The Analgesic Effects of Liposomal Bupivacaine versus Bupivacaine Hydrochloride Administered as a Transversus Abdominis Plane Block after Abdominally Based Autologous Microvascular Breast Reconstruction: A Prospective, Single-Blind, Randomized, Controlled Trial

The effect of a local anesthetic cocktail in a serratus anterior plane and PECS 1 block for implant-based breast reconstruction

Introduction

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have been implemented to decrease opioid use and decrease patient hospital length of stay (LOS, days). Serratus anterior plane (SAP) blocks anesthetize the T2 through T9 dermatomes of the breast and can be applied intraoperatively. The purpose of this study was to compare postoperative opioid (OME) consumption and LOS between a control group, an ERAS group, and an ERAS/local anesthetic cocktail group in patients who underwent implant-based breast reconstruction.

Methods

In this study, 142 women who underwent implant-based breast reconstruction between 2004 and 2020 were divided into Group A (46 patients), a historical cohort; Group B (73 patients), an ERAS/no-block control group; and Group C (23 patients), an ERAS/anesthetic cocktail study group. Primary outcomes of interest were postanesthesia care unit (PACU), inpatient and total hospital OME consumption, and PACU LOS.

Results

A significant decrease was observed from Group A to C in PACU LOS (103.3 vs. 80.2 vs. 70.5; p = 0.011), OME use (25.1 vs. 11.4 vs. 5.7; p < 0.0001), and total hospital OME (120.3 vs. 95.2 vs. 35.9; p < 0.05). No difference was observed in inpatient OMEs between the three groups (95.2 vs. 83.8 vs. 30.8; p = 0.212). Despite not reaching statistical significance, Group C consumed an average of 50-60 % less opioids per patient than did Group B in PACU, inpatient, and total hospital OMEs.

Conclusion

Local anesthetic blocks are important components of ERAS protocols. Our results demonstrate that a combination regional block with a local anesthetic cocktail in an ERAS protocol can decrease opioid consumption in implant-based breast reconstruction.

Liposomal Bupivacaine Analgesia in Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background

Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) can be used for postsurgical analgesia after breast reconstruction. We examined real-world clinical and economic benefits of LB versus bupivacaine after deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study used the IQVIA claims databases to identify patients undergoing primary DIEP flap breast reconstruction in 2016-2019. Patients receiving LB and those receiving bupivacaine were compared to assess opioid utilization in morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) and healthcare resource utilization during perioperative (2 weeks before surgery to 2 weeks after discharge) and 6-month postdischarge periods. A generalized linear mixed-effects model and inverse probability of treatment weighting method were performed.

Results

Weighted baseline characteristics were similar between cohorts (LB, n = 669; bupivacaine, n = 348). The LB cohort received significantly fewer mean MMEs versus the bupivacaine cohort during the perioperative (395 versus 512 MMEs; rate ratio [RR], 0.771 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.677-0.879]; P = 0.0001), 72 hours after surgery (63 versus 140 MMEs; RR, 0.449 [95% CI, 0.347-0.581]; P < 0.0001), and inpatient (154 versus 303 MMEs; RR, 0.508 [95% CI, 0.411-0.629]; P < 0.0001) periods; postdischarge filled opioid prescriptions were comparable. The LB cohort was less likely to have all-cause inpatient readmission (odds ratio, 0.670 [95% CI, 0.452-0.993]; P = 0.046) and outpatient clinic/office visits (odds ratio, 0.885 [95% CI, 0.785-0.999]; P = 0.048) 3 months after discharge than the bupivacaine cohort; other all-cause healthcare resource utilization outcomes were not different.

Conclusions

LB was associated with fewer perioperative MMEs and all-cause 3-month inpatient readmissions and outpatient clinic/office visits than bupivacaine in patients undergoing DIEP flap breast reconstruction.

A systematic review of randomised controlled trials in breast reconstruction

BACKGROUND

For preference sensitive treatments, such as breast reconstructions, there are barriers to conducting randomised controlled trials (RCTs). The primary aims of this systematic review were to investigate what type of research questions are explored by RCTs in breast reconstruction, where have they been performed and where have they been published, and to thematise the research questions and thus create an overview of the state of the research field.

METHODS

Randomised controlled trials investigating any aspect of breast reconstructions were included. The PubMed database was searched with a pre-defined search string. Inclusion and data abstraction was performed in a pre-defined standardised fashion. For the purpose of this study, we defined key issues as comparison of categories of breast reconstruction and comparison of immediate and delayed breast reconstruction, when the thematisation was done.

RESULTS

A total of 419 abstracts were retrieved from the search. Of the 419, 310 were excluded as they were not RCTs concerning some aspect of breast reconstruction, which left us with 110 abstracts to be included in the study. The research questions of the included studies could more or less be divided into seven different themes inclusive of 2 key issues: Other issues - comparison of different categories of breast reconstruction, comparison of immediate and delayed breast reconstruction, surgical details within a category of breast reconstruction, surgical details valid for several categories of breast reconstruction, donor site management, anaesthetics, and non-surgical details. Only five studies compared key issues, and they all illustrate the challenges with RCTs in breast reconstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

A total of 110 publications based on RCTs in breast reconstruction have been published. Seven themes of research questions could be identified. Only five studies have explored the key issues. Better scientific evidence is needed for the key issues in breast reconstruction, for example by implementing a new study design in the field.

