1
|
Laconi G, Coppens S, Roofthooft E, Van De Velde M. High dose glucocorticoids for treatment of postoperative pain: A systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis. J Clin Anesth 2024; 93:111352. [PMID: 38091865 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2023.111352] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2023] [Revised: 10/30/2023] [Accepted: 11/22/2023] [Indexed: 01/14/2024]
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE Glucocorticoids as a component of multimodal analgesia have been studied for many years and their post-operative analgesic effects appear to be dose-dependent. We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the evidence of peri-operative high dose corticosteroid therapy in comparison to placebo (placebo drug) or control group (no treatment) for improving the quality of post-operative analgesia as indicated by a reduction of 10 mm in 100 mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) or reduction of 1 point in a 0-10 point VAS scale, or a reduction of 1 point in an 11-point Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) score, or reduction of rescue opioid analgesia, in patients undergoing all types of surgery. DESIGN Systematic review of RCTs with meta-analysis. SETTING Acute postoperative pain treatment in non-obese adult population. INTERVENTIONS Perioperative administration of high dose of Dexamethasone (≥ 0,2 mg/Kg or ≥ 15 mg), or a corresponding dose of a systemic glucocorticoid. MEASUREMENTS Primary outcomes were postoperative pain measured in 0-100 mm VAS score at 24 h after surgery upon rest and movement. Secondary outcomes were postoperative pain 0-100 mm VAS score 48 h after surgery, postoperative rescue analgesic requirement, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), relevant adverse events. MAIN RESULTS 47 RCT's were included (3943 patients). The Mean Difference (MD) of 100 mm VAS scores for pain at rest 24 h after surgery was -6.18 mm 95% CI [-8.53, -3.83], at motion -8.86 mm 95% CI [-11.82, -5.89]. Opioid analgesic requirements evaluated in Oral Morphine Equivalents (OME) was -10.00 mg 95% CI [-13.65, -6.34]. PONV events Odds Ratio of 0.29 95%CI [0.24, 0.36]. Major adverse events OR was 0.88 95% CI [0.65, 1.19]. Minor adverse events OR 1.29 95% CI [0.86, 1.92]. CONCLUSION High doses of glucocorticoids are one of the many possible tools available in multimodal postoperative analgesia, possibly reducing opioids consumption and recurrence of PONV but with no relevant effects in terms of reduction of postoperative VAS score. Available data show a safe therapeutic profile, without increase adverse events. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION CRD42020137119.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giulia Laconi
- Anesthesia and Intensive Care Unit, AOU Sant'Anna, Ferrara, Italy.
| | - Steve Coppens
- Department of Anesthesiology, University Hospitals of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, Biomedical Sciences Group, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Eva Roofthooft
- Department of Anesthesia, GZA Hospitals, Antwerp, Belgium and Department of Cardiovascular sciences, KULeuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Marc Van De Velde
- Department of Anesthesiology, University Hospitals of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, Biomedical Sciences Group, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Xu C, Wang C, Hu Y, Gu F, Lu J, Zhou Q. Comparing preoperative and postoperative dexamethasone effects on analgesia duration in shoulder surgery. iScience 2024; 27:109019. [PMID: 38352222 PMCID: PMC10863306 DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2024.109019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/05/2023] [Revised: 12/24/2023] [Accepted: 01/22/2024] [Indexed: 02/16/2024] Open
Abstract
Dexamethasone is commonly used as an adjuvant to prolong peripheral nerve block analgesia, but the optimal timing is unclear. This randomized equivalence trial tested whether preoperative versus postoperative intravenous dexamethasone have equivalent analgesic effects when combined with interscalene brachial plexus block for shoulder surgery. 168 patients were randomized to receive 5 mg dexamethasone either preoperatively or postoperatively. The primary outcome was duration of analgesia, analyzed for equivalence with a 2-h margin. The mean durations were equivalent between groups (11.5 h preoperative versus 10.7 h postoperative). The confidence intervals fell within the equivalence margin. There were no other clinically significant differences in secondary outcomes like time to first analgesia, motor recovery, opioid consumption, blood glucose, or complications. In conclusion, as an adjuvant for nerve block, preoperative and postoperative intravenous dexamethasone provide equivalent analgesic duration, allowing for flexibility in clinical use. This addresses previous uncertainty about timing while demonstrating equivalent efficacy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cheng Xu
- Department of Anaesthesiology, Shanghai Sixth People’s Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, 600 Yishan Road, Shanghai, China
| | - Chengyu Wang
- Department of Anaesthesiology, Shanghai Sixth People’s Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, 600 Yishan Road, Shanghai, China
| | - Yanling Hu
- Department of Anaesthesiology, Shanghai Sixth People’s Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, 600 Yishan Road, Shanghai, China
| | - Fei Gu
- Department of Anaesthesiology, Shanghai Sixth People’s Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, 600 Yishan Road, Shanghai, China
| | - Jie Lu
- Department of Anaesthesiology, Shanghai Sixth People’s Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, 600 Yishan Road, Shanghai, China
| | - Quanhong Zhou
- Department of Critical Care, Shanghai Sixth People’s Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, 600 Yishan Road, Shanghai, China
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Paul RW, Szukics PF, Brutico J, Tjoumakaris FP, Freedman KB. Postoperative Multimodal Pain Management and Opioid Consumption in Arthroscopy Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review. Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil 2022; 4:e721-e746. [PMID: 35494281 PMCID: PMC9042766 DOI: 10.1016/j.asmr.2021.09.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/24/2021] [Accepted: 09/17/2021] [Indexed: 01/01/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Ryan W. Paul
