Routine use of dexamethasone for postoperative nausea and vomiting: the case against

Correlation of Venous Blood Sugar Measured by Lab Method and Capillary Blood Sugar Measured by Glucometer in Neurosurgical Patients Receiving Dexamethasone

Background  Brain is vulnerable to extreme blood glucose levels that may occur due to multiple factors in neurosurgical patients; perioperative use of dexamethasone is the most common. Thus, frequent monitoring of blood sugar levels is advocated. This study aimed to assess correlation between venous blood sugar measured by lab method and capillary blood sugar by glucometer at various time intervals. Materials and Methods  This prospective and observational study was conducted in 20 adult patients of either sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade I to III, scheduled to undergo brain tumor resection. The patients who were already on dexamethasone and received intraoperatively 8 mg dexamethasone were enrolled. Standard anesthesia technique and intraoperative monitoring were followed in all patients. Venous sample was withdrawn and blood sugar analyzed in laboratory, while at the same time capillary blood sugar was tested by glucometer. The sampling was done at baseline, 1 hourly after dexamethasone administration till 4 hours and then 8, 12, and 24 hours. The correlation between the two values was assessed. Results  During the study, 160 venous and 160 capillary blood sugar levels were analyzed. Though capillary blood sugar levels were slightly higher than venous sugar levels, there was strong correlation between the two (Pearson correlation coefficient) with p -value less than 0.05 except at 24 hours when two values were not correlated. Conclusion  Capillary blood sugar levels by glucometer have good correlation with venous sugar levels; therefore, this method may be adopted routinely for frequent blood sugar estimation as it is reliable, easy, and practical.

Perineural low dexamethasone dose as adjuvant in supraclavicular brachial plexus block for arteriovenous fistula creation in end stage renal disease: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Dexamethasone as adjunct to local anesthetic solution improves the quality of brachial plexus block (BPB). However, evidence for its efficacy at low doses (< 4 mg) is lacking. This study was designed to evaluate the duration of analgesia attained with low dose dexamethasone as adjuvant to local anesthetic for creation of arteriovenous fistula (AVF) under BPB.

METHODS

Sixty-six patients scheduled for AVF creation were randomly allocated to receive either saline (control) or 2 mg dexamethasone, together with 0.5% ropivacaine and 0.2% lignocaine. The primary outcome was duration of analgesia, defined as time from performing the block to the first analgesic request. The secondary outcomes were time from injection to complete sensory block, time from injection to complete motor block, duration of motor block, postoperative analgesic consumption, and fistula patency at three months.

RESULTS

All the blocks were effective. In the group that received dexamethasone, the time to first analgesic request was significantly delayed (432 ± 43.8 minutes vs. 386.4 ± 40.2 minutes; p < 0.01). The onset of sensory and motor blockade occurred faster in dexamethasone group and overall analgesic consumption was also reduced. However, dexamethasone addition did not prolong the duration of motor block. There was no statistically significant difference in the patency of fistulas between the two groups at three months. (p = 0.34).

CONCLUSION

Addition of low-dose perineural dexamethasone to local anesthetic solution significantly prolonged the duration of analgesia. Further trials are warranted to compare the adverse effects between dexamethasone doses of 4 mg and lower.

Effects of Dexamethasone on Postoperative Glycemic Control in Diabetic Patients Following Primary Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Retrospective Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Concerns regarding the effects of dexamethasone on diabetics' glucose control have stymied its use following total joint arthroplasty (TJA). This study aimed to evaluate the effects of two intravenous (IV) perioperative doses of dexamethasone on glucose levels, pain scores, and inpatient opioid consumption following TJA in diabetic patients.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 523 diabetic patients who underwent primary elective THA and 953 diabetic patients who underwent primary elective TKA between May 6, 2020 and December 17, 2021. Patients who received one dose (1D) of perioperative dexamethasone 10 mg IV were compared to patients who received two doses (2D). Primary outcomes included postoperative glucose levels, opioid consumption as morphine milligram equivalences (MMEs), postoperative pain as Verbal Rating Scale (VRS) pain scores, and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

The 2D TKA cohort had significantly greater average and maximum blood glucose levels from 24 to 60 hours compared to the 1D TKA cohort. The 2D THA cohort had significantly greater average blood glucose levels at 24 to 36 hours compared to the 1D THA cohort. However, the 2D TKA group had significantly reduced opioid consumption from 24 to 72 hours and reduced total consumption compared to the 1D TKA group. VRS pain scores did not differ between cohorts for both TKA and THA at any interval.