Analgesic Effectiveness of Liposomal Bupivacaine versus Plain Local Anesthetics for Abdominal Fascial Plane Blocks: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials

BACKGROUND

Liposomal bupivacaine is reported to prolong the duration of analgesia when used for abdominal fascial plane blocks compared to plain local anesthetics; however, evidence from randomized trials is mixed. This meta-analysis aims to compare the analgesic effectiveness of liposomal bupivacaine to plain local anesthetics in adults receiving abdominal fascial plane blocks.

METHODS

Randomized trials comparing liposomal bupivacaine and plain (nonliposomal) local anesthetics in abdominal fascial plane blocks were sought. The primary outcome was area under the curve rest pain between 24 to 72 h postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included rest pain at individual timepoints (1, 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 h); analgesic consumption at 0 to 24, 25 to 48, and 49 to 72 h; time to analgesic request; hospital stay duration; and opioid-related side effects. Data were pooled using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman random effects method.

RESULTS

Sixteen trials encompassing 1,287 patients (liposomal bupivacaine, 667; plain local anesthetics, 620) were included. The liposomal bupivacaine group received liposomal bupivacaine mixed with plain bupivacaine in 10 studies, liposomal bupivacaine alone in 5 studies, and both preparations in 1 three-armed study. No difference was observed between the two groups for area under the curve pain scores, with a standardized mean difference (95% CI) of -0.21 cm.h (-0.43 to 0.01; P = 0.058; I2 = 48%). Results were robust to subgroup analysis based on (1) potential conflict of interest and (2) mixing of plain local anesthetics with liposomal bupivacaine. The two groups were not different for any of the day 2 or day 3 secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review and meta-analysis suggests similar analgesic effectiveness between liposomal bupivacaine and plain local anesthetics when used for fascial plane block of the abdominal wall. The authors' analysis does not support an evidence-based preference for liposomal bupivacaine compared to plain local anesthetics for abdominal fascial plane blocks.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Liposomal to Plain Bupivacaine in the Transversus Abdominis Plane for DIEP Flap Breast Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Pain control after autologous breast reconstruction is important for patient satisfaction and early recovery. Transversus abdominis plane (TAP) blocks are commonly used as part of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway for breast reconstruction. It is uncertain whether liposomal bupivacaine used in TAP blocks offers additional advantages. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of liposomal bupivacaine versus plain bupivacaine for patients undergoing deep inferior epigastric perforator flap reconstruction.

METHODS

This double-blinded randomized controlled trial studied patients undergoing abdominally based autologous breast reconstruction between June of 2019 and August of 2020. Subjects were randomly assigned liposomal or plain bupivacaine, performed using ultrasound-guided TAP block technique. All patients were managed according to an ERAS protocol. Primary outcomes were postoperative narcotic analgesia required, measured in oral morphine equivalents from postoperative days 1 to 7. Secondary outcomes included numeric pain scale score on postoperative days 1 to 7, nonnarcotic pain medication use, time to first narcotic use, return of bowel function, and length of stay.

RESULTS

Sixty patients were enrolled: 30 received liposomal bupivacaine and 30 received plain bupivacaine. There were no significant differences in demographics, daily oral morphine equivalent narcotic use, nonnarcotic pain medication use, time to narcotic use, numeric pain scale score, time to bowel function, or length of stay.

CONCLUSION

Liposomal bupivacaine does not confer advantages over plain bupivacaine when used in TAP blocks for abdominally based microvascular breast reconstruction in patients under ERAS protocols and multimodal approaches for pain control.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, I.

Learning curve of ultrasound-guided surgeon-administered transversus abdominis plane (UGSA-TAP) block on a porcine model

Background

Surgeons commonly perform ultrasound-guided Transversus Abdominis Plane blocks to manage acute pain following abdominal surgeries. There is no consensus on whether surgeons should undergo basic hands-on training to perform TAP blocks or if video-based learning is sufficient. We theorized that simulation-based learning is superior to video-based learning. In the present study, we present the analysis of technical skills of UGSA-TAP block performance on a live porcine model by general surgery trainees after undergoing video or simulation-based learning.

Methods

We performed a prospective, double-blinded, randomized study. Ten surgery residents and two surgery critical-care fellows (n = 12) without prior experience in performing the TAP block were recruited. The participants were randomized either into a video-based or simulation-based training group. After that, all participants performed a TAP block on a live anesthetized pig, which was recorded and scored by three blinded anesthesiologists. All participants completed a post-performance survey to assess their confidence in gaining competency in the UGSA-TAP block. Statistical analyses were performed to assess the differences between the two groups. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

All simulation-based learning participants successfully performed a survey scan, identified the three muscular layers of the abdominal wall, and identified the transversus abdominis plane compared to 50 %, 50 %, and 33 % video-based learning group participants for the respective parameters (p < 0.05). While some performance metrics showed no statistically significant differences between the groups, substantial effect sizes (Cohen's ℎ up to 1.07) highlighted notable differences in participants' performance. Both groups exhibited confidence in core competencies, with varied rates of satisfactory skill execution. Performance assessed using a global rating scale revealed a higher passing rate for the simulation group (83 % vs. 33 %). Participant feedback via the Likert scale reflected confidence post-training. Inter-rater reliability (0.83-1) confirmed the robustness of study evaluations.