- Rothman Orthopaedic Institute, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A
| | - Patrick F. Szukics
- Rowan University School of Osteopathic Medicine, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Stratford, New Jersey, U.S.A
| | - Joseph Brutico
- Rothman Orthopaedic Institute, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A
| | | | - Kevin B. Freedman
- Rothman Orthopaedic Institute, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A
- Address correspondence to Kevin B. Freedman, M.D., Rothman Orthopaedic Institute, Thomas Jefferson University, 825 Old Lancaster Rd., Suite 200, Bryn Mawr, PA, 19010, U.S.A.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Hurley ET, Maye AB, Thompson K, Anil U, Resad S, Virk M, Strauss EJ, Alaia MJ, Campbell KA. Pain Control After Shoulder Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials With a Network Meta-analysis. Am J Sports Med 2021; 49:2262-2271. [PMID: 33321046 DOI: 10.1177/0363546520971757] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/31/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Shoulder arthroscopy is one of the most commonly performed orthopaedic procedures used to treat a variety of conditions, with >500,000 procedures performed each year. PURPOSE To systematically review the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on pain control after shoulder arthroscopy in the acute postoperative setting and to ascertain the best available evidence in managing pain after shoulder arthroscopy to optimize patient outcomes. STUDY DESIGN Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS A systematic review of the literature was performed based on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Studies were included if they were RCTs evaluating interventions to reduce postoperative pain after shoulder arthroscopy: nerve blocks, nerve block adjuncts, subacromial injections, patient-controlled analgesia, oral medications, or other modalities. Meta-analyses and network meta-analyses were performed where appropriate. RESULTS Our study included 83 RCTs. Across 40 studies, peripheral nerve blocks were found to significantly reduce postoperative pain and opioid use, but there was no significant difference among the variable nerve blocks in the network meta-analysis. However, continuous interscalene block did have the highest P-score at most time points. Nerve block adjuncts were consistently shown across 18 studies to prolong the nerve block time and reduce pain. Preoperative administration was shown to significantly reduce postoperative pain scores (P < .05). No benefit was found in any of the studies evaluating subacromial infusions. CONCLUSION Continuous interscalene block resulted in the lowest pain levels at most time points, although this was not significantly different when compared with the other nerve blocks. Additionally, nerve block adjuncts may prolong the postoperative block time and improve pain control. There is promising evidence for some oral medications and newer modalities to control pain and reduce opioid use. However, we found no evidence to support the use of subacromial infusions or patient-controlled analgesia.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Andrew B Maye
- New York University Langone Health, New York, New York, USA
| | | | - Utkarsh Anil
- New York University Langone Health, New York, New York, USA
| | - Sehar Resad
- New York University Langone Health, New York, New York, USA
| | - Mandeep Virk
- New York University Langone Health, New York, New York, USA
| | - Eric J Strauss
- New York University Langone Health, New York, New York, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Patel MS, Abboud JA, Sethi PM. Perioperative pain management for shoulder surgery: evolving techniques. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2020; 29:e416-e433. [PMID: 32844751 DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2020.04.049] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/01/2020] [Revised: 04/13/2020] [Accepted: 04/21/2020] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
Improving management of postoperative pain following shoulder surgery is vital for optimizing patient outcomes, length of stay, and decreasing addiction to narcotic medications. Multimodal analgesia (ie, controlling pain via multiple different analgesic methods with differing mechanisms) is an ever-evolving approach to enhancing pain control perioperatively after shoulder surgery. With a variety of options for the shoulder surgeon to turn to, this article succinctly reviews the pros and cons of each approach and proposes a potential pain management algorithm.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Manan S Patel
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The Rothman Institute at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
| | - Joseph A Abboud
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The Rothman Institute at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Paul M Sethi
- Orthopaedic & Neurosurgery Specialists, Greenwich, CT, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Weibel S, Rücker G, Eberhart LH, Pace NL, Hartl HM, Jordan OL, Mayer D, Riemer M, Schaefer MS, Raj D, Backhaus I, Helf A, Schlesinger T, Kienbaum P, Kranke P. Drugs for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults after general anaesthesia: a network meta-analysis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2020; 10:CD012859. [PMID: 33075160 PMCID: PMC8094506 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd012859.