CONCLUSION

Administration of a second perioperative dose of dexamethasone was associated with increased postoperative blood glucose levels. However, the observed effect on glucose control may not outweigh the clinical benefits of a second perioperative dose of glucocorticoids.

Postoperative systemic inflammatory dysregulation and corticosteroids: a narrative review

In some patients, the inflammatory-immune response to surgical injury progresses to a harmful, dysregulated state. We posit that postoperative systemic inflammatory dysregulation forms part of a pathophysiological response to surgical injury that places patients at increased risk of complications and subsequently prolongs hospital stay. In this narrative review, we have outlined the evolution, measurement and prediction of postoperative systemic inflammatory dysregulation, distinguishing it from a healthy and self-limiting host response. We reviewed the actions of glucocorticoids and the potential for heterogeneous responses to peri-operative corticosteroid supplementation. We have then appraised the evidence highlighting the safety of corticosteroid supplementation, and the potential benefits of high/repeated doses to reduce the risks of major complications and death. Finally, we addressed how clinical trials in the future should target patients at higher risk of peri-operative inflammatory complications, whereby corticosteroid regimes should be tailored to modify not only the a priori risk, but also further adjusted in response to markers of an evolving pathophysiological response.

Different effects of a perioperative single dose of dexamethasone on wound healing in mice with or without sepsis

Introduction

Sepsis delays wound healing owing to uncontrolled inflammation. A single perioperative dose of dexamethasone is widely used because of its anti-inflammatory effects. However, the effects of dexamethasone on wound healing in sepsis remain unclear.

Methods

We discuss the methods to obtain dose curves and explore the safe dosage range for wound healing in mice with or without sepsis. A saline or LPS intraperitoneal injection was applied to C57BL/6 mice. After 24 hours, the mice received a saline or DEX intraperitoneal injection and full-thickness, dorsal wounding operation. Wound healing was observed by image record, immunofluorescence and histological staining. Inflammatory cytokines and M1/M2 macrophages in wounds were determined by ELISA and immunofluorescence, respectively.

Results

Dose-response curves reflected the safe dosage range of DEX in mice with or without sepsis, from 0.121 to 2.03 mg/kg and from 0 to 0.633 mg/kg, respectively. we found that a single dose of dexamethasone (1 mg/kg, i.p.) promoted wound healing in septic mice, but delayed wound healing in normal mice. In normal mice, dexamethasone delays inflammation, resulting in an insufficient number of macrophages during the healing process. In septic mice, dexamethasone alleviated excessive inflammation and maintained the balance of M1/M2 macrophages in the early and late healing process.

Discussion

In summary, the safe dosage range of dexamethasone in septic mice is wider than that in normal mice. A single dose of dexamethasone (1 mg/kg) increased wound healing in septic mice, but delayed it in normal mice. Our findings provide helpful suggestions for the rational use of dexamethasone.

Personalized Medicine for Classical Anesthesia Drugs and Cancer Progression

In this review, we aim to discuss the use and effect of five different drugs used in the induction of anesthesia in cancer patients. Propofol, fentanyl, rocuronium, sugammadex, and dexamethasone are commonly used to induce anesthesia and prevent pain during surgery. Currently, the mechanisms of these drugs to induce the state of anesthesia are not yet fully understood, despite their use being considered safe. An association between anesthetic agents and cancer progression has been determined; therefore, it is essential to recognize the effects of all agents during cancer treatment and to evaluate whether the treatment provided to the patients could be more precise. We also highlight the use of in silico tools to review drug interaction effects and safety, as well as the efficacy of the treatment used according to different subgroups of patients.

A novel therapeutic approach for reducing postoperative inflammatory complications after impacted mandibular third molar removal

BACKGROUND

This study was designed to compare effect of combined use of dexamethasone and honey versus each agent alone in controlling complications associated with removal of impacted mandibular third molar.

METHODS

This randomized clinical study included patients suffering from impacted mandibular wisdom teeth. Patients were divided randomly into 4 groups. Group I, control, group II, received dexamethasone injection preoperatively, group III, received honey locally in the wound after extraction, and group IV, received dexamethasone injection preoperatively and topical honey application. All patients were evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively to assess facial edema, interincisal distance, pain, and total analgesic dose used.