Conclusion

The UGSA-TAP block curriculum should be introduced into the surgical residency programs with an emphasis on simulation-based learning to enhance the procedural skills of the trainees before transitioning to surgical patients.

The postoperative analgesic efficacy of liposomal bupivacaine versus long-acting local anaesthetics for peripheral nerve and field blocks: A systematic review and meta-analysis, with trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

Liposomal bupivacaine is claimed by the manufacturer to provide analgesia for up to 72 h postoperatively.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the postoperative analgesic efficacy of liposomal bupivacaine versus long-acting local anaesthetics for peripheral nerve or field blocks.

DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science, among others, up to June 2022.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We retrieved randomised controlled trials comparing liposomal bupivacaine versus bupivacaine, levobupivacaine or ropivacaine for peripheral nerve and field blocks after all types of surgery. Our primary endpoint was rest pain score (analogue scale 0 to 10) at 24 h. Secondary endpoints included rest pain score at 48 and 72 h, and morphine consumption at 24, 48 and 72 h.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven trials including 2122 patients were identified. Rest pain scores at 24 h were significantly reduced by liposomal bupivacaine with a mean difference (95% CI) of -0.9 (-1.4 to -0.4), I2  = 87%, P  < 0.001. This reduction in pain scores persisted at 48 h and 72 h with mean differences (95% CI) of -0.7 (-1.1 to -0.3), I2  = 82%, P  = 0.001 and -0.7 (-1.1 to -0.3), I2  = 80%, P  < 0.001, respectively. There were no differences in interval morphine consumption at 24 h ( P  = 0.15), 48 h ( P  = 0.15) and 72 h ( P  = 0.07). The quality of evidence was moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate level evidence that liposomal bupivacaine reduces rest pain scores by 0.9 out of 10 units, when compared with long-acting local anaesthetics at 24 hours after surgery, and by 0.7 up to 72 hours after surgery.

Updates on Enhanced Recovery after Surgery protocols for plastic surgery of the breast and future directions

Introduction

Perioperative pain control is an important component of any plastic surgery practice. Due to the incorporation of Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) protocols, reported pain level, opioid consumption, and hospital length of stay numbers have decreased significantly. This article provides an up-to-date review of current ERAS protocols in use, reviews individual aspects of ERAS protocols, and discusses future directions for the continual improvement of ERAS protocols and control of postoperative pain.

ERAS components

ERAS protocols have proven to be excellent methods of decreasing patient pain, opioid consumption, and postanesthesia care unit (PACU) and/or inpatient length of stay. ERAS protocols have three phases: preoperative education and pre-habilitation, intraoperative anesthetic blocks, and a postoperative multimodal analgesia regimen. Intraoperative blocks consist of local anesthetic field blocks and a variety of regional blocks, with lidocaine or lidocaine cocktails. Various studies throughout the surgical literature have demonstrated the efficacy of these aspects and their relevance to the overall goal of decreasing patient pain, both in plastic surgery and other surgical fields. In addition to the individual ERAS phases, ERAS protocols have shown promise in both the inpatient and outpatient sectors of plastic surgery of the breast.

Conclusion

ERAS protocols have repeatedly been shown to provide improved patient pain control, decreased hospital or PACU length of stay, decreased opioid use, and cost savings. Although protocols have most commonly been utilized in inpatient plastic surgery procedures of the breast, emerging evidence points towards similar efficacy when used in outpatient procedures. Furthermore, this review demonstrates the efficacy of local anesthetic blocks in controlling patient pain.

"Spin" in Plastic Surgery Randomized Controlled Trials with Statistically Nonsignificant Primary Outcomes: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

"Spin" refers to a manipulation of language that implies benefit for an intervention when none may exist. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in other fields have been demonstrated to employ spin, which can mislead clinicians to use ineffective or unsafe interventions. This study's objective was to determine the strategies, severity, and extent of spin in plastic surgery RCTs with nonsignificant primary outcomes.

METHODS

A literature search of the top 15 plastic surgery journals using MEDLINE was performed (2000 through 2020). Parallel 1:1 RCTs with a clearly identified primary outcome showing statistically nonsignificant results ( P > 0.05) were included. Screening, data extraction, and spin analysis were performed by two independent reviewers. The spin analysis was then independently assessed in duplicate by two plastic surgery residents with graduate-level training in clinical epidemiology.

RESULTS

From 3497 studies identified, 92 RCTs were included in this study. Spin strategies were identified in 78 RCTs (85%), including 64 abstracts (70%) and 77 main texts (84%). Severity of spin was rated moderate or high in 43 abstract conclusions (47%) and 42 main text conclusions (46%). The most identified spin strategy in the abstract was claiming equivalence for statistically nonsignificant results (26%); in the main text, focusing on another objective (24%).

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that 85% of statistically nonsignificant RCTs in plastic surgery employ spin. Readers of plastic surgery research should be aware of strategies, whether intentional or unintentional, used to manipulate language in reports of statistically nonsignificant RCTs when applying research findings to clinical practice.