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 62] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common adverse effect of anaesthesia and surgery. Up to 80% of patients may be affected. These outcomes are a major cause of patient dissatisfaction and may lead to prolonged hospital stay and higher costs of care along with more severe complications. Many antiemetic drugs are available for prophylaxis. They have various mechanisms of action and side effects, but there is still uncertainty about which drugs are most effective with the fewest side effects. OBJECTIVES • To compare the efficacy and safety of different prophylactic pharmacologic interventions (antiemetic drugs) against no treatment, against placebo, or against each other (as monotherapy or combination prophylaxis) for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults undergoing any type of surgery under general anaesthesia • To generate a clinically useful ranking of antiemetic drugs (monotherapy and combination prophylaxis) based on efficacy and safety • To identify the best dose or dose range of antiemetic drugs in terms of efficacy and safety SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists of relevant systematic reviews. The first search was performed in November 2017 and was updated in April 2020. In the update of the search, 39 eligible studies were found that were not included in the analysis (listed as awaiting classification). SELECTION CRITERIA Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing effectiveness or side effects of single antiemetic drugs in any dose or combination against each other or against an inactive control in adults undergoing any type of surgery under general anaesthesia. All antiemetic drugs belonged to one of the following substance classes: 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists, D₂ receptor antagonists, NK₁ receptor antagonists, corticosteroids, antihistamines, and anticholinergics. No language restrictions were applied. Abstract publications were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS A review team of 11 authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias and subsequently extracted data. We performed pair-wise meta-analyses for drugs of direct interest (amisulpride, aprepitant, casopitant, dexamethasone, dimenhydrinate, dolasetron, droperidol, fosaprepitant, granisetron, haloperidol, meclizine, methylprednisolone, metoclopramide, ondansetron, palonosetron, perphenazine, promethazine, ramosetron, rolapitant, scopolamine, and tropisetron) compared to placebo (inactive control). We performed network meta-analyses (NMAs) to estimate the relative effects and ranking (with placebo as reference) of all available single drugs and combinations. Primary outcomes were vomiting within 24 hours postoperatively, serious adverse events (SAEs), and any adverse event (AE). Secondary outcomes were drug class-specific side effects (e.g. headache), mortality, early and late vomiting, nausea, and complete response. We performed subgroup network meta-analysis with dose of drugs as a moderator variable using dose ranges based on previous consensus recommendations. We assessed certainty of evidence of NMA treatment effects for all primary outcomes and drug class-specific side effects according to GRADE (CINeMA, Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis). We restricted GRADE assessment to single drugs of direct interest compared to placebo. MAIN RESULTS We included 585 studies (97,516 randomized participants). Most of these studies were small (median sample size of 100); they were published between 1965 and 2017 and were primarily conducted in Asia (51%), Europe (25%), and North America (16%). Mean age of the overall population was 42 years. Most participants were women (83%), had American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I and II (70%), received perioperative opioids (88%), and underwent gynaecologic (32%) or gastrointestinal surgery (19%) under general anaesthesia using volatile anaesthetics (88%). In this review, 44 single drugs and 51 drug combinations were compared. Most studies investigated only single drugs (72%) and included an inactive control arm (66%). The three most investigated single drugs in this review were ondansetron (246 studies), dexamethasone (120 studies), and droperidol (97 studies). Almost all studies (89%) reported at least one efficacy outcome relevant for this review. However, only 56% reported at least one relevant safety outcome. Altogether, 157 studies (27%) were assessed as having overall low risk of bias, 101 studies (17%) overall high risk of bias, and 327 studies (56%) overall unclear risk of bias. Vomiting within 24 hours postoperatively Relative effects from NMA for vomiting within 24 hours (282 RCTs, 50,812 participants, 28 single drugs, and 36 drug combinations) suggest that 29 out of 36 drug combinations and 10 out of 28 single drugs showed a clinically important benefit (defined as the upper end of the 95% confidence interval (CI) below a risk ratio (RR) of 0.8) compared to placebo. Combinations of drugs were generally more effective than single drugs in preventing vomiting. However, single NK₁ receptor antagonists showed treatment effects similar to most of the drug combinations. High-certainty evidence suggests that the following single drugs reduce vomiting (ordered by decreasing efficacy): aprepitant (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.38, high certainty, rank 3/28 of single drugs); ramosetron (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.59, high certainty, rank 5/28); granisetron (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.54, high certainty, rank 6/28); dexamethasone (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.57, high certainty, rank 8/28); and ondansetron (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.60, high certainty, rank 13/28). Moderate-certainty evidence suggests that the following single drugs probably reduce vomiting: fosaprepitant (RR 0.06, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.21, moderate certainty, rank 1/28) and droperidol (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.69, moderate certainty, rank 20/28). Recommended and high doses of granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol showed clinically important benefit, but low doses showed no clinically important benefit. Aprepitant was used mainly at high doses, ramosetron at recommended doses, and fosaprepitant at doses of 150 mg (with no dose recommendation available). Frequency of SAEs Twenty-eight RCTs were included in the NMA for SAEs (10,766 participants, 13 single drugs, and eight drug combinations). The certainty of evidence for SAEs when using one of the best and most reliable anti-vomiting drugs (aprepitant, ramosetron, granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol compared to placebo) ranged from very low to low. Droperidol (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.08 to 9.71, low certainty, rank 6/13) may reduce SAEs. We are uncertain about the effects of aprepitant (RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.26 to 7.36, very low certainty, rank 11/13), ramosetron (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.05 to 15.74, very low certainty, rank 7/13), granisetron (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.11 to 13.15, very low certainty, rank 10/13), dexamethasone (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.28 