RESULTS

Significant edema developed in group I than other groups and improved significantly in group II and III on seventh postoperative day, and tenth postoperative day in group I. Insignificant edema developed in group IV. Significant decrease in interincisal distance occurred in all groups on third postoperative day that improved significantly on seventh postoperative days in all groups except group I, it improved on tenth postoperative day. Pain was significantly minimum in group IV than other groups and its maximum degree was in group I.

CONCLUSION

Both dexamethasone and honey are an effective way of minimizing swelling, pain, and trismus after removal of impacted lower third molars. Both agents either alone or in combination provide simple, safe, painless, and cost-effective method to eliminate postoperative discomfort. However, dexamethasone or honey can decrease complications related to surgical extraction of mandibular third molar, the simultaneous application of both agents is more effective method in this regard.

Methylprednisolone and Hyaluronic Acid versus Each Agent Alone to Control Complication of Impacted Wisdom Removal

Introduction. Extraction of impacted molars is commonest operation in oral cavity and associated with complications disturbing patient’s quality of life. Hyaluronic acid is a nontoxic agent recommended for wound management due to its anti-inflammatory effects. Also, methylprednisolone sodium is used to reduce pain and edema. The aim this study was to compare the effect of combined use of corticosteroid and hyaluronic acid versus each agent alone in controlling postextraction complications of impacted mandibular third molars. Materials and Methods. This prospective randomized trial included patients suffering from impacted mandibular third molar. Patients were divided into four groups. Group I, control, and group II received methylprednisolone sodium succinate injection preoperatively, group III received hyaluronic acid applied in extraction socket, and group IV received preoperative methylprednisolone sodium succinate injection and topical hyaluronic acid in the socket. All patients were evaluated preoperatively and postoperative day to assess swelling, pain, mouth opening, and total analgesic dose. Results. Group IV showed insignificant edema along the study period, and other groups showed significant edema on third postoperative day that improved on seventh postoperative in group II and III and tenth postoperative day in group I. Significant decreased mouth opening occurred on second postoperative day in group I, while in other groups, it occurred in third postoperative day. Significant improvement occurred on seventh postoperative day in all groups except in group I which occurred on tenth postoperative day. There was less pain and analgesic dose reported in group IV than other groups. Conclusion. Combined use of methylprednisolone sodium succinate and hyaluronic acid significantly decrease postoperative complications than using each agent alone.

Postoperative Infection Risk in Total Joint Arthroplasty After Perioperative IV Corticosteroid Administration: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies

BACKGROUND

Perioperative corticosteroid administration is associated with reduced postoperative nausea, pain, and enhanced recovery after surgery. However, potential complications including wound and periprosthetic joint infections remain a concern for surgeons after total joint arthroplasty (TJA).

METHODS

A systematic review of the search databases PubMed, Google Scholar, and EMBASE was made in January 2021 to identify comparative studies evaluating infection risk after perioperative corticosteroid administration in TJA. PRISMA guidelines were used for this review. Meta-analysis was used to assess infection risk in accordance with joint and corticosteroid dosing regimen used.

RESULTS

201 studies were returned after initial search strategy, with 29 included for review after application of inclusion and exclusion criteria. Studies were categorized as using low- or high-dose corticosteroid with single or repeat dosing regimens. Single low-dose corticosteroid administration was not associated with an increased risk of infection (P = .4; CI = 0.00-0.00). Single high-dose corticosteroid was not associated with an increased infection risk (P = .3; CI = 0.00-0.01) nor did repeat low-dose regimens result in increased risk of infection (P = .8; CI = -0.02-0.02). Studies assessing repeat high-dosing regimens reported no increased infection, with small numbers of participants included. No significant risk difference in infection risk was noted in hip (P = .59; CI = -0.03-0.02) or knee (P = .2; CI = 0.00-0.01) arthroplasty. Heterogeneity in patient profiles included in studies to date was noted.

CONCLUSION

Use of perioperative corticosteroid in TJA does not appear to be associated with increased risk of postoperative infection in patients with limited comorbidities. Further research is warranted to evaluate postoperative complications after TJA in these at-risk patient populations.

