Gabapentin and pregabalin in the management of postoperative pain after lumbar spinal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Adjuvant Analgesics in Acute Pain - Evaluation of Efficacy

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

Acute postoperative pain impacts a significant number of patients and is associated with various complications, such as a higher occurrence of chronic postsurgical pain as well as increased morbidity and mortality.

RECENT FINDINGS

Opioids are often used to manage severe pain, but they come with serious adverse effects, such as sedation, respiratory depression, postoperative nausea and vomiting, and impaired bowel function. Therefore, most enhanced recovery after surgery protocols promote multimodal analgesia, which includes adjuvant analgesics, to provide optimal pain control. In this article, we aim to offer a comprehensive review of the contemporary literature on adjuvant analgesics in the management of acute pain, especially in the perioperative setting. Adjuvant analgesics have proven efficacy in treating postoperative pain and reducing need for opioids. While ketamine is an established option for opioid-dependent patients, magnesium and α2-agonists have, in addition to their analgetic effect, the potential to attenuate hemodynamic responses, which make them especially useful in painful laparoscopic procedures. Furthermore, α2-agonists and dexamethasone can extend the analgesic effect of regional anesthesia techniques. However, findings for lidocaine remain inconclusive.

Opioid Use Prior to Adult Spine Deformity Correction Surgery is Associated With Worse Pre- and Postoperative Back Pain and Prolonged Opioid Demands

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective multicenter database post-hoc analysis.

OBJECTIVES

Opioids are frequently prescribed for painful spinal conditions to provide pain relief and to allow for functional improvement, both before and after spine surgery. Amidst a current opioid epidemic, it is important for providers to understand the impact of opioid use and its relationship with patient-reported outcomes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate pre-/postoperative opioid consumption surrounding ASD and assess patient-reported pain outcomes in older patients undergoing surgery for spinal deformity.

METHODS

Patients ≥60 years of age from 12 international centers undergoing spinal fusion of at least 5 levels and a minimum 2-year follow-up were included. Patient-reported outcome scores were collected using the Numeric Rating Scale for back and leg pain (NRS-B; NRS-L) at baseline and at 2 years following surgery. Opioid use, defined based on a specific question on case report forms and question 11 from the SRS-22r questionnaire, was assessed at baseline and at 2-year follow-up.

RESULT

Of the 219 patients who met inclusion criteria, 179 (81.7%) had 2-year data on opioid use. The percentages of patients reporting opioid use at baseline (n = 75, 34.2%) and 2 years after surgery (n = 55, 30.7%) were similar (P = .23). However, at last follow-up 39% of baseline opioid users (Opi) were no longer taking opioids, while 14% of initial non-users (No-Opi) reported opioid use. Regional pre- and postoperative opioid use was 5.8% and 7.7% in the Asian population, 58.3% and 53.1% in the European, and 50.5% and 40.2% in North American patients, respectively. Baseline opioid users reported more preoperative back pain than the No-Opi group (7.0 vs 5.7, P = .001), while NRS-Leg pain scores were comparable (4.8 vs 4, P = .159). Similarly, at last follow-up, patients in the Opi group had greater NRS-B scores than Non-Opi patients (3.2 vs 2.3, P = .012), but no differences in NRS-Leg pain scores (2.2 vs 2.4, P = .632) were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, almost one-third of surgical ASD patients were consuming opioids both pre- and postoperatively world-wide. There were marked international variations, with patients from Asia having a much lower usage rate, suggesting a cultural influence. Despite both opioid users and nonusers benefitting from surgery, preoperative opioid use was strongly associated with significantly more back pain at baseline that persisted at 2-year follow up, as well as persistent postoperative opioid needs.

Perioperative Pain Management for Distal Radius Fractures

Distal radius fractures have a high incidence among both young and elderly patients, and in many instances require operative intervention. When operative intervention is employed, adequate pain management is essential to decrease postoperative complications, such as chronic pain and disability, while minimizing the risk of prolonged opioid use and dependence. Strategies to optimize pain management include regional anesthesia, preoperative dosing of medication, multimodal regimens, long-acting selective opioids at the time of surgery, corticosteroids, and non-pharmacologic therapies.

Dexamethasone Plus Bupivacaine Versus Bupivacaine in Bilateral Transincisional Paravertebral Block in Lumbar Spine Surgeries: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES

Few studies examined the analgesic effects of dexamethasone in lumbar paravertebral block, specifically the transincisional approach. This study aimed to compare dexamethasone with bupivacaine versus bupivacaine alone for bilateral transincisional paravertebral block (TiPVB) for postoperative analgesia in lumbar spine surgeries.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifty patients who were aged 20 to 60 years and had American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status (ASA-PS) I or II of either sex were randomly allocated into 2 equal groups. Both groups received combined general anesthesia and bilateral lumbar TiPVB. However, in group 1 (dexamethasone group) (n=25), patients received 14 mL of bupivacaine 0.20% plus 1 mL containing 4 mg of dexamethasone on each side, while, in group 2 (control group) (n=25), patients received 14 mL of bupivacaine 0.20% plus 1 mL of saline on each side. Time to first analgesic need was the primary outcome, while total opioid consumption during the first 24 hours after surgery, the Visual Analog Scale for pain perception (0-10), and the incidence of side effects were secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

The mean time to the first analgesic requirement was significantly prolonged among patients in the dexamethasone group than the control group (mean±SD: 18.4±0.8 vs. 8.7±1.2 h, respectively) ( P <0.001). Patients in the dexamethasone group had lower total opiates consumption than the control) P <0.001). Although nonsignificant, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting was more frequent among the control group ( P =0.145).

DISCUSSION

Adding dexamethasone to bupivacaine in TiPVB resulted in a prolonged analgesia-free period and lower opioid consumption in lumbar spine surgeries with comparable incidence of adverse events.

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.

Pregabalin as an effective treatment for acute postoperative pain following spinal surgery without major side effects: protocol for a prospective, randomized controlled, double-blinded trial

BACKGROUND

Patients experience considerable postoperative pain after spinal surgery. As the spine is located at the centre of the body and supports body weight, severe postoperative pain hinders upper body elevation and gait which can lead to various complications, including pulmonary deterioration and pressure sores. It is important to effectively control postoperative pain to prevent such complications. Gabapentinoids are widely used as preemptive multimodal analgesia, but their effects and side effects are dose-dependent. This study was designed to examine the efficacy and side effects of varying doses of postoperative pregabalin for the treatment of postoperative pain after spinal surgery.