to 4.85, very low certainty, rank 9/13), and ondansetron (RR 1.62, 95% CI 0.32 to 8.10, very low certainty, rank 12/13). No studies reporting SAEs were available for fosaprepitant. Frequency of any AE Sixty-one RCTs were included in the NMA for any AE (19,423 participants, 15 single drugs, and 11 drug combinations). The certainty of evidence for any AE when using one of the best and most reliable anti-vomiting drugs (aprepitant, ramosetron, granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol compared to placebo) ranged from very low to moderate. Granisetron (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.05, moderate certainty, rank 7/15) probably has no or little effect on any AE. Dexamethasone (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.08, low certainty, rank 2/15) and droperidol (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.98, low certainty, rank 6/15) may reduce any AE. Ondansetron (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.01, low certainty, rank 9/15) may have little or no effect on any AE. We are uncertain about the effects of aprepitant (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.97, very low certainty, rank 3/15) and ramosetron (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.54, very low certainty, rank 11/15) on any AE. No studies reporting any AE were available for fosaprepitant. Class-specific side effects For class-specific side effects (headache, constipation, wound infection, extrapyramidal symptoms, sedation, arrhythmia, and QT prolongation) of relevant substances, the certainty of evidence for the best and most reliable anti-vomiting drugs mostly ranged from very low to low. Exceptions were that ondansetron probably increases headache (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.28, moderate certainty, rank 18/23) and probably reduces sedation (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.96, moderate certainty, rank 5/24) compared to placebo. The latter effect is limited to recommended and high doses of ondansetron. Droperidol probably reduces headache (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.86, moderate certainty, rank 5/23) compared to placebo. We have high-certainty evidence that dexamethasone (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.09, high certainty, rank 16/24) has no effect on sedation compared to placebo. No studies assessed substance class-specific side effects for fosaprepitant. Direction and magnitude of network effect estimates together with level of evidence certainty are graphically summarized for all pre-defined GRADE-relevant outcomes and all drugs of direct interest compared to placebo in http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4066353. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS We found high-certainty evidence that five single drugs (aprepitant, ramosetron, granisetron, dexamethasone, and ondansetron) reduce vomiting, and moderate-certainty evidence that two other single drugs (fosaprepitant and droperidol) probably reduce vomiting, compared to placebo. Four of the six substance classes (5-HT₃ receptor antagonists, D₂ receptor antagonists, NK₁ receptor antagonists, and corticosteroids) were thus represented by at least one drug with important benefit for prevention of vomiting. Combinations of drugs were generally more effective than the corresponding single drugs in preventing vomiting. NK₁ receptor antagonists were the most effective drug class and had comparable efficacy to most of the drug combinations. 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists were the best studied substance class. For most of the single drugs of direct interest, we found only very low to low certainty evidence for safety outcomes such as occurrence of SAEs, any AE, and substance class-specific side effects. Recommended and high doses of granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol were more effective than low doses for prevention of vomiting. Dose dependency of side effects was rarely found due to the limited number of studies, except for the less sedating effect of recommended and high doses of ondansetron. The results of the review are transferable mainly to patients at higher risk of nausea and vomiting (i.e. healthy women undergoing inhalational anaesthesia and receiving perioperative opioids). Overall study quality was limited, but certainty assessments of effect estimates consider this limitation. No further efficacy studies are needed as there is evidence of moderate to high certainty for seven single drugs with relevant benefit for prevention of vomiting. However, additional studies are needed to investigate potential side effects of these drugs and to examine higher-risk patient populations (e.g. individuals with diabetes and heart disease).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stephanie Weibel
- Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, University Hospital Wuerzburg, Wuerzburg, Germany
| | - Gerta Rücker
- Institute of Medical Biometry and Statistics, Faculty of Medicine and Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Leopold Hj Eberhart
- Department of Anaesthesiology & Intensive Care Medicine, Philipps-University Marburg, Marburg, Germany
| | - Nathan L Pace
- Department of Anesthesiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Hannah M Hartl
- Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, University Hospital Wuerzburg, Wuerzburg, Germany
| | - Olivia L Jordan
- Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, University Hospital Wuerzburg, Wuerzburg, Germany
| | - Debora Mayer
- Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, University Hospital Wuerzburg, Wuerzburg, Germany
| | - Manuel Riemer
- Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, University Hospital Wuerzburg, Wuerzburg, Germany
| | - Maximilian S Schaefer
- Department of Anaesthesiology, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
- Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care & Pain Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Diana Raj
- Department of Anaesthesia, Intensive Care Medicine and Pain Medicine, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, UK
| | - Insa Backhaus
- Department of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Antonia Helf
- Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, University Hospital Wuerzburg, Wuerzburg, Germany
| | - Tobias Schlesinger
- Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, University Hospital Wuerzburg, Wuerzburg, Germany
