effects. However, there are no good head-to-head comparisons between these two drugs in the aspect of preemptive analgesic effects in lumbar spinal fusion surgery. This study aimed to compare the efficacy in terms of postoperative pain control and safety of parecoxib with ketorolac as preemptive analgesia in posterior lumbar spinal fusion patients.

Methods

A prospective, double-blinded randomized controlled trial was carried out in patients undergoing posterior lumbar spinal fusion, who were randomized into 3 groups (n = 32). Parecoxib, ketorolac or a placebo was given to each patient via injection around 30 minutes prior to incision. The efficacy of postoperative pain control was assessed by a verbal numerical rating score (0–10). And various postoperative things were monitored for analysis, such as total opioid consumption, complications, and estimated blood loss.

Results

Both the ketorolac and parecoxib groups showed significantly better early postoperative pain reduction at the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) than the control group (p < 0.05). There were no differences between the pain scores of ketorolac and parecoxib at any time points. Complications and bleeding were not significantly different between all three groups.

Conclusions

Preemptive analgesia using both ketorolac and parecoxib showed a significantly better early postoperative pain control in the PACU than the control group in patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01859585. Registered 15 May 2013.

Multimodal therapy in perioperative analgesia

This article reviews the current evidence for multimodal analgesic options for common surgical procedures. As perioperative physicians, we have come a long way from using only opioids for postoperative pain to combinations of acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), selective Cyclo-oxygenase (COX-2) inhibitors, local anesthetics, N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists, and regional anesthetics. As discussed in this article, many of these agents have decreased narcotic requirements, improved patient satisfaction, and decreased postanesthesia care unit (PACU) times, as well as morbidity in the perioperative period.

Efficacy and safety of parecoxib sodium for acute postoperative pain: A meta-analysis

This meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of parecoxib sodium for acute postoperative pain. PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EBSCO, Springer, Ovid and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases were searched from January 1999 to January 2013 to comprehensively collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of parecoxib sodium for acute postoperative pain. The methodological quality of the included RCTs were assessed and the data were extracted by two reviewers independently according to the Cochrane Handbook. Efficacies and safety (respiratory depression, pruritus, fever, headache, and nausea and vomiting) were pooled using meta-analysis performed by Review Manager 5.1 software. Relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated in a fixed-effects model. Seven RCTs involving 1,939 patients met the inclusion criteria. The results of the meta-analysis revealed that the rate of 'effective' treatment as described by the patients' global evaluation of study medication (PGESM) was higher in the patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) combined with parecoxib sodium group 24, 48, and 72 h after the initial intravenous dose of 40 mg parecoxib compared with that in the control group [PCA alone; RR=1.41, 95% CI (1.13-1.75); RR=1.25, 95% CI (1.15-1.35); and RR=1.30, 95% CI (1.21-1.40), respectively]. The rate of 'ineffective' treatment in the PCA combined with parecoxib sodium group was lower compared with that of the control group [RR=0.43, 95% CI (0.26-0.72); RR= 0.44, 95% CI (0.34-0.57); and RR= 0.33, 95% CI (0.23-0.48), respectively]. Combination of PCA with parecoxib sodium reduced the incidence of postoperative fever [RR=0.34, 95% CI (0.22-0.53)], as well as nausea and vomiting [RR=0.69, 95% CI (0.57-0.83)]; however, it did not significantly reduce respiratory depression [RR= 0.84, 95% CI (0.38-1.83)], pruritus [RR= 0.91, 95% CI (0.54-1.52)] or headache [RR=0.77, 95% CI (0.47-1.28)]. The combination of PCA with parecoxib sodium successively injected for <3 days significantly increases the scores of PGESM and reduces the incidence of adverse effects and postoperative complications.

