The Association of Liposomal Bupivacaine on Opioid Consumption in the Pediatric Alveolar Cleft Population

Patient Safety and Quality Improvement Initiatives in Cleft Lip and Palate Surgery: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Cleft lip and/or palate repair techniques require continued reevaluation of best practice through high-quality evidence. The objective of this systematic review was to highlight the existing evidence for patient safety and quality improvement (QI) initiatives in cleft lip and palate surgery.

METHODS

A systematic review of published literature evaluating patient safety and QI in patients with cleft lip and/or palate was conducted from database inception to June 9, 2022, using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews guidelines. Quality appraisal of included studies was conducted using Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies, Cochrane, or a Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2 instruments, according to study type.

RESULTS

Sixty-one studies met inclusion criteria, with most published between 2010 and 2020 (63.9%). Randomized controlled trials represented the most common study design (37.7%). Half of all included studies were related to the topic of pain and analgesia, with many supporting the use of infraorbital nerve block using 0.25% bupivacaine. The second most common intervention examined was use of perioperative antibiotics in reducing fistula and infection (11.5%). Other studies examined optimal age and closure material for cleft lip repair, early recovery after surgery protocols, interventions to reduce blood loss, and safety of outpatient surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient safety and QI studies in cleft surgery were of moderate quality overall and covered a wide range of interventions. To further enhance PS in cleft repair, more high-quality research in the areas of perioperative pharmaceutical usage, appropriate wound closure materials, and optimal surgical timing are needed.

Evaluation of liposomal bupivacaine infiltration at reconstructive skin graft donor sites in adolescent and young adult burn patients: A retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pain at skin graft donor sites is frequently undertreated in burn patients, which can impair reconstructive outcomes and result in harmful psychological consequences. We find a critical need to explore and promote non-opioid, multimodal analgesics. Donor site infiltration of the local anesthetic liposomal bupivacaine in adolescent and young adult burn patients has not been previously investigated. Therefore, the goal of this study was to evaluate intraoperative liposomal bupivacaine infiltration for postoperative donor site pain control in adolescent and young adult burn patients undergoing reconstructive skin graft procedures.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis included patients aged 14-25 years, who underwent at least two reconstructive skin graft procedures, one that received donor site infiltration of the standard treatment (bupivacaine hydrochloride) and one that received donor site infiltration of liposomal bupivacaine. The final sample included 30 patients with a total of 44 liposomal bupivacaine cases and 53 standard treatment cases analyzed.

RESULTS

In the authors' five-year experience, the use of liposomal bupivacaine compared to standard treatment was associated with statistically significant decreases in 0-4 h postoperative pain scores (mean 1.4/10 versus 2.3/10, p = 0.04) and 0-24 h postoperative pain scores (mean 1.7/10 versus 2.4/10, p = 0.02). Neither analgesic was associated with adverse events. Differences in length of stay and inpatient postoperative opioid usage were not regarded as significant.

CONCLUSION

In this retrospective analysis, the authors report the first results that suggest intraoperative liposomal bupivacaine donor site infiltration may be associated with statistically improved patient outcomes in adolescent and young adult burn patients. However, the reported differences are most likely not clinically significant, establishing the necessity for further evaluation of using liposomal bupivacaine in this unique patient population.

Perioperative Pain Management in Cleft Lip and Palate Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies

BACKGROUND

Developing effective strategies to manage perioperative pain remains a focus of cleft care. The present study's purpose was to systematically review perioperative pain control strategies for cleft lip and palate repair.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was performed. Primary outcomes included pain scale scores and time to analgesia failure. Cohen d normalized effect size permitted comparison between studies, and a fixed-effects model was used for analysis. I2 and Q-statistic p values were calculated.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies were included: eight of 23 studies provided data for meta-analytic comparison. Meta-analyses evaluated the efficacy of intraoperative nerve blocks on postoperative pain management. Meta-analysis included a total of 475 treatment and control patients. Cleft lip studies demonstrated significantly improved pain control with a nerve block versus placebo by means of pain scale scores ( p < 0.001) and time to analgesia failure ( p < 0.001). Measurement of effect size over time demonstrated statistically significant pain relief with local anesthetic. Palatoplasty studies showed significantly improved time to analgesia failure ( p < 0.005) with maxillary and palatal nerve blocks. Multiple studies demonstrated an opioid-sparing effect with the use of local anesthetics and other nonopioid medications. Techniques for nerve blocks in cleft lip and palate surgery are reviewed.

