Intraperitoneal Local Anesthetic Instillation and Postoperative Infusion Improves Functional Recovery Following Colectomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Efficacy and safety of intraperitoneal ropivacaine in pain management following laparoscopic digestive surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs

BACKGROUND

Managing postoperative pain effectively with an opioid-free regimen following laparoscopic surgery (LS) remains a significant challenge. Intraperitoneal instillation of ropivacaine has been explored for its potential to reduce acute postoperative pain, but its efficacy and safety are still under debate. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intraperitoneal instillation of ropivacaine for acute pain management following laparoscopic digestive surgery.

METHODS

We used PRISMA 2020 and a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews 2 guidelines to conduct this review. The random-effects model was adopted using Review Manager Version 5.4 for pooled estimates.

RESULTS

We retained 24 eligible RCTs involving 1705 patients (862 patients in the intraperitoneal instillation group and 843 patients in the control group). The intraperitoneal instillation group reduced total opioid consumption during the first 24 hours postoperatively (MD = -21.93 95% CI [-27.64, -16.23], P < .01), decreased pain scores at different time (4 hours, 8 hours, 12 hours and 24 hours), shorter the hospital stay (MD = -0.20 95% CI [-0.36, -0.05], P < .01), reduced the postoperative shoulder pain (MD = 0.18 95% CI [0.07, 0.44], P < .01), and decreased postoperative nausea and vomiting (MD = 0.47 95% CI [0.29, 0.77], P < .01).

CONCLUSION

Intraperitoneal instillation of ropivacaine appears to be an effective component of multimodal pain management strategies following laparoscopic digestive surgery, significantly reducing opioid consumption and improving postoperative recovery markers. Despite these promising results, additional high-quality trials are needed to confirm the efficacy and safety of this approach.

REGISTRATION

The registration number at PROSPERO was CRD42021279238.

PROcedure-SPECific postoperative pain management guideline for laparoscopic colorectal surgery: A systematic review with recommendations for postoperative pain management

Colorectal cancer is the second most common cancer diagnosed in women and third most common in men. Laparoscopic resection has become the standard surgical technique worldwide given its notable benefits, mainly the shorter length of stay and less postoperative pain. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the current literature on postoperative pain management following laparoscopic colorectal surgery and update previous procedure-specific pain management recommendations. The primary outcomes were postoperative pain scores and opioid requirements. We also considered study quality, clinical relevance of trial design, and a comprehensive risk-benefit assessment of the analgesic intervention. We performed a literature search to identify randomised controlled studies (RCTs) published before January 2022. Seventy-two studies were included in the present analysis. Through the established PROSPECT process, we recommend basic analgesia (paracetamol for rectal surgery, and paracetamol with either a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug or cyclo-oxygenase-2-specific inhibitor for colonic surgery) and wound infiltration as first-line interventions. No consensus could be achieved either for the use of intrathecal morphine or intravenous lidocaine; no recommendation can be made for these interventions. However, intravenous lidocaine may be considered when basic analgesia cannot be provided.

Effect of Erector Spinae Plane Block on Postoperative Pain after Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Study

The erector spinae plane (ESP) block can be used to reduce pain and opioid requirements after abdominal surgery. We evaluated the effect of the ESP block on postoperative pain score, analgesic use, and quality of recovery (QoR) score in patients undergoing laparoscopy. Fifty-nine patients undergoing elective laparoscopic colorectal surgery were randomly assigned to control (n = 30) or ESPB (n = 29) groups after anesthesia induction. In the ESPB group, an ultrasound-guided ESP block was performed immediately after induction using 20 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine bilaterally. The primary outcome was the postoperative pain score, which was evaluated using the 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS) (0 = no pain, 10 = worst imaginable pain), in the recovery room. NRS “at rest” and “on cough” and total dose of fentanyl rescue (in the recovery room) as well as NRS “at rest” and the cumulative administered fentanyl dose of patient-controlled analgesia (24 h post-surgery) were significantly lower in the ESPB group than in the control group. The postoperative QoR score did not differ between the groups. Bilateral ESP block after induction reduced pain scores and opioid requirements for 24 h postoperatively but did not improve the QoR in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Regional techniques for pain management following laparoscopic elective colonic resection: A systematic review

Introduction

Pain management is an integral part of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) following laparoscopic colonic resection. A variety of regional and neuraxial techniques were proposed, but their efficacy is still controversial. This systematic review evaluates published evidence on analgesic techniques and their impact on postoperative analgesia and recovery for laparoscopic colonic surgery patients.