Osteogenic Evaluation of Hydroxyapatite Scaffold Loaded With Dexamethasone in Femoral Drill Holes

BACKGROUND/AIM

Many cases of bone damage are due to trauma and metabolic diseases. This study aimed to evaluate bone regeneration into a porous hydroxyapatite (HA) scaffold using dexamethasone (DM)-loaded polymeric microspheres.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Four adult dogs were used to evaluate the in vivo performance of DM-loaded microspheres immobilized on the surfaces of porous HA scaffolds. Two 5-mm drill holes were created in both the left and right femurs of each dog. The experimental groups included a control group (drill holes filled with HA scaffold alone), a DM 20 group (holes filled with DM-loaded HA scaffold with 20 mg DM per scaffold), and a DM 100 group (hole filled with DM-loaded HA scaffold with 100 mg DM per scaffold). Resulting bone volume percentages and bone mineral densities were calculated by examing micro-computed tomographic (CT) images.

RESULTS

The DM-loaded HA scaffold groups showed a gradual periosteal reaction two weeks after insertion of the HA scaffold into the femoral drill holes. Four weeks after HA scaffold insertion, the periosteal reaction in the femoral drill holes became denser. Eight weeks after insertion of DM-loaded HA scaffolds, clear images of the scaffold were observed in micro-CT images of the femoral drill hole. The DM 100 group had better bone healing tendencies (bone mineral density, bone mass, trabecular volume, bone surface, and trabecular thickness) than the DM 20 group.

CONCLUSION

DM-loaded HA scaffolds are suitable platforms for distributing bioactive molecules during osteogenesis in femoral drill holes.

Perioperative Systemic Dexamethasone Reduces Length of Stay in Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

The objective of this review is to examine the effect of perioperative systemic corticosteroids at varying doses and timings on early postoperative recovery outcomes following unilateral total knee and total hip arthroplasty. The primary outcome was length of stay (LOS).

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was performed. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to June 1, 2020. Studies comparing the outcome of adult patients receiving a systemic steroid to patients who did not receive steroids were included.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies were included, incorporating 1957 patients. Perioperative corticosteroids reduced hospital LOS (mean difference [MD] = -0.39 days, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.61 to -0.18). A subsequent dose of corticosteroid at 24 hours further reduced LOS (MD = -0.33, 95% CI -0.55 to -0.11). Corticosteroids resulted in reduced levels of pain on postoperative day (POD) 0 (MD = -1.99, 95% CI -3.30 to -0.69), POD1 (MD = -1.47, 95% CI -2.15 to -0.79), and POD2. Higher doses were more effective in reducing pain with activity on POD0 (P = .006) and 1 (P = .023). Steroids reduced the incidence of PONV on POD1 (log odds ratio [OR] = -1.05, 95% CI -1.26 to -0.84) and POD2, with greater effect at higher doses (P = .046). Corticosteroids did not increase the incidence of infection (P = 1.000), venous thromboembolism (P = 1.000), or gastrointestinal hemorrhage (P = 1.000) but were associated with an increase in blood glucose (MD = 5.30 mg/dL, 95% CI 2.69-7.90).

CONCLUSION

Perioperative corticosteroids are safe, facilitate earlier discharge, and improve patient recovery following unilateral total knee arthroplasty and total hip arthroplasty. Higher doses (15-20 mg of dexamethasone) are associated with further reductions in dynamic pain and PONV, and repeat dosing may further reduce LOS.

Drugs for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults after general anaesthesia: a network meta-analysis

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).

Impact of Intraoperative Dexamethasone on Surgical and Oncologic Outcomes for Patients with Resected Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Administration of dexamethasone to mitigate postoperative nausea and vomiting has been suggested to improve short- and long-term outcomes after pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) resection. This study aimed primarily to evaluate these hypotheses in a contemporary patient cohort treated with multimodality therapy.

METHODS

The clinicopathologic and perioperative characteristics of consecutive resected PDAC patients (July 2011 to October 2018) were analyzed from a prospectively maintained database. Intraoperative administration of dexamethasone (4-10 mg) was retrospectively abstracted from the electronic medical record.