| | - Peter Kienbaum
- Department of Anaesthesiology, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Peter Kranke
- Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, University Hospital Wuerzburg, Wuerzburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Polderman JAW, Farhang‐Razi V, Dieren S, Kranke P, DeVries JH, Hollmann MW, Preckel B, Hermanides J. Adverse side‐effects of dexamethasone in surgical patients – an abridged Cochrane systematic review. Anaesthesia 2019; 74:929-939. [DOI: 10.1111/anae.14610] [Citation(s) in RCA: 55] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 01/23/2019] [Indexed: 01/18/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- J. A. W. Polderman
- Department of Anaesthesiology Amsterdam University Medical Centre Amsterdamthe Netherlands
| | - V. Farhang‐Razi
- Department of Anaesthesiology Amsterdam University Medical Centre Amsterdamthe Netherlands
| | - S. Dieren
- Department of Surgery Amsterdam University Medical Centre Amsterdamthe Netherlands
| | - P. Kranke
- Department of Anaesthesia and Critical Care University Hospitals of Wuerzburg Germany
| | - J. H. DeVries
- Department of Endocrinology Amsterdam University Medical Centre Amsterdamthe Netherlands
| | - M. W. Hollmann
- Department of Anaesthesiology and Laboratory of Experimental Intensive Care and Anaesthesiology (L.E.I.C.A.) Amsterdam University Medical Centre Amsterdam the Netherlands
| | - B. Preckel
- Department of Anaesthesiology and Laboratory of Experimental Intensive Care and Anaesthesiology (L.E.I.C.A.) Amsterdam University Medical Centre Amsterdam the Netherlands
| | - J. Hermanides
- Department of Anaesthesiology Amsterdam University Medical Centre Amsterdamthe Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Polderman JAW, Farhang‐Razi V, Van Dieren S, Kranke P, DeVries JH, Hollmann MW, Preckel B, Hermanides J. Adverse side effects of dexamethasone in surgical patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018; 11:CD011940. [PMID: 30480776 PMCID: PMC6426282 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd011940.pub3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In the perioperative period, dexamethasone is widely and effectively used for prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), for pain management, and to facilitate early discharge after ambulatory surgery.Long-term treatment with steroids has many side effects, such as adrenal insufficiency, increased infection risk, hyperglycaemia, high blood pressure, osteoporosis, and development of diabetes mellitus. However, whether a single steroid load during surgery has negative effects during the postoperative period has not yet been studied. OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of a steroid load of dexamethasone on postoperative systemic or wound infection, delayed wound healing, and blood glucose change in adult surgical patients (with planned subgroup analysis of patients with and without diabetes). SEARCH METHODS We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), in the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science for relevant articles on 29 January 2018. We searched without language or date restriction two clinical trial registries to identify ongoing studies, and we handsearched the reference lists of relevant publications to identify all eligible trials. SELECTION CRITERIA We searched for randomized controlled trials comparing an incidental steroid load of dexamethasone versus a control intervention for adult patients undergoing surgery. We required that studies include a follow-up of 30 days for proper assessment of the number of postoperative infections, delayed wound healing, and the glycaemic response. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data from relevant studies, and assessed all included studies for bias. We resolved differences by discussion and pooled included studies in a meta-analysis. We calculated Peto odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes. Our primary outcomes were postoperative systemic or wound infection, delayed wound healing, and glycaemic response within 24 hours. We created a funnel plot for the primary outcome postoperative (wound or systemic) infection. We used GRADE to assess the quality of evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS We included in the meta-analysis 37 studies that included adults undergoing a large variety of surgical procedures (i.e. abdominal surgery, cardiac surgery, neurosurgery, and orthopaedic surgery). We excluded one previously included study, as this study was recently retracted. Age range of participants was 18 to 80 years. There is probably little or no difference in the risk of postoperative (wound or systemic) infection with dexamethasone compared with no treatment, placebo, or active control (ramosetron, ondansetron, or tropisetron) (Peto OR 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80 to 1.27; 4603 participants, 26 studies; I² = 32%; moderate-quality evidence). The effects of dexamethasone on delayed wound healing are unclear because the wide confidence interval includes both meaningful benefit and harm (Peto OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.28 to 3.43; 1072 participants, eight studies; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence). Dexamethasone may produce a mild increase in glucose levels among participants without diabetes during the first 12 hours after surgery (MD 13 mg/dL, 95% CI 6 to 21; 10 studies; 595 participants; I² = 50%; low-quality evidence). We identified two studies reporting on glycaemic response after dexamethasone in participants with diabetes within 24 hours after surgery (MD 32 mg/dL, 95% CI 15 to 49; 74 participants; I² = 0%; very low-quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS A single dose of dexamethasone probably does not increase the risk for postoperative infection. It is uncertain whether dexamethasone has an effect on delayed wound healing in the general surgical population owing to imprecision in trial results. Participants with increased risk for delayed wound healing (e.g. participants with diabetes, those taking immunosuppressive drugs) were not included in the randomized studies reporting on delayed wound healing included in this meta-analysis; therefore our findings should be extrapolated to the clinical setting with caution. Furthermore, one has to keep in mind that dexamethasone induces a mild increase in glucose. For patients with diabetes, very limited evidence suggests a more pronounced increase in glucose. Whether this influences wound healing in a clinically relevant way remains to be established. Once assessed, the two studies awaiting classification and three that are ongoing may alter the conclusions of this review.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jorinde AW Polderman