METHODS

This is a prospective, randomized controlled, double-blind study. A total of 132 participants will be randomly assigned to the placebo (n = 33) group or to the pregabalin 25 mg (n = 33), 50 mg (n = 33), or 75 mg (n = 33) groups. Each participant will be administered placebo or pregabalin once prior to surgery and every 12 h after surgery for 72 h. The primary outcome will be the visual analogue scale pain score, total dose of administered intravenous patient-controlled analgesia, and frequency of rescue analgesic administered for 72 h from arrival to the general ward after surgery, subdivided into four periods: 1-6 h, 6-24 h, 24-48 h, and 48-72 h. The secondary outcomes will be the incidence and frequency of nausea and vomiting due to intravenous patient-controlled analgesia. Safety will be assessed by monitoring the occurrence of side effects such as sedation, dizziness, headache, visual disturbance, and swelling.

DISCUSSION

Pregabalin is already widely used as preemptive analgesia and, unlike nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, is not associated with a risk of nonunion after spinal surgery. A recent meta-analysis demonstrated the analgesic efficacy and opioid-sparing effect of gabapentinoids with significantly decreased risks of nausea, vomiting, and pruritus. This study will provide evidence for the optimal dosage of pregabalin for the treatment of postoperative pain after spinal surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05478382. Registered on 26 July 2022.

Opioid versus non-opioid analgesia for spine surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

Opioids are the primary analgesics used in patients undergoing spine surgery. Postoperative pain is common despite their liberal use and so are opioid-associated side effects. Non-opioid analgesics are gaining popularity as alternative to opioids in spine surgery.

METHODS

This systematic review evaluated current evidence regarding opioid and non-opioid intraoperative analgesia and their influence on immediate postoperative pain and adverse events in spine surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 10,459 records were obtained by searching Medline, EMBASE and Web of Science databases and six randomized controlled trials were included. Differences in postoperative pain scores between opioid and non-opioid groups were not significant at 1 h: 4 studies, mean difference (MD) = 0.65 units, 95% confidence intervals (CI) [-0.12 to 1.41], p = 0.10, but favored non-opioid at 24 h after surgery: 3 studies, MD = 0.75 units, 95%CI [0.03 to 1.46], p = 0.04. The time for first postoperative analgesic requirement was shorter (MD = -45.06 min, 95%CI [-72.50 to -17.62], p = 0.001), and morphine consumption during first 24 h after surgery was higher in opioid compared to non-opioid group (MD = 4.54 mg, 95%CI [3.26 to 5.82], p < 0.00001). Adverse effects of postoperative nausea and vomiting (Relative risk (RR) = 2.15, 95%CI [1.37 to 3.38], p = 0.0009) and shivering (RR = 2.52, 95%CI [1.08 to 5.89], p = 0.03) were higher and bradycardia was lower (RR = 0.35, 95%CI [0.17 to 0.71], p = 0.004) with opioid analgesia.

CONCLUSION

The certainty of evidence on GRADE assessment is low for studied outcomes. Available evidence supports intraoperative non-opioid analgesia for overall postoperative pain outcomes in spine surgery. More research is needed to find the best drug combination and dosing regimen. Prospero Registration: CRD42020209042.

Liposomal bupivacaine does not decrease postoperative opioid use or length of hospital stay in patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion

BACKGROUND

Despite its widespread use, definitive data demonstrating the efficacy of liposomal bupivacaine (LB) is limited especially in patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Therefore, this investigation examined whether ACDF patients who received intra-operative LB (LB cohort) exhibited decreased post-operative opioid use and lengths of hospital stay (LOS) compared to ACDF patients who did not receive intra-operative LB (controls).

METHODS

Eighty-two patients who underwent primary ACDF by a single surgeon from 2016 to 2019 were identified from an institutional database. Fifty-nine patients received intra-operative LB while twenty-three did not. Patient characteristics, medical comorbidities, complications, post-operative opioid consumption, and LOS data were collected.

RESULTS

The LB cohort did not require fewer opioids on post-operative day (POD) 0, POD1, POD2, or throughout the hospital course after normalizing by LOS (total per LOS). The number of cervical vertebrae involved in surgery, but not LB use, predicted opioid consumption on POD0, POD1, and total per LOS. For every vertebral level involved, 242 additional morphine milligram equivalents (MME) were consumed on POD0, 266 additional MME were utilized on POD1, and 130 additional MME were consumed in total per LOS.

CONCLUSIONS

ACDF patients who received intra-operative LB did not require fewer post-operative opioids or exhibit a decreased LOS compared to controls. Patients whose procedures involved a greater number of cervical vertebrae were associated with greater opioid consumption on POD0, POD1, and total per LOS. ACDF patients, especially those who had a high number of vertebrae involved, may require alternative analgesia to LB.

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

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

The preemptive effects of oral pregabalin on perioperative pain management in lower limb orthopedic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To systematically review the literature and provide a comprehensive understanding of the preemptive effects of oral pregabalin on perioperative pain management in lower limb orthopedic surgery.

METHOD

We searched three electronic databases for randomized controlled trials comparing the results of preoperative pregabalin and placebo in patients undergoing lower limb orthopedic surgery. Data analyses were conducted using RevMan 5.4.

RESULTS

Twenty-one randomized controlled trials met our inclusion criteria. The cumulative opioid consumption within 24 and 48 h postoperatively in the pregabalin group was significantly less than that in the placebo group. The pooled static pain intensity at all time points within the first day was significantly lower in the pregabalin group than in the placebo group. Lower dynamic pain intensity at 48 h was detected in the pregabalin group than in the placebo group. Meanwhile, pregabalin led to a lower incidence of nausea but appeared to be associated with a higher incidence of dizziness and sedation. Subgroup analyses showed that no difference was detected between subgroups stratified by dosing regimen or pregabalin dose in the results of opioid consumption, pain intensity and incidence of complications.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis supports the use of pregabalin preoperatively in patients undergoing lower limb orthopedic surgery. However, it was wary of the resulting increase in dizziness and sedation. There is no evidence to support the continued use of pregabalin postoperatively or using more than 150 mg of pregabalin per day.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered on 09 November 2021 with INPLASY (registration number: INPLASY2021110031).

Comparative Multimodal Palliative efficacy of gabapentin and tramadol By Using Two Pain Scoring Systems in Cats Undergoing Ovariohysterectomy

The analgesic efficacy of the gabapentin-tramadol combination was compared with meloxicam-tramadol and tramadol perioperative analgesic regimens in cats brought to the clinic for ovariohysterectomy. Thirty adult cats belonging to comparable demographics (age, body weight), were enrolled into a randomized, blinded study after due consent from their owners into four treatment groups. A Gabapentin-Tramadol group (GT-group, n = 10), Meloxicam-Tramadol group (MT-group, n = 10), and a Tramadol group (T-group, n = 10) were formed. Gabapentin capsules at 50 mg were administered orally 2 hours before surgery while the rest received a placebo dose. Tramadol (2 mg/kg, IM) and meloxicam at (0.2 mg/kg, SC) were injected immediately prior to anesthetic premedication. Anesthetic protocol involved premedication with ketamine and xylazine, while anesthesia was induced using propofol. Inhalant isoflurane anesthesia was used to maintain a surgical plane. GT group scored lower on IVAS as well as CPS than MT group, and T group for up to 8 hours after surgery. The mechanical nociceptive threshold remained higher (98±0) for up to 12 hours postoperatively a nd serum cortisol concentrations remained significantly lower during the 24hr period. The addition of gabapentin to the tramadol regimen significantly improved analgesia and mechanical nociceptive threshold than when used on its own.