CONCLUSIONS

The present systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies demonstrates that intraoperative nerve blocks for cleft lip and palate surgery provide effective pain control. Opioid-sparing effects were appreciated in multiple studies. Intraoperative nerve blocks should be considered in all cases of cleft lip and palate repair to improve postoperative pain management.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, II.

Postoperative pain management in pediatric cleft lip and palate repair

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There has been an increased interest in the literature on methods to improve perioperative outcomes in surgical patients while minimizing opioid use. Pediatric cleft palate repair can be a painful procedure, and this postoperative pain can lead to longer hospital stays and worse surgical outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent literature has explored four key areas surrounding analgesia after cleft lip and palate repair. These areas are management of postoperative pain with nonopioid oral analgesics, peripheral nerve blockade, liposomal bupivacaine for donor-site analgesia in bone grafting, and enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols.

SUMMARY

The included studies indicate that patients undergoing palatoplasty may have a decreased opioid requirement if nonopioid analgesics such as acetaminophen and ibuprofen are started early in the postoperative setting. Peripheral nerve blockade is an important adjunct to analgesia in these patients. Suprazygomatic maxillary nerve blockade may improve pain management over traditional infraorbital nerve blockade. In patients undergoing alveolar bone grafting, injection of liposomal bupivacaine into the donor site can significantly decrease oral opioid requirements. Finally, ERAS protocols are emerging ways to decrease postoperative pain in cleft palate patients.

Effects of intraoperative liposomal bupivacaine on pain control and opioid use after pediatric Chiari I malformation surgery: an initial experience

OBJECTIVE

Pediatric Chiari I malformation decompression is a common neurosurgical procedure. Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) is a novel formulation that can have an impact on postoperative recovery for particular procedures, but its potential role in pediatric neurosurgery is largely unexplored. The authors sought to describe and assess their initial experience with LB in pediatric Chiari I malformation decompression to better define its potential role as an analgesic agent in a procedure for which the postoperative course is often remarkably painful.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all pediatric Chiari procedures performed at the authors' institution between 2018 and 2020 was conducted. Patients were divided into those who were treated with a single intraoperative dose of LB (LB group) and those who were not (control group). Comparisons of total opioid use and pain control were made using chi-square and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests.

RESULTS

A total of 18 patients were identified, 9 (50%) in the LB group and 9 (50%) in the control group. Overall, there were 13 (72%) female and 5 (28%) male patients with a mean age of 15.9 years. No surgical complications were observed over a mean length of stay of 2.7 days. Within the first 24 hours after surgery, the LB group had significantly lower total opioid use than the control group (17.5 vs 47.9 morphine milligram equivalents, respectively; p = 0.03) as well as lower mean pain scores reported by patients using a 10-point visual analog scale (3.6 vs 5.5 for the LB vs control groups, p = 0.04). However, from the first 24 postoperative hours to discharge, total opioid use (p = 0.51) and mean pain scores (p = 0.09) were statistically comparable between the two groups. There were 2/9 (22%) LB patients versus 0/9 (0%) control patients who did not require opioid analgesia at any point during hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a single intraoperative dose of LB in pediatric Chiari I malformation surgery appears to be safe and has the potential to reduce pain scores and opioid use when administered during the first 24 postoperative hours. From that time period to discharge, however, there may be no significant difference in total opioid use or pain scores.