Comparison of Liposomal Bupivacaine to a Local Analgesic Cocktail for Transversus Abdominis Plane-Blocks in Abdominally-Based Microvascular Breast Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Transversus Abdominis Plane (TAP) blocks can improve pain control and decrease opioid usage within an ERAS protocol, in patients undergoing abdominally-based autologous breast reconstruction. The author has transitioned to using a local analgesic cocktail in place of liposomal bupivacaine for TAP blocks. The purpose of this study is to compare post-operative opioid use in patients who received the different TAP blocks.

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients undergoing abdominally-based autologous breast reconstruction between November 2015 and December 2019 was performed. The study group received Bupivacaine, Ketorolac, Dexmedetomidine, and Dexamethasone, and the control group received Liposomal Bupivacaine +/- Bupivacaine, Ketorolac, or Dexmedetomidine, as a TAP block. The primary outcome of interest was post-operative opioid use and pain scores.

RESULTS

A total of 104 women met inclusion criteria: 36 in Group A (pre-ERAS, pre-TAP), 38 in Group B (ERAS, TAP with liposomal bupivacaine), and 30 in Group C (ERAS, TAP with local anesthetic cocktail). Total and average daily OME consumption were significantly less for Group C in the inpatient phase (Group A: 633, B: 240, C: 135; p<0.0001) (Group A: 137, B: 56, C: 29; p<0.0001). Patients in Group C were prescribed significantly less outpatient OMEs (Group A: 79, B: 74, C: 52; p=0.01).

CONCLUSION

TAP blocks are a significant component of an ERAS protocol for abdominally-based breast reconstruction. Liposomal bupivacaine is a popular option for TAP blocks. Our results demonstrate that a local anesthetic cocktail, composed of economical and readily available medications, can provide excellent patient pain control and decrease post-operative opioid use.

The Role of Maximal Locoregional Block in Autologous Breast Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) has become the standard of care in microsurgical breast reconstruction. The current literature provides overwhelming evidence of the benefit of ERAS pathways in improving quality of recovery, decreasing length of hospital stay, and minimizing the amount of postoperative narcotic use in these patients. However, there are limited data on the role of using maximal locoregional anesthetic blocks targeting both the abdomen and chest as an integral part of an ERAS protocol in abdominally based autologous breast reconstruction. The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of implementing a comprehensive ERAS protocol with and without maximal locoregional nerve blocks to determine any added benefit of these blocks to the standard ERAS pathway.

METHODS

Forty consecutive patients who underwent abdominally based autologous breast reconstruction in the period between July 2017 and February 2020 were included in this retrospective institutional review board-approved study. The goal was to compare patients who received combined abdominal and thoracic wall locoregional blocks as part of their ERAS pathway (study group) with those who had only transversus abdominis plane blocks. The primary end points were total hospital length of stay, overall opioids consumption, and overall postoperative complications.

RESULTS

The use of supplemental thoracic wall block resulted in a shorter hospital length of stay in the study group of 3.2 days compared with 4.2 days for the control group (P < 0.01). Postoperative total morphine equivalent consumption was lower at 38 mg in the study group compared with 51 mg in the control group (P < 0.01). Complications occurred in 6 cases (15%) in the control group versus one minor complication in the thoracic block group. There was no difference between the 2 groups in demographics, comorbidities, and type of reconstruction.

CONCLUSION

The maximal locoregional nerve block including a complete chest wall block confers added benefits to the standard ERAS protocol in microvascular breast reconstruction.

Evaluating the Efficacy of Two Regional Pain Management Modalities in Autologous Breast Reconstruction

At our institution, multimodal opiate-sparing pain management is the cornerstone of our enhanced recovery program for autologous breast reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to compare postoperative outcomes and pain control metrics following implementation of an enhanced recovery program with two different regional analgesia approaches.

Applications of Ultrasound in the Postoperative Period: A Review

Background Recent advances in ultrasound technology have further increased its potential for routine use by plastic and reconstructive surgeons.

Methods An extensive literature review was performed to determine the most common applications of ultrasound in the postoperative care of plastic and reconstructive surgery patients.

Results In contrast with other available imaging modalities, ultrasound is cost-effective, rapid to obtain, eliminates the need for ionizing radiation or intravenous contrast, and has virtually no contraindications. In addition to its diagnostic capabilities, ultrasound can also be used to facilitate treatment of common postoperative concerns conveniently at the bedside or in an office setting.

Conclusion This article presents a review of the current applications of ultrasound imaging in the postoperative care of plastic and reconstructive surgery patients, including free flap monitoring following microsurgery, diagnosis and treatment of hematoma and seroma, including those associated with BIA-ALCL, and breast implant surveillance.

Comparison of Liposomal Bupivacaine and Conventional Local Anesthetic Agents in Regional Anesthesia: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Pain is one of the most common adverse events after surgery. Regional anesthesia techniques are effective for pain control but have limited duration of action. Liposomal bupivacaine is a long-acting formulation of bupivacaine. We conduct this systematic review to assess whether liposomal bupivacaine may prolong the analgesic duration of regional anesthesia compared to conventional local anesthetic agents.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE (Ovid), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Google Scholar, Web of Science citation index, US clinical trials register, and recent conference abstracts for relevant studies.