- Academic Medical Center (AMC) University of AmsterdamDepartment of AnaesthesiologyMeibergdreef 9AmsterdamNetherlands1105 AZ
| | - Violet Farhang‐Razi
- Academic Medical Center (AMC) University of AmsterdamDepartment of AnaesthesiologyMeibergdreef 9AmsterdamNetherlands1105 AZ
| | - Susan Van Dieren
- Academic Medical Center (AMC) University of AmsterdamDepartment of AnaesthesiologyMeibergdreef 9AmsterdamNetherlands1105 AZ
| | - Peter Kranke
- University of WürzburgDepartment of Anaesthesia and Critical CareOberdürrbacher Str. 6WürzburgGermany97080
| | - J Hans DeVries
- Academic Medical CentreDepartment of Internal MedicinePO Box 22700AmsterdamNetherlands1100 DE
| | - Markus W Hollmann
- Academic Medical Center (AMC) University of AmsterdamDepartment of AnaesthesiologyMeibergdreef 9AmsterdamNetherlands1105 AZ
| | - Benedikt Preckel
- Academic Medical Center (AMC) University of AmsterdamDepartment of AnaesthesiologyMeibergdreef 9AmsterdamNetherlands1105 AZ
| | - Jeroen Hermanides
- Academic Medical Center (AMC) University of AmsterdamDepartment of AnaesthesiologyMeibergdreef 9AmsterdamNetherlands1105 AZ
| | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Rasmussen JK, Nikolajsen L, Bjørnholdt KT. Acute postoperative pain after arthroscopic rotator cuff surgery: A review of methods of pain assessment. SICOT J 2018; 4:49. [PMID: 30465647 PMCID: PMC6250077 DOI: 10.1051/sicotj/2018042] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/22/2018] [Accepted: 08/10/2018] [Indexed: 12/26/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Pain can be severe during the first days after arthroscopic surgery, and acute pain is an important outcome in clinical trials of surgical technique or anaesthetic strategy. A standardized, validated method of assessing acute postoperative pain would improve the quality of clinical studies, and facilitate systematic reviews and meta-analyses. A step on the way towards this standard is to investigate the methods most commonly used in recent literature. METHODS PubMed and CINAHL databases were searched, including studies of arthroscopic rotator cuff surgery with a primary pain-related outcome during the first postoperative week, published in English from 2012 to 2017. RESULTS A total of 47 studies were included, all measuring pain intensity using a pain rating scale. Most frequently used was the visual analogue scale using the anchors "no pain" and "worst pain imaginable", with recordings at 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hours postoperatively. A total of 34 studies recorded analgesic consumption, usually as average cumulated consumption in mg. Time to first analgesic request or first pain were recorded in 11 studies, and 4 different starting points were used. DISCUSSION This review describes the currently most common methods of assessing acute postoperative pain in clinical trials of arthroscopic shoulder surgery involving rotator cuff repair, and the large variety of methods applied. Based on this study and international guidelines, several recommendations on how to measure and report postoperative pain outcomes in future trials are proposed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Lone Nikolajsen
- Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Aarhus University Hospital, Research, C319, Palle Juul Jensens Boulevard 99, Aarhus, Denmark
| | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Polderman JAW, Farhang‐Razi V, Van Dieren S, Kranke P, DeVries JH, Hollmann MW, Preckel B, Hermanides J. Adverse side effects of dexamethasone in surgical patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018; 8:CD011940. [PMID: 30152137 PMCID: PMC6513495 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd011940.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/24/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In the perioperative period, dexamethasone is widely and effectively used for prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), for pain management, and to facilitate early discharge after ambulatory surgery.Long-term treatment with steroids has many side effects, such as adrenal insufficiency, increased infection risk, hyperglycaemia, high blood pressure, osteoporosis, and development of diabetes mellitus. However, whether a single steroid load during surgery has negative effects during the postoperative period has not yet been studied. OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of a steroid load of dexamethasone on postoperative systemic or wound infection, delayed wound healing, and blood glucose change in adult surgical patients (with planned subgroup analysis of patients with and without diabetes). SEARCH METHODS We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), in the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science for relevant articles on 29 January 2018. We searched without language or date restriction two clinical trial registries to identify ongoing studies, and we handsearched the reference lists of relevant publications to identify all eligible trials. SELECTION CRITERIA We searched for randomized controlled trials comparing an incidental steroid load of dexamethasone versus a control intervention for adult patients undergoing surgery. We required that studies include a follow-up of 30 days for proper assessment of the number of postoperative infections, delayed wound healing, and the glycaemic response. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data from relevant studies, and assessed all included studies for bias. We resolved differences by discussion and pooled included studies in a meta-analysis. We calculated Peto odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes. Our primary outcomes were postoperative systemic or wound infection, delayed wound healing, and glycaemic response within 24 hours. We created a funnel plot for the primary outcome postoperative (wound or systemic) infection. We used GRADE to assess the quality of evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS We included in the meta-analysis 38 studies that included adults undergoing a large variety of surgical procedures (i.e. abdominal surgery, cardiac surgery, neurosurgery, and orthopaedic surgery). Age range of participants was 18 to 80 years. There is probably little or no difference in the risk of postoperative (wound or systemic) infection with dexamethasone compared with no treatment, placebo, or active control (ramosetron, ondansetron, or tropisetron) (Peto OR 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80 to 1.27; 4931 participants, 27 studies; I² = 27%; moderate-quality evidence). The effects of dexamethasone on delayed wound healing are unclear because the wide confidence interval includes both meaningful benefit and harm (Peto OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.28 to 3.43; 1072 participants, eight studies; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence). Dexamethasone may produce a mild increase in glucose levels among participants without diabetes during the first 12 hours after surgery (MD 13 mg/dL, 95% CI 6 to 21; 10 studies; 595 participants; I² = 50%; low-quality evidence). We identified two studies reporting on glycaemic response after dexamethasone in participants with diabetes within 24 hours after surgery (MD 32 mg/dL, 95% CI 15 to 49; 74 participants; I² = 0%; very low-quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS A single dose of dexamethasone probably does not increase the risk for postoperative infection. It is uncertain whether dexamethasone has an effect on delayed wound healing in the general surgical population owing to imprecision in trial results. Participants with increased risk for delayed wound healing (e.g. participants with diabetes, those taking immunosuppressive drugs) were not included in the randomized studies reporting on delayed wound healing included in this meta-analysis; therefore our findings should be extrapolated to the clinical setting with caution. Furthermore, one has to keep in mind that dexamethasone induces a mild increase in glucose. For patients with diabetes, very limited evidence suggests a more pronounced increase in glucose. Whether this influences wound healing in a clinically relevant way remains to be established. Once assessed, the three studies awaiting classification and two that are ongoing may alter the conclusions of this review.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jorinde AW Polderman
- Academic Medical Center (AMC) University of AmsterdamDepartment of AnaesthesiologyMeibergdreef 9AmsterdamNetherlands1105 AZ
| | - Violet Farhang‐Razi
- Academic Medical Center (AMC) University of AmsterdamDepartment of AnaesthesiologyMeibergdreef 9AmsterdamNetherlands1105 AZ
| | - Susan Van Dieren
- Academic Medical Center (AMC) University of AmsterdamDepartment of AnaesthesiologyMeibergdreef 9AmsterdamNetherlands1105 AZ
| | - Peter Kranke
- University of WürzburgDepartment of Anaesthesia and Critical CareOberdürrbacher Str. 6WürzburgGermany97080
| | - J Hans DeVries
- Academic Medical CentreDepartment of Internal MedicinePO Box 22700AmsterdamNetherlands1100 DE
| | - Markus W Hollmann
- Academic Medical Center (AMC) University of AmsterdamDepartment of AnaesthesiologyMeibergdreef 9AmsterdamNetherlands1105 AZ
| | - Benedikt Preckel
- Academic Medical Center (AMC) University of AmsterdamDepartment of AnaesthesiologyMeibergdreef 9AmsterdamNetherlands1105 AZ
| | - Jeroen Hermanides
- Academic Medical Center (AMC) University of AmsterdamDepartment of AnaesthesiologyMeibergdreef 9AmsterdamNetherlands1105 AZ
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Wittayapairoj A, Wittayapairoj K, Kulawong A, Huntula Y. Effect of intermediate dose dexamethasone on post-operative pain in lumbar spine surgery: A randomized, triple-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Asian J Anesthesiol 2017; 55:73-77. [PMID: 28986051 DOI: 10.1016/j.aja.2017.08.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/06/2017] [Revised: 08/22/2017] [Accepted: 08/24/2017] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Dexamethasone has demonstrated analgesic properties and is used as an adjunctive pain agent for many procedures. We evaluated the efficacy of a single, intermediate dose of dexamethasone on post-operative analgesic consumption, and pain scores for lumbar spine surgery. METHODS Eighty patients aged between 18 and 70 scheduled for lumbar decompressive laminectomy were randomly allocated into two groups to receive either intravenous 0.2 mg/kg dexamethasone (group D = 40) or normal saline (group P = 40) before anesthetic induction. Post-operative total morphine consumption and the respective pain score at the PACU, 4, 6, 12, 24 and 48 h were evaluated. In addition, any adverse events were recorded. RESULTS Total post-operative morphine consumption within 48 h was significantly lower in group D (34.5 vs. 42.5 mg, p = 0.031); however, the respective morphine consumption at each assessment was similar between groups. The respective NRS pain score at rest and upon movement in both groups was not significantly different for any time comparison. The average NRS pain score at rest and upon movement within 48 h was similar in both groups (i.e., NRS at rest Group D 3.6 vs. Group P 3.8, p = 0.936, and NRS for movement Group D 6.2 vs. Group P 6.3, p = 0.791). The adverse events within 48 h were also similar and serious complications (i.e., respiratory depression or surgical infection) were not found in either group. CONCLUSION A single, intermediate dose of dexamethasone before anesthetic induction could minimally decrease post-operative morphine consumption within 48 h after lumbar decompressive laminectomy without any effect on the pain score.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aumjit Wittayapairoj
- Department of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
| | | | - Atiporn Kulawong
- Department of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand
| | - Yuwadee Huntula