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.

Pregabalin and Persistent Postoperative Pain Following Posterior Spinal Fusion in Children and Adolescents: A Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Surgical correction of spinal deformity requires major surgical intervention with extensive manipulation of the spine and neural elements. Persistent postoperative pain affects patient quality of life and can also cause financial burden for patient families and for society. We aimed to investigate the effect of perioperative pregabalin on the incidence of persistent pain following instrumented spinal fusion.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized, double-blinded, and placebo-controlled single-center clinical trial. Adolescents and children 10 to 21 years old with a spinal deformity who were scheduled for pedicle screw instrumentation and fusion were randomized into either the pregabalin or placebo group. Patients received 2 mg/kg of pregabalin or a placebo twice daily preoperatively and for 5 days postoperatively. The duration of follow-up was 2 years. The primary outcomes were cumulative opioid consumption during the first 48 hours postoperatively and the incidence of persistent postoperative pain over the course of the 2-year follow-up.

RESULTS

Sixty-four of 77 eligible patients were enrolled in the study, with all patients completing the 2-year follow-up. Thirty-three patients were randomized into the pregabalin group and 31 into the placebo group. There was no significant difference in cumulative 48-hour opioid consumption between the study groups. The Scoliosis Research Society 24-Item Questionnaire pain domain score improved significantly, from a mean value of 3.8 in both groups to 4.3 in the pregabalin and 4.0 in the placebo group at 2 years postoperatively, with no differences between the study groups at any time point (p = 0.317). The Scoliosis Research Society total scores of the study groups were similar (p = 0.678). Back pain, as measured with use of a visual analogue scale, improved significantly (p = 0.001) with no significant differences at any time point (preoperatively and 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively).

CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative pregabalin does not reduce postoperative opioid consumption or the incidence of persistent postoperative pain following instrumented posterior spinal fusion for spinal deformities in an adolescent population.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

Design and Implementation of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol in Elective Lumbar Spine Fusion by Posterior Approach: A Retrospective, Comparative Study

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective, comparative.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to design an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol for elective lumbar spine fusion by posterior approach, and to compare the results after ERAS implementation in patients undergoing elective lumbar spine fusion with conventional perioperative care.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Despite wide adoption in other surgical disciplines, ERAS has only been recently implemented in spine surgery. The integrated multidisciplinary approach of ERAS aims to reduce surgical stress to achieve better outcomes.

METHODS

Hospital records of adult patients who underwent one- to three-level elective lumbar spine fusion by posterior approach at a single center were retrospectively studied. An ERAS protocol was designed based on the prevalent hospital practices, local resources and supportive evidence from literature. The ERAS protocol was implemented at our institute in December 2016-dividing patients into pre-ERAS and post-ERAS groups. The outcome measures for comparison were: length of hospital stay (LOS), postoperative complications, 60-day readmission rate, 60-day reoperation rate, and patient-reported outcome measures (visual analogue scale [VAS] and Oswestry Disability Index [ODI] score) at stipulated time intervals.

RESULTS

A total of 812 patients were included - 496 in the pre-ERAS group and 316 in the post-ERAS group. There was no significant difference between the two groups in baseline demographic, clinical, and surgery-related variables. Patients in the post-ERAS group had a significantly shorter LOS (2.94 vs. 3.68 days). The rate of postoperative complications (13.5% vs. 11.7%), 60-day readmission (1.8% vs. 2.2%), and 60-day reoperation (1.2% vs. 1.3%) did not differ significantly between the pre-ERAS and post-ERAS groups. The VAS and ODI scores, similar at baseline, were significantly lower in the post-ERAS group (VAS: 49.8 ± 12.0 vs. 44 ± 10.8, ODI: 31.6 ± 14.2 vs. 28 ± 12.8) at 4 weeks after surgery. This difference however was not significant at intermediate-term follow-up (6 months and 12 months).

CONCLUSION

Implementation of an ERAS protocol is feasible for elective lumbar spine fusion, and leads to shorter LOS and improved early pain and functional outcome scores.Level of Evidence: 3.

Dexmedetomidine as an Analgesic Agent with Neuroprotective Properties: Experimental and Clinical Aspects

Dexmedetomidine (Dexdor or Precedex®) is considered as a sedative agent which is widely used as an adjuvant in general anesthesia and critical care practice. There is extensive evidence indicating its neuroprotective properties especially in various ischemic and hemorrhagic brain injury models of animals. Clinical trials have shown that dexmedetomidine (DEX) can improve the outcome of intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Also, DEX is appropriate as a non-opioid analgesic therapy whenever minimizing opioid-related side effects is necessary. The present article reviews the recent advances in the use of DEX as a neuroprotective agent in both animal and human studies including newest findings about the mechanism of the drug as well as analgesic efficacy of this drug at all perioperative stages. In spite of the beneficial effects of the drug on the nervous system, there are potential adverse effects, such as hypotension and bradycardia, which can be treated pharmacologically and must be taken into consideration by clinicians.

Cold pain hypersensitivity predicts trajectories of pain and disability after low back surgery: a prospective cohort study

Improving the ability to predict persistent pain after spine surgery would allow identification of patients at risk and guide treatment decisions. Quantitative sensory tests (QST) are measures of altered pain processes, but in our previous study, preoperative QST did not predict pain and disability at single time-points. Trajectory analysis accounts for time-dependent patterns. We hypothesized that QST predict trajectories of pain and disability during 1 year after low back surgery. We performed a trajectory analysis on the cohort of our previous study (n = 141). Baseline QST included electrical, pressure, heat, and cold stimulation of the low back and lower extremity, temporal summation, and conditioned pain modulation. Pain intensity and Oswestry Disability Index were measured before, and 2, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Bivariate trajectories for pain and disability were computed using group-based trajectory models. Multivariable regressions were used to identify QST as predictors of trajectory groups, with sociodemographic, psychological, and clinical characteristics as covariates. Cold pain hypersensitivity at the leg, not being married, and long pain duration independently predicted worse recovery (complete-to-incomplete, incomplete-to-no recovery). Cold pain hypersensitivity increased the odds for worse recovery by 3.8 (95% confidence intervals 1.8-8.0, P < 0.001) and 3.0 (1.3-7.0, P = 0.012) in the univariable and multivariable analyses, respectively. Trajectory analysis, but not analysis at single time-points, identified cold pain hypersensitivity as strong predictor of worse recovery, supporting altered pain processes as predisposing factor for persisting pain and disability, and a broader use of trajectory analysis. Assessment of cold pain sensitivity may be a clinically applicable, prognostic test.