RESULTS

We identified 13 randomized controlled trials that compared the use of liposomal bupivacaine to conventional local anesthetics in regional anesthesia. There were 5 studies on transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block, 3 of which reported longer duration of analgesia with liposomal bupivacaine. One study reported comparable analgesia with liposomal bupivacaine TAP block compared to TAP block catheter. There were 3 studies on brachial plexus block, 2 of which reported that liposomal bupivacaine may provide longer analgesia. Studies on other techniques did not report significantly longer analgesia with liposomal bupivacaine.

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, there is limited evidence suggesting that liposomal bupivacaine provides longer analgesia than conventional local anesthetics when used in regional anesthesia. The analyses of multiple studies on liposomal bupivacaine for TAP blocks and brachial plexus blocks have yielded conflicting results. As a result, no definitive conclusions can be drawn about its efficacy compared to plain bupivacaine.

Evaluation of Liposomal Bupivacaine at Split Thickness Skin Graft Donor Sites Through a Randomized, Controlled Trial

Split thickness skin grafts (STSG) are commonly required in reconstructive surgery but may cause significant pain. The goal of this investigator-initiated trial is to evaluate the effect of liposomal bupivacaine on donor site pain and opioid consumption. A parallel, randomized, controlled trial of adult acute burn patients with <20% total body surface area burns (TBSA) was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of liposomal bupivacaine at STSG donor sites. The control group received standard subcutaneous infiltration of dilute lidocaine solution at the STSG donor site, and the experimental group received dilute liposomal bupivacaine infiltration in a similar fashion. Donor site pain scores and opioid consumption in morphine equivalents (MEE) were evaluated. A total of 25 patients were enrolled in each group. There were no statistical differences in demographic variables, and TBSA was 4.0% in both groups (p=.94). There were no statistical differences in pain scores at any time point postoperatively (mean control range 3.1/10-4.9/10, experimental range 3.3/10-4.3/10, p=.12-.96). There were no statistical differences in opioid consumption at 24, 48, or 72 hours postoperatively between the groups (mean control MEE range 49.3-71.1, experimental MEE range 63.6-75.8, p=.34-.85). The average length of stay was 7.7 days in both groups (p=.88). No adverse events occurred in either group. There is no statistical benefit to the use of liposomal bupivacaine for infiltration at STSG donor sites compared to standard of care with respect to pain control, opioid use, or length of stay when evaluated in a randomized, controlled fashion.

Do Patient Expectations of Discharge Affect Length of Stay after Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap for Breast Reconstruction?

INTRODUCTION

 Deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap is a common method of breast reconstruction. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) postoperative protocols have been used to optimize patient outcomes and facilitate shorter hospital stays. The effect of patient expectations on length of stay (LOS) after DIEP has not been evaluated. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether patient expectations affect LOS.

METHODS

 A retrospective chart review was performed for patients undergoing DIEP flaps for breast reconstruction from 2017 to 2020. All patients were managed with the same ERAS protocol. Patients were divided in Group I (early expectations) and Group II (standard expectations). Group I patients had expectations set for discharge postoperative day (POD) 2 for unilateral DIEP and POD 3 for bilateral DIEP. Group II patients were given expectations for POD 3 to 4 for unilateral DIEP and POD 4 to 5 for bilateral. The primary outcome variable was LOS.

RESULTS

 The study included 215 DIEP flaps (45 unilateral and 85 bilateral). The average age was 49.8 years old, and the average body mass index (BMI) was 31.4. Group I (early expectations) included 56 patients (24 unilateral DIEPs, 32 bilateral). Group II (standard expectations) had 74 patients (21 unilateral, 53 bilateral). LOS for unilateral DIEP was 2.9 days for Group I compared with 3.7 days for Group II (p = 0.004). Group I bilateral DIEP patients had LOS of 3.5 days compared with 3.9 days for Group II (p = 0.02). Immediate timing of DIEP (Group I 42.9 vs. Group II 52.7%) and BMI (Group I 32.1 vs. Group II 30.8) were similar (p = 0.25).

CONCLUSION

 Our study found significantly shorter hospital stay after DIEP flap for patients who expected an earlier discharge date despite similar patient characteristics and uniform ERAS protocol. Patient expectations should be considered during patient counseling and as a confounding variable when analyzing ERAS protocols.

The Efficacy of Liposomal Bupivacaine for Opioid and Pain Reduction: A Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials

Background The opioid crisis has prompted surgeons to search for alternative postoperative methods of analgesia. Liposomal bupivacaine is a long-acting local anesthetic formulation used for pain, potentially reducing opioid use. Evaluation of liposomal bupivacaine as a viable alternative for pain management is needed. The objective was to assess the efficacy of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of liposomal bupivacaine in postoperative pain management and opioid consumption. Material and Methods The authors extracted RCTs comparing liposomal bupivacaine versus placebo or active comparators for postoperative pain or opioid reduction from PubMED/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Exclusion criteria included nonhuman studies, non-RCTs, pooled studies, and inability to access full text. The following variables were abstracted: surgical specialty, number of subjects, pain and opioid outcomes, and authors' financial conflicts of interest. Results We identified 77 published RCTs, of which 63 studies with a total of 6770 subjects met inclusion criteria. Liposomal bupivacaine did not demonstrate significant pain relief compared to placebo or active agents in 74.58% of RCTs. Of the studies evaluating narcotic use, liposomal bupivacaine did not show a reduction in opioid consumption in 85.71% of RCTs. Liposomal bupivacaine, when compared to standard bupivacaine or another active agent, yielded no reduction in opioid use in 83.33% and 100.00% of studies, respectively. Clinical trials with a financial conflict of interest relating to the manufacturer of liposomal bupivacaine were significantly more likely to show pain relief (OR: 14.31 [95% CI, 2.8, 73.10], P = 0.0001) and decreased opioid consumption (OR: 12.35 [95% CI 1.40, 109.07], P = 0.0237). Of the 265 unpublished RCTs on ClinicalTrials.gov, 47.54% were withdrawn, terminated, suspended, or completed without study results available. Conclusions The efficacy of liposomal bupivacaine for providing superior postoperative pain control relative to placebo or another active agent is not supported by a majority of RCTs. Underreporting of trial results and bias due to underlying financial relationships amongst authors are two major concerns that should be considered when evaluating the available evidence.

The analgesic efficacy of liposomal bupivacaine compared with bupivacaine hydrochloride for the prevention of postoperative pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND/IMPORTANCE

Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) is a prolonged release formulation of conventional bupivacaine designed for prolonging local or peripheral regional single injection anesthesia. To this day, the benefit of the new substance on relevant end points is discussed controversial.

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to determine whether there is a difference in postoperative pain scores and morphine consumption between patients treated with LB and bupivacaine hydrochloride in a systematic review and meta-analysis.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

Randomized controlled trials (RCT) were identified in Embase, CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Web of Science up to May 2020. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane methodology. Primary end points were the mean pain score difference and the relative morphine equivalent (MEQ) consumption expressed as the ratio of means (ROM) 24 and 72 hours postoperatively.

FINDINGS

23 RCTs including 1867 patients were eligible for meta-analysis. The mean pain score difference at 24 hours postoperatively was significantly lower in the LB group, at -0.37 (95% CI -0.56 to -0.19). The relative MEQ consumption after 24 hours was also significantly lower in the LB group, at 0.85 (0.82 to 0.89). At 72 hours, the pain score difference was not significant at -0.25 (-0.71 to 0.20) and the MEQ ratio was 0.85 (0.77 to 0.95).

CONCLUSION

The beneficial effect on pain scores and opioid consumption was small but not clinically relevant, despite statistical significance. The effect was stable among all studies, indicating that it is independent of the application modality.

Perineural Liposomal Bupivacaine Is Not Superior to Nonliposomal Bupivacaine for Peripheral Nerve Block Analgesia

BACKGROUND

Liposomal bupivacaine is purported to extend analgesia of peripheral nerve blocks when administered perineurally. However, evidence of the clinical effectiveness of perineural liposomal bupivacaine is mixed. This meta-analysis seeks to evaluate the effectiveness of perineural liposomal bupivacaine in improving peripheral nerve block analgesia as compared with nonliposomal local anesthetics.

METHODS

The authors identified randomized trials evaluating the effectiveness of peripheral nerve block analgesic that compared liposomal bupivacaine with nonliposomal local anesthetics. The primary outcome was the difference in area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) of the pooled 24- to 72-h rest pain severity scores. Secondary outcomes included postoperative analgesic consumption, time to first analgesic request, incidence of opioid-related side effects, patient satisfaction, length of hospital stay, liposomal bupivacaine side effects, and functional recovery. AUC pain scores were interpreted in light of a minimal clinically important difference of 2.0 cm · h.

RESULTS

Nine trials (619 patients) were analyzed. When all trials were pooled, AUC pain scores ± SD at 24 to 72 h were 7.6 ± 4.9 cm · h and 6.6 ± 4.6 cm · h for nonliposomal and liposomal bupivacaine, respectively. As such, perineural liposomal bupivacaine provided a clinically unimportant benefit by improving the AUC (95% CI) of 24- to 72-h pain scores by 1.0 cm · h (0.5 to 1.6; P = 0.003) compared with nonliposomal bupivacaine. Excluding an industry-sponsored trial rendered the difference between the groups nonsignificant (0.7 cm · h [-0.1 to 1.5]; P = 0.100). Secondary outcome analysis did not uncover any additional benefits to liposomal bupivacaine in pain severity at individual timepoints up to 72 h, analgesic consumption, time to first analgesic request, opioid-related side effects, patient satisfaction, length of hospital stay, and functional recovery. No liposomal bupivacaine side effects were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Perineural liposomal bupivacaine provided a statistically significant but clinically unimportant improvement in the AUC of postoperative pain scores compared with plain local anesthetic. Furthermore, this benefit was rendered nonsignificant after excluding an industry-sponsored trial, and liposomal bupivacaine was found to be not different from plain local anesthetics for postoperative pain and all other analgesic and functional outcomes. High-quality evidence does not support the use of perineural liposomal bupivacaine over nonliposomal bupivacaine for peripheral nerve blocks.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