Methods

We conducted bibliographic research on May 10, 2021, through PubMed, Cochrane database, and Google scholar. We retained meta-analysis and randomized clinical trials. We graded the strength of clinical data and subsequent recommendations according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine.

Results

Twelve studies were included. Thoracic epidural analgesia improved postoperative analgesia and bowel function following laparoscopic colectomy. However, it lengthens the hospital stay. Transversus abdominis plane block was as effective as thoracic epidural analgesia concerning pain control but with better postoperative recovery and lower length of hospital stay. Moreover, Lidocaine intravenous infusion improved postoperative pain management and recovery; Quadratus lumborum block provided similar postoperative analgesia and recovery. Finally, wound infiltration reduced postoperative pain without improving recovery of bowel function, and it could be proposed as an alternative to thoracic epidural analgesia.

Conclusions

Several analgesic techniques have been investigated. We found that abdominal wall blocks were as effective as thoracic epidural analgesia for pain management but with lower hospital stay and better recovery. We registered this review on PROSPERO (ID: CRD42021279228).

•

First systematic review assessing the efficacy of analgesic techniques following laparoscopic elective colonic resection.

•

Only colonic resection was evaluated contrary to other studies, including rectal surgery.

•

High-quality studies (randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses) were assessed.

Intraperitoneal local anaesthesia for post-operative pain management in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Intraperitoneal instillation of local anaesthetic agents has been reported as an effective adjunct to pain management and early functional recovery in colorectal surgery. Laparoscopic colorectal resection (LCR) is considered as the gold standard approach to resect benign and malignant lesions of the colon and rectum due to the advantages of reduced pain score, quicker recovery, and shorter hospitalization. The objective of this study is to systematically analyze the published RCTs evaluating the effectiveness of intraperitoneal local anesthetic (IPLA) instillation versus standard analgesia in patients undergoing LCR.

EVIDENCE ANALYSIS

Electronic databases such as Embase, Medline, PubMed, PubMed Central and the Cochrane library pertaining to the use of IPLA infiltration after LCR were systematically reviewed using the principles of meta-analysis.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Five RCTs on 292 patients undergoing LCR were either given IPLA or standard post-operative analgesia. In the random-effects model analysis using the statistical software Review Manager, statistically 2-4 hours pain score (Standardized mean difference (SMD), -1.72; 95% CI, -2.62, -0.81; z = 3.71; P = 0.0002) was significantly ower in the IPLA group. The 12 hours post-operative pain score (P = 0.23) was also lower in the IPLA group but failed to reach the statistical significance. Opioid analgesia requirement was lower in the IPLA group (SMD -7.60; 95% CI, -11.21, -3.90; z = 4.12; P = 0.0001) but the time to flatus, length of stay and the frequency of nausea/vomiting were statistically similar in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

IPLA instillation is an effective modality to reduce the post-operative pain score and lower the opioid analgesic requirements in patients undergoing LCR without influencing the time to first flatus, length of stay, and post-operative nausea/vomiting.

Epidural analgesia and mortality after colorectal cancer surgery: A retrospective cohort study

Background

Epidural analgesia (EA) has been the standard of care after major abdominal surgery for many years. This study aimed to correlate EA with postoperative complications, short- and long-term mortality in patients with and without EA after open surgery (OS) and minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for colorectal cancer.

Methods

Patient, clinical and outcome data were obtained from the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry and the Swedish Perioperative Registry. All adult patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer without metastases who underwent elective curative MIS or OS for colorectal cancer between January 2016 and December 2018 and who had data recorded in both registries, were included in the study. Data were analyzed for OS and MIS procedures separately. A Poisson regression model was used to investigate the association between EA and the outcomes of interest.