Pathway for enhanced recovery after spinal surgery-a systematic review of evidence for use of individual components

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery in spinal surgery (ERSS) has shown promising improvements in clinical and economical outcomes. We have proposed an ERSS pathway based on available evidence. We aimed to delineate the clinical efficacy of individual pathway components in ERSS through a systematic narrative review.

METHODS

We included systematic reviews and meta-analysis, randomized controlled trials, non-randomized controlled studies, and observational studies in adults and pediatric patients evaluating any one of the 22 pre-defined components. Our primary outcomes included all-cause mortality, morbidity outcomes (e.g., pulmonary, cardiac, renal, surgical complications), patient-reported outcomes and experiences (e.g., pain, quality of care experience), and health services outcomes (e.g., length of stay and costs). Following databases (1990 onwards) were searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and CENTRAL). Two authors screened the citations, full-text articles, and extracted data. A narrative synthesis was provided. We constructed Evidence Profile (EP) tables for each component of the pathway, where appropriate information was available. Due to clinical and methodological heterogeneity, we did not conduct a meta-analyses. GRADE system was used to classify confidence in cumulative evidence for each component of the pathway.

RESULTS

We identified 5423 relevant studies excluding duplicates as relating to the 22 pre-defined components of enhanced recovery in spinal surgery. We included 664 studies in the systematic review. We identified specific evidence within the context of spinal surgery for 14/22 proposed components. Evidence was summarized in EP tables where suitable. We performed thematic synthesis without EP for 6/22 elements. We identified appropriate societal guidelines for the remainder of the components.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified the following components with high quality of evidence as per GRADE system: pre-emptive analgesia, peri-operative blood conservation (antifibrinolytic use), surgical site preparation and antibiotic prophylaxis. There was moderate level of evidence for implementation of prehabilitation, minimally invasive surgery, multimodal perioperative analgesia, intravenous lignocaine and ketamine use as well as early mobilization. This review allows for the first formalized evidence-based unified protocol in the field of ERSS. Further studies validating the multimodal ERSS framework are essential to guide the future evolution of care in patients undergoing spinal surgery.

Addition of Celebrex and Pregabalin to Ropivacaine for Posterior Spinal Surgery: A Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Trial

Background

Serious pain commonly occurs after posterior spinal surgery. This study aims to evaluate the effect of preemptive and multimodal analgesia using celebrex, pregabalin and ropivacaine on pain control after this surgery.

Methods

Ninety-three patients undergoing posterior spinal surgery were enrolled in this prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. All patients were treated with patient- controlled analgesia (PCA, intravenous tramadol hydrochloride and flurbiprofen) as required. They were randomized to combination analgesia intervention (oral celebrex, pregabalin and subcutaneous infiltration of ropivacaine), ropivacaine intervention (only subcutaneous infiltration of ropivacaine), and control intervention (placebo). We compared postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) scores and PCA dose among the three groups.

Results

The VAS scores were significantly lower in the combination analgesia group than in the control group at 0 h, 2 h, 12 h, 24 h, 3 d, 5 d, 7 d and 14 d after posterior spinal surgery, while combination analgesia was also superior to ropivacaine in terms of VAS scores at 24 h and 14 d postoperatively. The combination analgesia group was also associated with significantly reduced PCA consumption compared with the control group, but there was no statistical difference in PCA consumption between the ropivacaine group and control group.

Conclusion

Combination analgesia using celebrex, pregabalin and ropivacaine is effective and safe to alleviate pain after posterior spinal surgery.

Clinical Trial Registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry No. ChiCTR2000031236.

Effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and safety of gabapentin versus placebo as an adjunct to multimodal pain regimens in surgical patients: protocol of a placebo controlled randomised controlled trial with blinding (GAP study)

INTRODUCTION

Gabapentin is an antiepileptic drug currently licensed to treat epilepsy and neuropathic pain but has been used off-label to treat acute postoperative pain. The GAP study will compare the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and safety of gabapentin as an adjunct to standard multimodal analgesia versus placebo for the management of pain after major surgery.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The GAP study is a multicentre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial in patients aged 18 years and over, undergoing different types of major surgery (cardiac, thoracic or abdominal). Patients will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive either gabapentin (600 mg just before surgery and 600 mg/day for 2 days after surgery) or placebo in addition to usual pain management for each type of surgery. Patients will be followed up daily until hospital discharge and then at 4 weeks and 4 months after surgery. The primary outcome is length of hospital stay following surgery. Secondary outcomes include pain, total opioid use, adverse health events, health related quality of life and costs.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has been approved by the Research Ethics Committee . Findings will be shared with participating hospitals and disseminated to the academic community through peer-reviewed publications and presentation at national and international meetings. Patients will be informed of the results through patient organisations and participant newsletters.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN63614165.

Effectiveness of Duloxetine for Postsurgical Chronic Neuropathic Disorders after Spine and Spinal Cord Surgery

Study Design

This is a retrospective observational study with an outpatient setting.

Purpose

This study aimed to describe the effects of duloxetine (DLX) administration for postsurgical chronic neuropathic disorders (both pain and numbness) following spinal surgery in patients without depression.

Overview of Literature

Although several reports indicated the potential of DLX to effectively treat postoperative symptoms as a perioperative intervention, there have been no reports of its positive effect on postsurgical chronic neuropathic disorders.

Methods

A total of 24 patients with postsurgical chronic pain and/or numbness Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) scores of ≥4 were enrolled. All patients underwent spine or spinal cord surgery at Keio University Hospital and received daily administration of DLX for more than 3 months. The mean postoperative period before the first administration of DLX was 35.5±57.0 months. DLX was administered for more than 3 months at a dose of 20, 40, or 60 mg/day, and the degree of pain and numbness was evaluated using the NRS before administration and 3 months after administration. Effectiveness was defined as more than a 2-point decrease in the NRS score following administration.

Results

In terms of the type of symptoms, 15 patients experienced only numbness, eight experienced both pain and numbness, and one experienced only pain. Of the 24 patients, 19 achieved effective relief with DLX. DLX was effective for all patients with postsurgical chronic pain (n=9), and it reduced postsurgical chronic numbness in 18 of 23 patients. No significant difference was observed in background spinal disorders. DLX was not effective for five patients who complained only of postsurgical chronic numbness.

Conclusions

This study reports the effectiveness of DLX for postsurgical chronic neuropathic disorders. Although DLX reduced postsurgical chronic pain (efficacy rate=100%) and numbness (78.3%) in certain patients, further investigation is needed to determine its optimal use.

Preoperative pain neuroscience education for shoulder surgery: A case series

Background

Central sensitisation, in addition to high levels of fear-avoidance and pain catastrophisation may exist in a subgroup of patients with shoulder pain. Pain neuroscience education (PNE) has been shown to positively influence sensitivity of the nervous system, as well as reduce fear and catastrophisation prior to lumbar and total knee surgery. To date, no study has examined the application of PNE prior to shoulder surgery.