RESULTS

The majority of 373 patients (59.8%) received intraoperative dexamethasone. Most of these patients underwent neoadjuvant therapy (75.3%), were potentially resectable at presentation (69.7%), and underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (79.9%). Women were more likely to receive dexamethasone than men (69.9 vs 30.1%; p < 0.001). The cohorts were otherwise clinically similar. Intraoperative dexamethasone was not associated with differences in postoperative major complications (PMCs) (21.1 vs 19.3%; p = 0.68), postoperative pancreatic fistulas (6.3 vs 6.7%; p = 0.88), or composite infectious complications (28.7 vs 24.7%; p = 0.39). Dexamethasone was not associated with any improvement in median recurrence-free survival (RFS) (17 vs 17 months; p = 0.99) or overall survival (OS) (46 vs 43 months; p = 0.90). After adjustment for clinical factors including margin status, clinical classification, tumor size, and dexamethasone, the only factors independently associated with OS were pathologic node-positivity (hazard ratio [HR], 1.80, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.32-2.47), perineural invasion (HR, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.23-3.31), multimodality therapy (HR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.13-0.70), and PMCs (HR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.17-2.29) (all p < 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Dexamethasone failed to demonstrate any protective advantage in terms of mitigating short-term PMCs or infectious complications, or to confer any long-term survival benefit. Tumor biology, multimodality therapy, and PMCs remain the main prognostic factors after PDAC resection.

An Electronic Medical Record-Derived Individualized Performance Metric to Measure Risk-Adjusted Adherence with Perioperative Prophylactic Bundles for Health Care Disparity Research and Implementation Science

BACKGROUND

Health care disparity persists despite vigorous countermeasures. Clinician performance is paramount for equitable care processes and outcomes. However, precise and valid individual performance measures remain elusive.

OBJECTIVES

We sought to develop a generalizable, rigorous, risk-adjusted metric for individual clinician performance (MIP) derived directly from the electronic medical record (EMR) to provide visual, personalized feedback.

METHODS

We conceptualized MIP as risk responsiveness, i.e., administering an increasing number of interventions contingent on patient risk. We embedded MIP in a hierarchical statistical model, reflecting contemporary nested health care delivery. We tested MIP by investigating the adherence with prophylactic bundles to reduce the risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), retrieving PONV risk factors and prophylactic antiemetic interventions from the EMR. We explored the impact of social determinants of health on MIP.

RESULTS

We extracted data from the EMR on 25,980 elective anesthesia cases performed at Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center between June 3, 2018 and March 31, 2019. Limiting the data by anesthesia Current Procedural Terminology code and to complete cases with PONV risk and antiemetic interventions, we evaluated the performance of 83 anesthesia clinicians on 2,211 anesthesia cases. Our metric demonstrated considerable variance between clinicians in the adherence to risk-adjusted utilization of antiemetic interventions. Risk seemed to drive utilization only in few clinicians. We demonstrated the impact of social determinants of health on MIP, illustrating its utility for health science and disparity research.

CONCLUSION

The strength of our novel measure of individual clinician performance is its generalizability, as well as its intuitive graphical representation of risk-adjusted individual performance. However, accuracy, precision and validity, stability over time, sensitivity to system perturbations, and acceptance among clinicians remain to be evaluated.

Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in Paediatric Anaesthesia

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common complication in paediatric anaesthesia and is a source of significant morbidity. Various independent risk factors have been implicated in the development of paediatric PONV, including higher pain scores postoperatively, the use of opioids for pain management and the use of volatile anaesthetics for the maintenance of anaesthesia. This review of the current literature regarding the prevention and treatment of paediatric PONV is based on a search of the PubMed database, which identified published clinical trials, systematic reviews and meta-analyses. While the occurrence of PONV in many cases is difficult to avoid entirely, the risk can be mitigated by the use of multimodal nonopioid analgesic regimens, total intravenous drugs in favour of volatile anaesthetics and an appropriate regimen of prophylactic pharmacotherapy. Frequently administered drug classes for the prevention of PONV include corticosteroids, 5HT3 antagonists and anticholinergics. The clinical use of the findings in the literature may help to reduce the occurrence of PONV in children. In this review, we provide comprehensive and updated information on the risk factors contributing the occurrence of PONV in children, outline the current opinion on the drugs that are commonly used for management and provide an overview of the guidelines that are used to help establish the prophylaxis and treatment of paediatric PONV.

The perioperative administration of dexamethasone and infection (PADDI) trial protocol: rationale and design of a pragmatic multicentre non-inferiority study

INTRODUCTION

The intraoperative administration of dexamethasone for prophylaxis against postoperative nausea and vomiting is a common and recommended practice. The safety of the administration of this immunosuppressive agent at a time of significant immunological disruption has not been rigorously evaluated in terms of infective complications.

METHODS/ANALYSIS

This is a pragmatic, multicentre, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial. A total of 8880 patients undergoing elective major surgery will be enrolled. Participants will be randomly allocated to receive either dexamethasone 8 mg or placebo intravenously following the induction of anaesthesia in a 1:1 ratio, stratified by centre and diabetes status. Patient enrolment into the trial is ongoing. The primary outcome is surgical site infection at 30 days following surgery, defined according to the Centre for Disease Control criteria.