Results

Five thousand seven hundred sixty-two patients were included in the study, 2712 in the MIS and 3050 patients in the OS group. After adjusting for patient specific and clinically relevant variables in the regression model, no statistically significant difference in risk for complications; 30-day, 90-day, and up to 3-year mortality following either MIS or OS could be detected between the EA+ and EA-cohorts.

Conclusions

In this large study cohort, EA as part of the comprehensive care provided was not associated with a reduction in postoperative complications risk or improved 30-day, 90-day, or 3-year survival after MIS or OS for colorectal cancer.

•

No reduction in postoperative complications with epidural analgesia.

•

No reduction in short-term mortality with epidural analgesia after colorectal surgery.

•

No reduction in long-term mortality with epidural analgesia in colorectal cancer.

Comparison of treatment to improve gastrointestinal functions after colorectal surgery within enhanced recovery programmes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Despite a significant improvement with enhanced recovery programmes (ERP), gastro-intestinal (GI) functions that are impaired after colorectal resection and postoperative ileus (POI) remain a significant issue. In the literature, there is little evidence of the distinction between the treatment assessed within or outside ERP. The purpose was to evaluate the efficiency of treatments to reduce POI and improve GI function recovery within ERP. A search was performed in PubMed and Scopus on 20 September 2019. The studies were included if they compared the effect of the administration of a treatment aiming to treat or prevent POI or improve the early functional outcomes of colorectal surgery within an ERP. The main outcome measures were the occurrence of postoperative ileus, time to first flatus and time to first bowel movement. Treatments that were assessed at least three times were included in a meta-analysis. Among the analysed studies, 28 met the eligibility criteria. Six of them focused on chewing-gum and were only randomized controlled trials (RCT) and 8 of them focused on Alvimopan but none of them were RCT. The other measures were assessed in less than 3 studies over RCTs (n = 11) or retrospective studies (n = 2). In the meta-analysis, chewing gum had no significant effect on the endpoints and Alvimopan allowed a significant reduction of the occurrence of POI. Chewing-gum was not effective on GI function recovery in ERP but Alvimopan and the other measures were not sufficiently studies to draw conclusion. Randomised controlled trials are needed.Systematic review registration number CRD42020167339.

Intravenous Local Anesthetic Compared with Intraperitoneal Local Anesthetic in Laparoscopic Colectomy: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

Controlling perioperative pain is essential to improving patient experience and satisfaction following surgery. Traditionally opioids have been frequently utilised for postoperative analgesia. Although they are effective at controlling pain, they are associated with adverse effects, including postoperative nausea, vomiting, ileus and long-term opioid dependency.Following laparoscopic colectomy, the use of intravenous or intraperitoneal infusions of lidocaine (IVL, IPL) are promising emerging analgesic options. Although both techniques are promising, there have been no direct, prospective randomized comparisons in patients undergoing laparoscopic colon resection. The purpose of this study was to compare IPL with IVL.

METHODS

Double blinded, randomized controlled trial of patients undergoing laparoscopic colonic resection. The two groups received equal doses of either IPL or IVL which commenced intra-operatively with a bolus followed by a continuous infusion for 3 days postoperatively. Patients were cared for through a standardized ERAS program. The primary outcome was total post-operative opioid consumption over the first three post-operative days. Patients were followed for 60 days.

RESULTS

Fifty-six patients were randomized in a 1:1 fashion to the IVL or IPL groups. Total opioid consumption over the first three post-operative days was significantly lower in the IPL group (70.9 mg vs 157.8 mg p < 0.05) and overall opioid consumption during the total length of stay was also significantly lower (80.3 mg vs 187.36 mg p < 0.05. Pain scores were significantly lower at two hours post-operatively in the IPL group, however, all other time points were not significant. There were no differences in complications between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Perioperative use of IPL results in a significant reduction in opioid consumption following laparoscopic colon surgery when compared to IVL. This suggests that the peritoneal cavity/compartment is a strategic target for local anesthetic administration. Future ERAS recommendations should consider IPL as an important component of a multimodal pain strategy following colectomy.