Objectives

This study examined the response to preoperative PNE in patients preparing for shoulder surgery.

Method

An exploratory pre–post case series was conducted. Twelve patients scheduled for surgery completed various pre-education measurements including shoulder pain, fear-avoidance, pain catastrophisation, beliefs and expectations regarding surgery, active shoulder flexion and pressure pain thresholds for the involved and uninvolved shoulder and the dominant-sided knee. Patients underwent a standard 30-min, one-on-one PNE session with a physiotherapist prior to surgery.

Results

Following education, all measures improved with some failing to reach significance: self-reported pain (p = 0.125), pain catastrophisation (p = 0.250) and pain pressure threshold of the uninvolved shoulder (p = 0.68) and knee (p = 0.097). Fear-avoidance (p = 0.013), active shoulder flexion (p = 0.013) and pain pressure threshold for the involved shoulder (p = 0.004) significantly improved.

Conclusion

A small patient group improved beyond minimal detectable change and/or minimal clinical important difference after education. No significant shifts of the preoperative beliefs occurred after education.

Clinical implications

Preoperative PNE may be beneficial to a subgroup of patients scheduled for shoulder surgery.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Trends in Adult Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is a multimodal, multidisciplinary approach to optimizing the postsurgical recovery process through preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative interventions. ERAS protocols are emerging quickly within orthopedic spine surgery, yet there is a lack of consensus on optimal ERAS practices.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review is to identify and discuss the trends in spine ERAS protocols and the associated outcomes.

METHODS

A literature search on PubMed was conducted to identify clinical studies that implemented ERAS protocols for various spine procedures in the adult population. The search included English-language literature published through December 2019. Additional sources were retrieved from the reference lists of key studies. Studies that met inclusion criteria were identified manually. Data regarding the study population, study design, spine procedures, ERAS interventions, and associated outcome metrics were extracted from each study that met inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Of the 106 studies identified from the literature search, 22 studies met inclusion criteria. From the ERAS protocols in these studies, common preoperative elements include patient education and modified preoperative nutrition regimens. Perioperative elements include multimodal analgesia and minimally invasive surgery. Postoperative elements include multimodal pain management and early mobilization/rehabilitation/nutrition regimens. Outcomes from ERAS implementation include significant reductions in length of stay, cost, and opioid consumption. Although these trends were observed, there remained great variability among the ERAS protocols, as well as in the reported outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS may improve cost-effectiveness to varying degrees for spinal procedures. Specifically, the use of multimodal analgesia may reduce overall opioid consumption. However, the benefits of ERAS likely will vary based on the specific procedure.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This review contributes to the assessment of ERAS protocol implementation in the field of adult spine surgery.

Enhanced Recovery after Lumbar Spine Fusion

Background

Prospective trials of enhanced recovery after spine surgery are lacking. We tested the hypothesis that an enhanced recovery pathway improves quality of recovery after one- to two-level lumbar fusion.

Methods

A patient- and assessor-blinded trial of 56 patients randomized to enhanced recovery (17 evidence-based pre-, intra-, and postoperative care elements) or usual care was performed. The primary outcome was Quality of Recovery-40 score (40 to 200 points) at postoperative day 3. Twelve points defined the clinically important difference. Secondary outcomes included Quality of Recovery-40 at days 0 to 2, 14, and 56; time to oral intake and discharge from physical therapy; length of stay; numeric pain scores (0 to 10); opioid consumption (morphine equivalents); duration of intravenous patient-controlled analgesia use; complications; and markers of surgical stress (interleukin 6, cortisol, and C-reactive protein).

Results

The analysis included 25 enhanced recovery patients and 26 usual care patients. Significantly higher Quality of Recovery-40 scores were found in the enhanced recovery group at postoperative day 3 (179 ± 14 vs. 170 ± 16; P = 0.041) without reaching the clinically important difference. There were no significant differences in recovery scores at days 0 (175 ± 16 vs. 162 ± 22; P = 0.059), 1 (174 ± 18 vs. 164 ± 15; P = 0.050), 2 (174 ± 18 vs. 167 ± 17; P = 0.289), 14 (184 ± 13 vs. 180 ± 12; P = 0.500), and 56 (187 ± 14 vs. 190 ± 8; P = 0.801). In the enhanced recovery group, subscores on the Quality of Recovery-40 comfort dimension were higher (longitudinal mean score difference, 4; 95% CI, 1, 7; P = 0.008); time to oral intake (−3 h; 95% CI, −6, −0.5; P = 0.010); and duration of intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (−11 h; 95% CI, −19, −6; P &lt; 0.001) were shorter; opioid consumption was lower at day 1 (−57 mg; 95% CI, −130, −5; P = 0.030) without adversely affecting pain scores (−2; 95% CI, −3, 0; P = 0.005); and C-reactive protein was lower at day 3 (6.1; 95% CI, 3.8, 15.7 vs. 15.9; 95% CI, 6.6, 19.7; P = 0.037).

Conclusions

Statistically significant gains in early recovery were achieved by an enhanced recovery pathway. However, significant clinical impact was not demonstrated.

Editor’s Perspective

What We Already Know about This Topic

What This Article Tells Us That Is New

Multimodal Analgesic Regimen for Spine Surgery

Background

Various multimodal analgesic approaches have been proposed for spine surgery. The authors evaluated the effect of using a combination of four nonopioid analgesics versus placebo on Quality of Recovery, postoperative opioid consumption, and pain scores.

Methods

Adults having multilevel spine surgery who were at high risk for postoperative pain were double-blind randomized to placebos or the combination of single preoperative oral doses of acetaminophen 1,000 mg and gabapentin 600 mg, an infusion of ketamine 5 µg/kg/min throughout surgery, and an infusion of lidocaine 1.5 mg/kg/h intraoperatively and during the initial hour of recovery. Postoperative analgesia included acetaminophen, gabapentin, and opioids. The primary outcome was the Quality of Recovery 15-questionnaire (0 to 150 points, with 15% considered to be a clinically important difference) assessed on the third postoperative day. Secondary outcomes were opioid use in morphine equivalents (with 20% considered to be a clinically important change) and verbal-response pain scores (0 to 10, with a 1-point change considered important) over the initial postoperative 48 h.

Results

The trial was stopped early for futility per a priori guidelines. The average duration ± SD of surgery was 5.4 ± 2.1 h. The mean ± SD Quality of Recovery score was 109 ± 25 in the pathway patients (n = 150) versus 109 ± 23 in the placebo group (n = 149); estimated difference in means was 0 (95% CI, –6 to 6, P = 0.920). Pain management within the initial 48 postoperative hours was not superior in analgesic pathway group: 48-h opioid consumption median (Q1, Q3) was 72 (48, 113) mg in the analgesic pathway group and 75 (50, 152) mg in the placebo group, with the difference in medians being –9 (97.5% CI, –23 to 5, P = 0.175) mg. Mean 48-h pain scores were 4.8 ± 1.8 in the analgesic pathway group versus 5.2 ± 1.9 in the placebo group, with the difference in means being –0.4 (97.5% CI; –0.8, 0.1, P = 0.094).