Clinical Effectiveness of Liposomal Bupivacaine Administered by Infiltration or Peripheral Nerve Block to Treat Postoperative Pain

The authors provide a comprehensive summary of all randomized, controlled trials (n = 76) involving the clinical administration of liposomal bupivacaine (Exparel; Pacira Pharmaceuticals, USA) to control postoperative pain that are currently published. When infiltrated surgically and compared with unencapsulated bupivacaine or ropivacaine, only 11% of trials (4 of 36) reported a clinically relevant and statistically significant improvement in the primary outcome favoring liposomal bupivacaine. Ninety-two percent of trials (11 of 12) suggested a peripheral nerve block with unencapsulated bupivacaine provides superior analgesia to infiltrated liposomal bupivacaine. Results were mixed for the 16 trials comparing liposomal and unencapsulated bupivacaine, both within peripheral nerve blocks. Overall, of the trials deemed at high risk for bias, 84% (16 of 19) reported statistically significant differences for their primary outcome measure(s) compared with only 14% (4 of 28) of those with a low risk of bias. The preponderance of evidence fails to support the routine use of liposomal bupivacaine over standard local anesthetics.

Practical Review of Abdominal and Breast Regional Analgesia for Plastic Surgeons: Evidence and Techniques

Regional analgesia has been increasing in popularity due to its opioid- sparing analgesic effects and utility in multimodal analgesia strategies. Several regional techniques have been used in plastic surgery; however, there is a lack of consensus on the indications and the comparative efficacy of these blocks. The goal of this review is to provide evidence-based recommendations on the most relevant types of interfascial plane blocks for abdominal and breast surgery. A systematic search of the PUBMED, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases was performed to identify the evidence associated with the different interfascial plane blocks used in plastic surgery. The search included all studies from inception to March 2020. A total of 126 studies were included and used in the synthesis of the information presented in this review. There is strong evidence for using the transversus abdominis plane blocks in both abdominoplasties as well as abdominally-based microvascular breast reconstruction as evidenced by a significant reduction in post-operative pain and opioid consumption. Pectoralis (I and II), serratus anterior, and erector spinae plane blocks all provide good pain control in breast surgeries. Finally, the serratus anterior plane block can be used as primary block or an adjunct to the pectoralis blocks for a wider analgesia coverage of the breast. All the reviewed blocks are safe and easy to administer. Interfascial plane blocks are effective and safe modalities used to reduce pain and opioid consumption after abdominal and breast plastic surgery.

Transversus Abdominis Plane Block With Liposomal Bupivacaine vs. Regular Anesthetics for Pain Control After Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Transverse abdominal plane (TAP) blocks are used to provide pain relief after abdominopelvic surgeries. The role of liposomal bupivacaine (LB) for TAP blocks is unclear. Therefore, this study aimed to synthesize evidence on the efficacy of LB vs. regular anesthetics in improving outcomes of TAP block. Methods: PubMed, Science Direct, Embase, Springer, and CENTRAL databases were searched up to July 24, 2020. Studies comparing LB with any regular anesthetic for TAP block for any surgical procedure and reporting total analgesic consumption (TAC) or pain scores were included. Results: Seven studies including five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were reviewed. LB was compared with regular bupivacaine (RB) in all studies. A descriptive analysis was conducted for TAC due to heterogeneity in data presentation. There were variations in the outcomes of studies reporting TAC. Meta-analysis of pain scores indicated statistically significant reduction of pain with the use of LB at 12 h (MD: -0.89 95% CI: -1.44, -0.34 I² = 0% p = 0.01), 24 h (MD: -0.64 95% CI: -1.21, -0.06 I² = 0% p = 0.03), 48 h (MD: -0.40 95% CI: -0.77, 0.04 I² = 0% p = 0.03) but not at 72 h (MD: -0.37 95% CI: -1.31, 0.56 I² = 57% p = 0.43). Pooled analysis indicated no difference in the duration of hospital stay between LB and RB (MD: -0.18 95% CI: -0.49, 0.14 I² = 61% p = 0.27). LB significantly reduced the number of days to first ambulation postsurgery (MD: -0.28 95% CI: -0.50, -0.06 I² = 0% p = 0.01). Conclusions: Current evidence on the role of LB for providing prolonged analgesia with TAP blocks is unclear. Conflicting results have been reported for TAC. LB may result in a small reduction in pain scores up to 48 h but not at 72 h. Further, high-quality homogenous RCTs are needed to establish high-quality evidence.

Perioperative Blocks for Decreasing Postoperative Narcotics in Breast Reconstruction

Context

High rates of mortality and chemical dependence occur following the overuse of narcotic medications, and the prescription of these medications has become a central discussion in health care. Efforts to curtail opioid prescribing include Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) guidelines, which describe local anesthesia techniques to decrease or eliminate the need for opioids when used in a comprehensive protocol. Here, we review effective perioperative blocks for the decreased use of opioid medications post-breast reconstruction surgery.

Evidence Acquisition

A comprehensive review was conducted using keywords narcotics, opioid, surgery, breast reconstruction, pain pump, nerve block, regional anesthesia, and analgesia. Papers that described a local anesthetic option for breast reconstruction for decreasing postoperative narcotic consumption, written in English, were included.