- Department of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Bambaren IA, Dominguez F, Elias Martin ME, Domínguez S. Anesthesia and Analgesia in the Patient with an Unstable Shoulder. Open Orthop J 2017; 11:848-860. [PMID: 29114334 PMCID: PMC5646176 DOI: 10.2174/1874325001711010848] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/02/2016] [Revised: 10/21/2016] [Accepted: 10/28/2016] [Indexed: 12/01/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction: The patient with an unstable shoulder represents a challenge for the anesthesiologist. Most patients will be young individuals in good health but both shoulder dislocation reduction, a procedure that is usually performed under specific analgesia in an urgent setting, and instability surgery anesthesia and postoperative management present certain peculiarities. Material and Methods: For the purpose of the article, 78 references including clinical trials and reviews were included. The review was organized considering the patient that presents an acute shoulder dislocation and the patient with chronic shoulder instability that requires surgery. In both cases the aspects like general or regional anesthesia, surgical positions and postoperative pain management were analyzed. Conclusion: The patient with an acutely dislocated shoulder is usually managed in the emergency room. Although reduction without analgesia is often performed in non-medical settings, an appropriate level of analgesia will ease the reduction procedure avoiding further complications. Intravenous analgesia and sedation is considered the gold standard but requires appropriate monitorization and airway control. Intraarticular local analgesic injection is considered also a safe and effective procedure. General anesthesia or nerve blocks can also be considered. The surgical management of the patient with shoulder instability requires a proper anesthetic management. This should start with an exhaustive preoperative evaluation that should be focused in identifying potential respiratory problems that might be complicated by local nerve blocks. Intraoperative management can be challenging, especially for patients operated in beach chair position, for the relationship with problems related to cerebral hypoperfusion, a situation related to hypotension events directly linked to patient positioning. Different nerve blocks will help attaining excellent analgesia both during and after the surgical procedure. An interescalene nerve block should be considered the best technique, but in certain cases, other blocks can be considered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Fernando Dominguez
- Ramón y Cajal Hospital. Anesthesia and Intensive Care Department. Madrid. Spain
| | | | - Silvia Domínguez
- Ramón y Cajal Hospital. Anesthesia and Intensive Care Department. Madrid. Spain
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Analgesic effect of a single dose of betamethasone after ambulatory knee arthroscopy: a randomized controlled trial. J Anesth 2016; 30:803-10. [DOI: 10.1007/s00540-016-2209-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/29/2016] [Accepted: 06/21/2016] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
|
14
|
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Persistent incisional pain is common after cardiac surgery and is believed to be in part related to inflammation and poorly controlled acute pain. Methylprednisolone is a corticosteroid with substantial antiinflammatory and analgesic properties and is thus likely to ameliorate persistent surgical pain. Therefore, the authors tested the primary hypothesis that patients randomized to methylprednisolone have less persistent incisional pain than those given placebo.
Methods
One thousand forty-three patients having cardiopulmonary bypass for cardiac surgery via a median sternotomy were included in this substudy of Steroids in Cardiac Surgery (SIRS) trial. Patients were randomized to 500 mg intraoperative methylprednisolone or placebo. Incisional pain was assessed at 30 days and 6 months after surgery, and the potential risk factors were also evaluated.
Results
Methylprednisolone administration did not reduce pain at 30 days or persistent incisional pain at 6 months, which occurred in 78 of 520 patients (15.7%) in the methylprednisolone group and in 88 of 523 patients (17.8%) in the placebo group. The odds ratio for methylprednisolone was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.79 to 1.09, P = 0.37). Furthermore, there was no difference in worst pain and average pain in the last 24 h, pain interference with daily life, or use of pain medicine at 6 months. Younger age, female sex, and surgical infections were associated with the development of persistent incisional pain.
Conclusions
Intraoperative methylprednisolone administration does not reduce persistent incisional pain at 6 months in patients recovering from cardiac surgery.
Collapse
|
15
|
Desmet M, Vanneste B, Reynvoet M, Van Cauwelaert J, Verhelst L, Pottel H, Missant C, Van de Velde M. A randomised controlled trial of intravenous dexamethasone combined with interscalene brachial plexus blockade for shoulder surgery. Anaesthesia 2015; 70:1180-5. [PMID: 26082203 DOI: 10.1111/anae.13156] [Citation(s) in RCA: 49] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 04/30/2015] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
We recruited patients scheduled for shoulder rotator cuff repair or subacromial decompression under general anaesthesia and interscalene brachial plexus blockade (30 ml ropivacaine 0.5%). We allocated 240 participants into four groups of 60 that were given pre-operative saline 0.9% or dexamethasone 1.25 mg, 2.5 mg or 10 mg, intravenously. We recorded outcomes for 48 h. The median (IQR [range]) time to first postoperative analgesic request after saline was 12.2 (11.0-14.1 [1.8-48]) h, which was extended by intravenous dexamethasone 2.5 mg and 10 mg to 17.4 (14.9-21.5 [7.2-48]) h, p < 0.0001, and 20.1 (17.2-24.3 [1.3-48]) h, p < 0.0001, respectively, but not by dexamethasone 1.25 mg, 14.0 (12.1-17.7 [2.1-48]) h, p = 0.05. Postoperative analgesia was given sooner after rotator cuff repair than subacromial decompression, hazard ratio (95% CI) 2.2 (1.6-3.0), p < 0.0001, but later in older participants, hazard ratio (95% CI) 0.98 (0.97-0.99) per year, p < 0.0001.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Desmet
- Department of Anaesthesiology, AZ Groeninge, Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - B Vanneste
- Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - M Reynvoet
- Department of Anaesthesiology, AZ Groeninge, Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - J Van Cauwelaert
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, AZ Groeninge, Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - L Verhelst
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, AZ Groeninge, Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - H Pottel
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven Campus Kulak, Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - C Missant
- Department of Anaesthesiology, UZ Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - M Van de Velde
- Department of Anaesthesiology, UZ Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|