Conclusions

An analgesic pathway based on preoperative acetaminophen and gabapentin, combined with intraoperative infusions of lidocaine and ketamine, did not improve recovery in patients who had multilevel spine surgery.

Editor’s Perspective

What We Already Know about This Topic

What This Article Tells Us That Is New

Preemptive Pregabalin in Children and Adolescents Undergoing Posterior Instrumented Spinal Fusion: A Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled, Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Pregabalin as part of a multimodal pain-management regimen has been shown to reduce opioid consumption after spinal surgery in adults but it is unclear whether this is also true in adolescents. Pregabalin has been found to have neuroprotective effects and therefore could have a positive impact on pain after spinal deformity surgery. We conducted a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial of adolescent patients undergoing spinal fusion to evaluate the short-term effects of pregabalin on postoperative pain and opioid consumption.

METHODS

Adolescents with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, Scheuermann kyphosis, or spondylolisthesis who were scheduled for posterior spinal fusion with all-pedicle-screw instrumentation were randomized to receive either pregabalin (2 mg/kg twice daily) or placebo preoperatively and for 5 days after surgery. The patients ranged from 10 to 21 years of age. The primary outcome was total opioid consumption as measured with use of patient-controlled analgesia. Postoperative pain scores and opioid-related adverse effects were evaluated.

RESULTS

Sixty-three of 77 eligible patients were included and analyzed. Cumulative oxycodone consumption per kilogram did not differ between the study groups during the first 48 hours postoperatively, with a median of 1.44 mg/kg (95% confidence interval [CI],1.32 to 1.67 mg/kg) in the pregabalin group and 1.50 mg/kg (95% CI, 1.39 to 1.79 mg/kg) in the placebo group (p = 0.433). A subgroup analysis of 51 patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis showed the same result, with a mean of 1.45 mg/kg (95% CI, 1.24 to 1.65 mg/kg) in the pregabalin group and 1.59 mg/kg (95% CI, 1.37 to 1.82 mg/kg) in the placebo group (p = 0.289). Total oxycodone consumption per hour (mg/kg/hr) was not different between the groups over the time points (p = 0.752). The postoperative pain scores did not differ significantly between the groups (p = 0.196).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of perioperative pregabalin does not reduce the postoperative opioid consumption or pain scores in adolescents after posterior spinal fusion surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

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.

Design and Implementation of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Program for Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression Spine Surgery: Initial Experience

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study of prospectively collected data.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to describe the development of and early experience with an evidence-based enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway for lumbar decompression.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

ERAS protocols have been consistently associated with improved patient experience and outcomes, and reduced cost and length of hospital stay (LoS). Despite successes in other orthopedic subspecialties, ERAS has yet to be established in spine surgery. Here, we report the development of and initial experience with the first comprehensive ERAS pathway for MIS lumbar spine surgery.

METHODS

An evidence-based review of the literature was performed to select components of the ERAS pathway. The pathway was applied to 61 consecutive patients presenting for microdiscectomy or lumbar laminotomy/laminectomy between dates. Data collection was performed by review of the electronic medical record. We evaluated compliance with individual ERAS process measures, and adherence to the overall pathway. The primary outcome was LoS. Demographics, comorbidities, perioperative course, prevalence of opioid tolerance, and factors affecting LoS were also documented.

RESULTS

The protocol included 15 standard ERAS elements. Overall pathway compliance was 85.03%. Median LoS was 279 minutes [interquartile range (IQR) 195-398 minutes] overall, 298 minutes (IQR 192-811) for lumbar decompression and 285 minutes (IQR 200-372) for microdiscectomy. There was no correlation between surgical subtype or duration and LoS. Overall, 37% of the cohort was opioid-tolerant at the time of surgery. There was no significant effect of baseline opioid use on LoS, or on the total amount of intraoperative or PACU opioid administration. There were four complications (6.5%) resulting in extended LoS (>23 hours).

CONCLUSION

This report comprises the first description of a comprehensive, evidence-based ERAS for spine pathway, tailored for lumbar decompression/microdiscectomy resulting in short LoS, minimal complications, and no readmissions within 90 days of surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Association Between Preoperative Narcotic Use with Perioperative Complication Rates, Patient Reported Pain Scores, and Ambulatory Status After Complex Spinal Fusion (≥5 Levels) for Adult Deformity Correction

OBJECTIVE

The widespread over-use of narcotics has been increasing. However, whether narcotic use impacts surgical outcomes after complex spinal fusion remains understudied. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether there is an association between preoperative narcotic use with perioperative complication rates, patient-reported pain scores, and ambulatory status after complex spinal fusions.

METHODS

The medical records of 134 adult (age ≥18 years) patients with spinal deformity undergoing elective, primary complex spinal fusion (≥5 levels) for deformity correction in a major academic institution from 2005-2015 were reviewed. Patient demographics, comorbidities, intraoperative and postoperative complication rates, pain scores, and ambulatory status were collected for each patient.

RESULTS

Patient demographics and comorbidities were similar between both cohorts, except that the Narcotic-User cohort had a greater mean age (57.5 years vs. 50.7 years; P = 0.045) and prevalence of depression (39.4% vs. 16.2%; P = 0.003). Complication rates were similar between both cohorts. The Narcotic-User cohort had significantly higher pain scores at baseline (6.7 ± 2.4 vs. 4.0 ± 3.4; P < 0.001) and at the first postoperative pain score reported (6.7 ± 2.8 vs. 5.3 ± 2.9; P = 0.013), but had a significantly greater improvement from baseline to last pain score (Narcotic-User: -2.5 ± 3.9 vs. Non-User: -0.5 ± 4.7; P = 0.031). The Narcotic-User cohort had significantly greater ambulation on the first postoperative ambulatory day compared with the Non-User cohort (103.8 ± 144.4 vs. 56.4 ± 84.0; P = 0.031).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that the preoperative use of narcotics may impact patient perception of pain and improvement after complex spinal fusions (≥5 levels). Consideration of patients' narcotic status preoperatively may facilitate tailored pain management and physical therapy regimens.

Implementation of an Enhanced Recovery After Spine Surgery program at a large cancer center: a preliminary analysis

This study describes the implementation of a multimodal, multidisciplinary, evidence-based ERAS program in oncologic spine surgery, identifies and measures several relevant postoperative recovery outcomes, and demonstrates the feasibility and potential benefit of the program in improving analgesia and decreasing opioid consumption. The study underscores the importance of defining and capturing meaningful, patient-specific, and patient-reported outcomes, and constant evaluation and monitoring of a group's compliance with the program. The study represents the steppingstone for evaluation and improvement of a young ERAS program for spine surgery and serves as a roadmap for further initiatives and larger-scale studies.