Effect of perioperative parecoxib on postoperative pain and local inflammation factors PGE2 and IL-6 for total knee arthroplasty: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

To assess the efficacy of postoperative pain management and the concentration change of PGE-2 and IL-6 of joint fluid with parecoxib after postoperative total knee arthroplasty. In the study, 100 patients experiencing primary TKA were randomly divided into study group, receiving parecoxib sodium (40 mg) intravenously (IV) at the completion of surgery and once every 12 h for totally 6 times postoperatively, and placebo group, receiving normal saline 2 mL IV at the same time points. Efficacy was assessed by total amount of morphine consumed, pain intensity, range of motion (ROM), the concentration change of PGE-2 and IL-6 of joint fluid, and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) postoperatively. Patients in study group consumed significantly less morphine, experienced significant less pain scores, and obtained significantly more ROM (P < 0.01) compared with that in placebo group during 3 days postoperatively. The concentration of PGE-2 and IL-6 of joint fluid in study group are significantly lower than that in placebo group (P < 0.01) during 24 h postoperatively. The overall incidence of PONV was low and was not significantly different between the two groups. The present study demonstrated that the perioperative administration of parecoxib after primary TKA resulted in significantly improved postoperative analgesic management as defined by reduction in opioid requirement, lower pain scores and ROM, and significantly lowered local inflammation factors PGE2 and IL-6.

The perioperative combination of methadone and ketamine reduces post-operative opioid usage compared with methadone alone

BACKGROUND

A synergy between ketamine and methadone (ME) to produce antinociception has been demonstrated in experimental neuropathy. We wanted to compare post-operative opioid requirements in patients undergoing multilevel lumbar arthrodesis after the administration combined ME-ketamine (MK) or ME alone.

METHODS

This was a randomised double-blind study. During sevoflurane-remifentanil anaesthesia, 11 patients in each group received the following: ketamine bolus (0.5 mg/kg) after tracheal intubation, followed by an infusion of 2.5 μg/kg/min in the MK or saline bolus plus infusion in the ME group. Post-operative analgesia - during 48 h - was provided by patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), delivering bolus containing the following: ME 0.25 mg plus ketamine 0.5 mg in the MK group or ME 0.5 mg in the ME group. Lockout was 10 min, maximum of 3 boluses/h in both groups. Before closing the wound, all the patients received intravenous (i.v.) ME 0.1 mg/kg, dexketoprophen and paracetamol. Pain intensity was evaluated by a numerical rating scale (NRS), on arrival at recovery room (RR) and 24 and 48 h after surgery. In the RR, i.v. ME was administered until NRS was 3 when PCA was started. Dexketoprophen and paracetamol were administered 48 h.

RESULTS

Remifentanil requirements were higher in the MK group (P = 0.004). Patients in the MK group received 70% less ME by PCA at 24 h (MK vs. ME group, median and interquartile range) - 3.43 mg (1.9-6.5) vs. 15 mg (9.65-17.38) (P < 0.001) - and at 48 h - 2 mg (0.5-3.63) vs. 9.5 mg (3.5-13.75) (P = 0.001). Patients in the MK group also attempted less doses, at 24 h: 19.5 (12.75-79.5) vs. 98 (41.5-137) (P = 0.043). Both groups had similar NRS values and comparable side effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative ketamine-ME combination significantly decreased opioid consumption by PCA.

Acetaminophen improves analgesia but does not reduce opioid requirement after major spine surgery in children and adolescents

STUDY DESIGN

A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study to evaluate the effect of intravenously (IV) administered acetaminophen on postoperative pain in children and adolescents undergoing surgery for idiopathic scoliosis or spondylolisthesis.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate effectiveness of IV-administered acetaminophen on postoperative analgesia, opioid consumption, and acetaminophen concentrations after major spine surgery in adolescents.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Scoliosis surgery is associated with severe postoperative pain, most commonly treated with IV-administered opioids. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), as adjuvant to opioids, improve analgesia and reduce the need for opioids. However, by inhibiting cyclo-oxygenase enzymes peripherally, NSAIDs may inhibit bone healing. Acetaminophen, a centrally acting analgesic, does not have the adverse effects of NSAIDs and has improved analgesia in children after another orthopedic surgery.