Results

A total of 52 papers were included in this review. Local anesthetic options included single-shot nerve blocks, nerve block catheters, and local and regional anesthesia. Most papers reported equal or even superior pain control with decreased nausea and vomiting, length of hospital stay, and other outcomes.

Conclusions

Though opioid medications are currently the gold standard medication for pain management following surgery, strategies to decrease the dose or number of opioids prescribed may lead to better patient outcomes. The use of a local anesthetic technique has been shown to reduce narcotic use and improve patients’ pain scores after breast reconstruction surgery.

Enhanced Recovery With Paravertebral and Transversus Abdominis Plane Blocks in Microvascular Breast Reconstruction

Purpose:

We have shown previously that a preoperative paravertebral nerve block is associated with improved postoperative recovery in microvascular breast reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of a complete enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol with complete regional anesthesia coverage to our traditional care with paravertebral block.

Patients and methods:

This was a retrospective cohort study of 83 patients who underwent autologous breast reconstruction by T.M.M. between May 2014 and February 2018 at a tertiary academic center. Patients in the ERAS group were additionally administered acetaminophen, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), gabapentin, a transversus abdominis plane block (liposomal or plain bupivacaine), and primarily oral opioids postoperatively. The patients were mobilized earlier with more rapid diet progression. All patients received a preoperative paravertebral block.

Results:

Forty-four patients in the ERAS cohort were compared with 39 retrospective controls. The 2 groups were similar with respect to demographics and comorbidities. The ERAS cohort required significantly less opioids (291 vs 707 mg oral morphine equivalent, P < .0001) with unchanged postoperative pain scores and a shorter time to oral only opioid use (16.0 vs 78.2 hours, P < .0001). Median length of stay (3.20 vs 4.62, P < .0001) and time to independent ambulation (1.86 vs 2.88, P < .0001) were also significantly decreased in the ERAS cohort. Liposomal bupivacaine use did not significantly affect the results (P ⩾ .2).

Conclusions:

Implementation of a robust enhanced recovery protocol with complete regional anesthesia coverage was associated with significantly decreased opioid use despite unchanged pain scores, with improved markers of recovery including length of stay, time to oral only narcotics, and time to independent ambulation.

Comparative Effectiveness of Transversus Abdominis Plane Blocks in Abdominally Based Autologous Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The abdomen is the most common donor site in autologous microvascular free flap breast reconstruction and contributes significantly to postoperative pain, resulting in increased opioid use, length of stay, and hospital costs. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols have demonstrated multiple clinical benefits, but these protocols are widely heterogeneous. Transversus abdominis plane (TAP) blocks have been reported to improve pain control and may be a key driver of the benefits seen with ERAS pathways.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting TAP blocks for abdominally based breast reconstruction were performed. Studies were extracted from 6 public databases before February 2019 and pooled in accordance with the PROSPERO registry. Total opioid use, postoperative pain, length of stay, hospital cost, and complications were analyzed using a random effects model.

RESULTS

The initial search yielded 420 studies, ultimately narrowed to 12 studies representing 1107 total patients. Total hospital length of stay (mean difference, -1.00 days; P < 0.00001; I = 81%) and opioid requirement (mean difference, -133.80 mg of oral morphine equivalent; P < 0.00001; I = 97%) were decreased for patients receiving TAP blocks. Transversus abdominis plane blocks were not associated with any significant differences in postoperative complications (P = 0.66), hospital cost (P = 0.22), and postoperative pain (P = 0.86).

CONCLUSIONS

Optimizing postoperative pain management after abdominally based microsurgical breast reconstruction is invaluable for patient recovery. Transversus abdominis plane blocks are associated with a reduction in length of stay and opioid use, representing a safe and reasonable strategy for decreasing postoperative pain.

Future in regional anesthesia: new techniques and technological advancements

Regional anesthesia has a very interesting long history, initially preferred over general anesthesia because of safety concerns, then for a period general anesthesia became safer and was preferred. The use of innovative technologies such as ultrasound technology has made the blocks safer and successful by directly visualizing targeted nerves and the location of local anesthetics. With the wide use of ultrasound in the regional anesthesia field success rate of peripheral nerve blocks increased and novel blocks techniques developed. Moreover, new extended-release local anesthetic agents have begun to be promising time-efficient and longer duration of analgesia with a single injection. In this article, we attempt to summarize some of the novel block techniques, pharmacological agents, and new technologies in the field of regional anesthesia.

Nanomedicines Lost in Translation

Nanomedicines have historically struggled to find clinical relevance and to achieve translation successfully. In this Perspective, we discuss possible reasons for this difficulty and highlight several key features of nanomedicines that are often overlooked by biomedical engineers. We present the notion of clinical multifunctionality as distinct from multifunctionality as it is traditionally described at the nanoscale and emphasize its importance through examples of nanomedicines that have demonstrated emergent clinical multifunctionality once translated. We also describe a phenomenon in which clinical multifunctionality results in diagonal translation after a nanomedicine is adopted by clinicians to serve as a solution for a clinical problem that it was not designed to solve. Biomedical engineers can take advantage of these phenomena to assist in achieving clinical translation of new nanomedicines.