Analgesic effects of gabapentin and buprenorphine in cats undergoing ovariohysterectomy using two pain-scoring systems: a randomized clinical trial

Objectives The aim of the study was to evaluate the analgesic efficacy of gabapentin-buprenorphine in comparison with meloxicam-buprenorphine or buprenorphine alone, and the correlation between two pain-scoring systems in cats. Methods Fifty-two adult cats were included in a randomized, controlled, blinded study. Anesthetic protocol included acepromazine-buprenorphine-propofol-isoflurane. The gabapentin-buprenorphine group (GBG, n = 19) received gabapentin capsules (50 mg PO) and buprenorphine (0.02 mg/kg IM). The meloxicam-buprenorphine group (MBG, n = 15) received meloxicam (0.2 mg/kg SC), buprenorphine and placebo capsules (PO). The buprenorphine group (BG, n = 18) received buprenorphine and placebo capsules (PO). Gabapentin (GBG) and placebo (MBG and BG) capsules were administered 12 h and 1 h before surgery. Postoperative pain was evaluated up to 8 h after ovariohysterectomy using a multidimensional composite pain scale (MCPS) and the Glasgow pain scale (rCMPS-F). A dynamic interactive visual analog scale (DIVAS) was used to evaluate sedation. Rescue analgesia included buprenorphine and/or meloxicam if the MCPS ⩾6. A repeated measures linear model was used for statistical analysis ( P <0.05). Spearman's rank correlation between the MCPS and rCMPS-F was evaluated. Results The prevalence of rescue analgesia with a MCPS was not different ( P = 0.08; GBG, n = 5 [26%]; MBG, n = 2 [13%]; BG, n = 9 [50%]), but it would have been significantly higher in the BG (n = 14 [78%]) than GBG ( P = 0.003; n = 5 [26%]) and MBG ( P = 0.005; n = 4 [27%]) if intervention was based on the rCMPS-F. DIVAS and MCPS/rCMPS-F scores were not different among treatments. A strong correlation was observed between scoring systems ( P <0.0001). Conclusions and relevance Analgesia was not significantly different among treatments using an MCPS. Despite a strong correlation between scoring systems, GBG/MBG would have been superior to the BG with the rCMPS-F demonstrating a potential type II error with an MCPS due to small sample size.

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.

Dexmedetomidine infusion as an analgesic adjuvant during laparoscopic сholecystectomy: a randomized controlled study

Background

Dexmedetomidine (DEX) has sedative, sympatholytic and analgesic effects and might be beneficial if used as an adjuvant to: improve analgesia; modulate haemodynamic responses to intubation and pneumoperitoneum and; reduce the number of opioid-associated adverse events. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DEX infusion during elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

Methods

A randomized, single-centre, parallel-group, placebo-controlled study was carried out between May 2016 and June 2017. Adult patients (18–79 years) with American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) physical status I–II were randomly assigned to 0.5 μg/kg/h DEX infusion from induction of anaesthesia to extubation (Group D; n = 30) or normal saline infusion (Group C; n = 30). The primary efficacy outcomes were postoperative morphine consumption. Secondary efficacy outcomes included: time to first use of rescue analgesia; postoperative morphine consumption; intraoperative fentanyl consumption; time from end of surgery to extubation; lengths of intensive care unit (ICU) and general ward stay; degree of postoperative pain 3, 6, 12 and 24 h after surgery; incidence of persistent post-surgical pain.

Results

DEX infusion was associated with a decrease in postoperative morphine consumption (p = 0.001), lower incidence of severe postoperative pain (odds ratio [OR] 9, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1–77, p = 0.04) and significantly longer time to first use of rescue analgesia (p = 0.001). Group D also had significantly lower fentanyl consumption both intraoperatively (p = 0.001) and in the time from end of surgery to extubation (p = 0.001) plus decreased incidence of persistent post-surgical pain (OR 14.5, 95% CI 1.7–122, p = 0.005). The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting was lower in Group D than Group C (OR 5, 95% CI 1.1–26, p = 0.005). Median pain intensity did not differ between the groups 3, 6, 12 or 24 h after surgery and there were no inter-group differences in the lengths of ICU stay or overall hospital stay between groups. The incidence of hypertension was significantly higher in Group C (OR 13.8, 95% CI 4–48, p < 0.0001); there were no inter-group differences in incidences of hypotension and bradycardia.

Conclusions

Intraoperative DEX infusion is safe and effective for improving analgesia during and after elective LC. DEX appears to significantly reduce the number of patients with severe postoperative pain, postoperative morphine consumption and prolong time to first use of rescue analgesia.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: Retrospectively registered on July 7, 2017, NCT03211871.

Does low-dose gapapentin reduce opioid use postoperatively?: A randomized controlled trial in women undergoing reconstructive pelvic surgery

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

Pre-emptive gabapentin has been shown to decrease postoperative pain in abdominal and vaginal hysterectomy. However, the effect of pre-emptive low-dose gabapentin has not been studied in vaginal hysterectomy combined with concomitant pelvic reconstruction.

METHODS

A randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial assessed all women seen for symptomatic prolapse requiring vaginal hysterectomy with concomitant pelvic reconstruction with or without midurethral sling. Gabapentin dosing was 600 mg (<65 years) or 300 mg (>65 years). The primary outcome was reduction in opioid consumption in the first 24 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes included sedation and prolongation of recovery room stay. Sample-size calculations indicated a need for 22 participants/group. Student's t test was used to compare differences in oral administration of morphine equivalents in the first 24 h postoperatively, time from end of surgery to leaving the recovery room, and length of recovery room stay. Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare visual analog scale (VAS) scores for anxiety, drowsiness/sedation, pain, and nausea.

RESULTS

Twenty-one patients received gabapentin and 26 a placebo capsule. Groups were similar with respect to age, menopause status, parity, American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) class, and concomitant procedures. There were also no significant differences between groups in opioid requirements within the first 24 h after surgery, time from end of surgery to leaving the recovery room, length of time in recovery room, or VAS scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-emptive gabapentin at our institutional low doses did not significantly affect postoperative pain and opioid requirements in women undergoing vaginal hysterectomy with concomitant reconstruction.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

www.clinicaltrials.gov , #NCT02999724.

Pregabalin Did Not Improve Pain Management After Spinal Fusions

BACKGROUND

The treatment of postoperative pain is a challenge after posterior spinal fusions. Pain management using predominantly opioids is often associated with multiple adverse effects, while multimodal postoperative analgesia may provide adequate pain relief with fewer opioid side effects.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

The purpose of this review is to determine whether addition of 150 mg pregabalin daily would reduce narcotic requirements and improve outcomes after posterior lumbar fusion (PLF).