METHODS

In an institutional review board approved study, 36 American Society of Anesthesiology patient classification I to III patients of 10 to 18 years of age were analyzed. Acetaminophen 30 mg/kg, administered IV or 0.9% NaCl was administered at the end of scoliosis or spondylolisthesis surgery, and thereafter twice at 8-hour intervals. Timed blood samples for acetaminophen determination were taken between 0.25 and 20 hours after the first dose. All patients received standard propofol-remifentanil anesthesia. Pain scores (visual analogue scale [VAS], 0-10), opioid consumption, and adverse effects were recorded.

RESULTS

In the surgical ward, 7 (39%) patients in the acetaminophen and 13 (72%) in the placebo group had a VAS pain score 6 or more (P < 0.05). There were fewer hours with VAS score 6 or more in the acetaminophen group compared with the placebo group (8.7% vs. 17.8% of the hours, P < 0.05). There was no difference in oxycodone consumption during the 24-hour follow-up between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

IV-administered acetaminophen 90 mg/kg/day, adjuvant to oxycodone, did improve analgesia, but did not diminish oxycodone consumption during 24 hours after major spine surgery in children and adolescents. All acetaminophen concentrations were in nontoxic levels.

Perioperative pain management in the neurosurgical patient

Perioperative pain management in neurosurgical patients has been inadequately recognized and treated. An increased awareness of pain management and advances in understanding of pain modulation and pathophysiology have led to improved perioperative care of patients. There is a need to assess neurologic function while providing superior analgesia with minimal side effects. Several classes of drugs are currently available or under investigation for use as adjuvants or alternative therapies. There remains a need to determine the best treatment of perioperative pain in this patient population. Improved awareness, assessment, and treatment of pain result in better care and overall patient outcome.

Intravenous or intramuscular parecoxib for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Parecoxib was the first COX-2 available for parenteral administration, and may, given intravenously or intramuscularly, offer advantages over oral medication when patients have nausea and vomiting or are unable to swallow, such as in the immediate postoperative period.

OBJECTIVES

Assess the efficacy of single dose intravenous or intramuscular parecoxib in acute postoperative pain, the requirement for rescue medication, and any associated adverse events.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE in November 2008.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials of parecoxib compared with placebo for relief of acute postoperative pain in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. The area under the "pain relief versus time" curve was used to derive the proportion of participants with parecoxib and placebo experiencing at least 50% pain relief over 6 hours, using validated equations. The number-needed-to-treat-to-benefit (NNT) was calculated using 95% confidence intervals (CI). The proportion of participants using rescue analgesia over a specified time period, and time to use of rescue analgesia, were sought as additional measures of efficacy. Information on adverse events and withdrawals were also collected.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven studies (1446 participants) were included. There was no significant difference between doses, or between intravenous and intramuscular administration for 50% pain relief over 6 hours: NNTs compared with placebo were 3.1 (2.4 to 4.5), 2.4 (2.1 to 2.8), and 1.8 (1.5 to 2.3) for 10, 20, and 40 mg parecoxib respectively. Fewer participants required rescue medication over 24 hours with parecoxib than placebo: parecoxib 40 mg was significantly better than parecoxib 20 mg (NNTs to prevent use of rescue medication 7.5 (5.3 to 12.8) and 3.3 (2.6 to 4.5) respectively; P < 0.0007). Median time to use of rescue medication was 3.1 hours, 6.9 hours and 10.6 hours with parecoxib 10 mg, 20 mg and 40 mg respectively, and 1.5 hours with placebo. Adverse events were generally mild to moderate, rarely led to withdrawal, and did not differ in frequency between groups. No serious adverse events were reported with parecoxib or placebo.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

A single dose of parecoxib 20 mg or 40 mg provided effective analgesia for 50 to 60% of those treated compared to about 15% with placebo, and was well tolerated. Duration of analgesia was longer, and significantly fewer participants required rescue medication over 24 hours with the higher dose.