Efficacy of transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block in colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Multimodal opioid-sparing analgesia is a key component of the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol for postoperative pain management. Transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block has contributed to the implementation of this approach in different kinds of surgical procedures. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of TAP block and its impact on recovery in colorectal surgery.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search of the PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases was conducted. Studies that compared TAP block to a control group (no TAP block or placebo) after colorectal resections were included. The effects of TAP block in patients undergoing colorectal surgery were assessed, including the technical aspects of the procedure. Two measures were used to evaluate the effectiveness of postoperative pain control: a numeric pain rating score at rest and on coughing or movement at 24 h following surgery and the opioid requirement at 24 h. Clinical aspects of recovery were postoperative ileus, surgical site infection, postoperative nausea and vomiting, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies were included in the analysis. Data showed that TAP block is a safe procedure associated with a significant reduction in the pain score at rest [WMD - 0.91 (95% CI - 1.56; - 0.27); p < 0.05] and on coughing or movement [WMD - 0.36 (95% CI - 0.72; - 0.01); p < 0.05] at 24 h after surgery and a significant decrease in morphine consumption in the TAP block group the day after surgery [WMD - 2.07 (95% CI - 2.63; - 1.51); p < 0.001].

CONCLUSIONS

TAP block appears to provide both an effective analgesia and a significant reduction in opioid use on the first postoperative day after colorectal surgery. Its use does not seem to lead to increased postoperative complications.

Intraperitoneal chemotherapy for peritoneal metastases: an expert opinion

Introduction: The rationale for intraperitoneal (IP) drug delivery for patients with peritoneal metastases (PM) is based on the pharmacokinetic advantage resulting from the peritoneal-plasma barrier, and on the potential to adequately treat small, poorly vascularized PM. Despite a history of more than three decades, many aspects of IP drug delivery remain poorly studied.Areas covered: We outline the anatomy and physiology of the peritoneal cavity, including the pharmacokinetics of IP drug delivery. We discuss transport mechanisms governing tissue penetration of IP chemotherapy, and how these are affected by the biomechanical properties of the tumor stroma. We provide an overview of the current clinical evidence on IP chemotherapy in ovarian, colorectal, and gastric cancer. We discuss the current limitations of IP drug delivery and propose several potential areas of progress.Expert opinion: The potential of IP drug delivery is hampered by off-label use of drugs developed for systemic therapy. The efficacy of IP chemotherapy for PM depends on cancer type, disease extent, and mode of drug delivery. Results from ongoing randomized trials will allow to better delineate the potential of IP chemotherapy. Promising approaches include IP aerosol therapy, prolonged delivery platforms such as gels or biomaterials, and the use of nanomedicine.

The LAPLAP study: a randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial assessing postoperative functional recovery using intraperitoneal local anaesthetic in laparoscopic colorectal surgery

AIM

Postoperative pain remains a major factor in recovery from colorectal resection. There is increasing interest in opioid-sparing analgesia, and intraperitoneal local anaesthetic (IPLA) has recently been shown to be useful in minor laparoscopic and open colorectal procedures. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of IPLA on functional recovery following major laparoscopic surgery. In this controlled trial, mobility, as measured by the De Morton Mobility Index (DEMMI), was used as a surrogate for postoperative functional recovery.

METHOD

Patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal resection were randomized either to continuous ropivacaine (0.2% at 4-6 ml/h) or to saline (0.9%) which were administered via intraperitoneal catheter for 3 days postoperatively. Results were analysed in a double-blind manner. DEMMIs were assessed on postoperative days 1, 2, 3, 7 and 30, and data on pain, opioid consumption, gut and respiratory function, length of stay (LOS) and complications were recorded.

RESULTS

Ninety-six patients were recruited. There was no difference in primary outcome (i.e., functional recovery) between IPLA and placebo groups. Opioid consumption and LOS were similar between groups, and no differences were found for any secondary outcome measure. There were no adverse events related to ropivacaine.

CONCLUSION

Infusional intraperitoneal local anaesthetic appears to be safe but does not improve functional recovery or analgesic consumption following elective laparoscopic colorectal surgery, in the setting of an established enhanced recovery programme.