METHODS

The method used is a randomized, controlled trial of elective PLF patients who received pregabalin or placebo. With institutional review board (IRB) approval, 86 patients undergoing elective posterior lumbar fusion, ASA I-III, were randomized to receive either a placebo or pregabalin after obtaining written informed consent. Both arms, i.e., placebo and pregabalin, consisted of 43 patients each.The 86 patients for elective PLF were randomly assigned to receive 150 mg of pregabalin 1 h before surgery and then 150 mg daily, or a placebo tablet. All patients received a similar general anesthetic and in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU), started on intravenous (IV) patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) of hydromorphone (0.2 mg/ml). Postoperative pain was assessed daily until discharge using a Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) at rest and with physical therapy (PT). Patients were also assessed twice daily for level of sedation and nausea and/or vomiting and expected PT milestones. All narcotics (IV, oral) were documented.

RESULTS

Demographics and operative time between groups were similar. PCA hydromorphone administration and oral narcotic intake were not statistically different between the two groups. However, an increased incidence of nausea and vomiting in the placebo group reached statistical significance (p < 0.05). In addition, there was no statistical difference between groups with respect to achieving PT milestones and hospital discharge day.

CONCLUSION

After PLF, patients receiving pregabalin 150 mg/day did not have reduced IV narcotic usage, improved PT milestones, or reduced length of hospital stay. We were unable to demonstrate an analgesic advantage to prescribing pregabalin to patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusions.

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.

Preoperative pregabalin has no effect on intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring in adolescents undergoing posterior spinal fusion for spinal deformities: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial

PURPOSE

This study was designed to evaluate the effect of preoperative pregabalin on intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring in adolescents undergoing surgery for spinal deformities.

METHODS

Thirty-one adolescents undergoing posterior spinal fusion were randomized to receive preoperatively either pregabalin 2 mg/kg twice daily or placebo. The ability to make reliable intraoperative neurophysiological measurements, transcranial motor (MEPs) and sensory evoked potentials (SSEP) was evaluated.

RESULTS

Two patients (pregabalin group) did not fulfil the inclusion criteria and one patient's (placebo group) spinal monitoring was technically incomplete and these were excluded from the final data. In the rest, spinal cord monitoring was successful. Anaesthesia prolonged the latency of MEPs and increased the threshold current of MEP. The current required to elicit MEPs did not differ between the study groups. There were no statistically significant differences between the study groups regarding the latency of bilateral SSEP (N32 and P37) and MEP latencies at any time point.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative pregabalin does not interfere spinal cord monitoring in adolescents undergoing posterior spinal fusion.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I.

Oral pregabalin for acute pain relief after cervicofacial surgery: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this systematic review were to unify criteria on the effectiveness of oral pregabalin to treat acute post-operative pain after cervicofacial surgery, to establish the most effective dose regimens, and to determine its effect on rescue medicine consumption and its association with adverse effects.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PubMed/Medline (National Library of Medicine, Washington, DC), Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were searched for studies in any language published between January 2000 and September 2016. The following question was posed, in accordance with PRISMA guidelines: Is oral pregabalin effective and safe for the relief of acute pain after cervicofacial surgery? The critical reading of the literature utilized a list of questions prepared by the CASPe Network, applying the Jadad scale for evaluation of the methodological quality of trials.

RESULTS

Eleven randomized controlled clinical trials were selected. The 11 trials obtained a score ≥ 3, considered as Ib evidence level and high quality. A single oral dose of 75-mg pregabalin before or after cervicofacial surgery alleviates pain and lessens the need for rescue analgesia consumption, while the statistical significance of these effects is higher with a single dose of 150-mg pregabalin, either before or after the surgery.

CONCLUSION

Oral pregabalin appears to significantly alleviate post-operative pain and reduce rescue analgesia consumption, with no severe adverse effects. However, the ideal dose and most effective administration regimen remain controversial issues that need to be addressed in further high-quality clinical trials.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

These findings suggest that pregabalin may be useful for acute pain relief after cervicofacial surgery.

Analgesic Effect of Pre-Emptive Gabapentin on Knee Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of preemptive oral gabapentin on postoperative analgesia after knee surgery. Gabapentin is widely known to reduce postoperative pain scores and opioid requirements following a variety of surgeries. We searched MEDLINE (January 1, 1976 to April 30, 2014), EMBASE (January 1, 1985 to April 30, 2014), the Cochrane Library (January 1, 1987 to April 30, 2014), and KoreaMed (June 1, 1958 to April 30, 2014). A total of 225 patients in 4 studies were included in the study. The overall pooled results from meta-analysis demonstrated that compared with placebo, pre-emptive analgesia could significantly reduce the postoperative pain score [mean difference (MD) −6.29; 95% confidence interval (CI) −10.17 to −2.42; P = 0.001; random-effect model]. The subgroup analyses found that gabapentin significantly reduced the postoperative pain score in patients who underwent general anesthesia (MD, −17.82; 95% CI, −21.82 to −13.81; P = 0.47; fixed-effect model). The subgroup analyses could not clarify the effectiveness of gabapentin on reducing postoperative pain in patients who underwent regional anesthesia (MD, 2.43; 95% CI, −1.14 to 6.00; P = 0.78; fixed-effect model). Pre-emptive gabapentin reduced early postoperative pain scores. However, it was unclear whether gabapentin reduces postoperative pain score in the setting of regional anesthesia or multimodal analgesic regimen.

Anesthetic considerations for a novel anterior surgical approach to pediatric scoliosis correction

BACKGROUND

Idiopathic scoliosis is a condition that may require surgical correction. Limitations of previous surgical modalities, however, created the need for novel methods of repair. One such technique, a newer form of anterolateral scoliosis correction, has shown considerable promise, which our center has had substantial experience performing.

AIM

In this article, we present the case details of our first 105 patients for the purposes of describing the evolution and details of the anesthetic management and considerations for this procedure.

METHODS

A retrospective review of medical records for 105 patients undergoing anterolateral instrumentation procedure for idiopathic scoliosis correction done at a single institution from May 2014 to June 2016 was performed. The details of perioperative management as well as surgical technique were reported for all patients.

RESULTS

The mean age for patients was 14.8 years (range 10-18); the mean weight was 49.9 kg (range 25-82). Unilateral procedures were performed on 46.7%, with bilateral and hybrid procedures performed on 50.5% and 4.7%, respectively. The median number of levels corrected was 8 (interquartile range [IQR] 7-9) for unilateral, right 7 (IQR 6-7) and left 5 (IQR 4-5) for bilateral, and 4 (IQR 4-4.5) for hybrids. The average estimated blood loss (EBL) was 310 mL±138, with cell salvaged blood transfused in 61% of patients, and allogenic blood transfusion required in only two patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The described anesthetic and analgesic management provides a framework for delivering perioperative care for this challenging procedure, which is gaining popularity as a modality for scoliosis correction.