ETHICS/DISSEMINATION

The PADDI trial has been approved by the ethics committees of over 45 participating sites in Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, South Africa and the Netherlands. The trial has been endorsed by the Australia and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists Clinical Trials Network and the Australian Society for Infectious Diseases Clinical Research Network. Participant recruitment began in March 2016 and is expected to be complete in mid-2019. Publication of the results of the PADDI trial is anticipated to occur in early 2020.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12614001226695.

Adverse side effects of dexamethasone in surgical patients

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.

Comparison of intraperitoneal versus intravenous dexamethasone on postoperative nausea and vomiting after gynecological laparoscopy: a randomized clinical trial

Background

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common complication following laparascopic surgery. This study compared the effect of intraperitoneal versus intravenous dexamethasone for reducing PONV after gynecological laparoscopic surgeries.

Methods

Eighty adult female patients, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I–II, scheduled for gynecological laparoscopic surgery were randomized to receive 8 mg dexamethasone intravenously (IV) (n = 40) or intraperitoneally (IP) (n = 40). The primary outcome was the PONV incidence during the first 24 h after laparoscopy. Secondary outcomes included visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores, total rescue analgesic consumption during the first 24 h postoperatively, the need for rescue antiemetic drugs, and the incidence of complications that may accompany these medications.

Results

Eleven women (27.5%) in the IV group, versus only 3 (7.5%) women in the IP group, experienced nausea during the first 24 h postlaparoscopy (P = 0.037). However, 5 patients (12.5%) in the IV group, versus only 2 patients (5.0%) in the IP group, experienced vomiting (P = 0.424). No statistically significant differences were seen in the severity of nausea or the need for rescue antiemetics. The IV group had a higher rate of side-effects than the IP group (27.5% vs. 7.5%, P = 0.037). Headache and dizziness were common side effects in the IV dexamethasone group. The groups did not differ significantly in terms of mean VAS score for pain and total meperidine consumption during the first 24 h postoperatively.

Conclusions

Intraperitoneal dexamethasone at a dose of 8 mg at the end of gynecological laparoscopy reduces the incidence of postoperative nausea.

Adverse side effects of dexamethasone in surgical patients

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.

Dexamethasone as an adjuvant to peripheral nerve block

BACKGROUND

Peripheral nerve block (infiltration of local anaesthetic around a nerve) is used for anaesthesia or analgesia. A limitation to its use for postoperative analgesia is that the analgesic effect lasts only a few hours, after which moderate to severe pain at the surgical site may result in the need for alternative analgesic therapy. Several adjuvants have been used to prolong the analgesic duration of peripheral nerve block, including perineural or intravenous dexamethasone.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of perineural dexamethasone versus placebo, intravenous dexamethasone versus placebo, and perineural dexamethasone versus intravenous dexamethasone when added to peripheral nerve block for postoperative pain control in people undergoing surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, DARE, Web of Science and Scopus from inception to 25 April 2017. We also searched trial registry databases, Google Scholar and meeting abstracts from the American Society of Anesthesiologists, the Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society, the American Society of Regional Anesthesia, and the European Society of Regional Anaesthesia.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing perineural dexamethasone with placebo, intravenous dexamethasone with placebo, or perineural dexamethasone with intravenous dexamethasone in participants receiving peripheral nerve block for upper or lower limb surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 35 trials of 2702 participants aged 15 to 78 years; 33 studies enrolled participants undergoing upper limb surgery and two undergoing lower limb surgery. Risk of bias was low in 13 studies and high/unclear in 22. Perineural dexamethasone versus placeboDuration of sensory block was significantly longer in the perineural dexamethasone group compared with placebo (mean difference (MD) 6.70 hours, 95% confidence interval (CI) 5.54 to 7.85; participants1625; studies 27). Postoperative pain intensity at 12 and 24 hours was significantly lower in the perineural dexamethasone group compared with control (MD -2.08, 95% CI -2.63 to -1.53; participants 257; studies 5) and (MD -1.63, 95% CI -2.34 to -0.93; participants 469; studies 9), respectively. There was no significant difference at 48 hours (MD -0.61, 95% CI -1.24 to 0.03; participants 296; studies 4). The quality of evidence is very low for postoperative pain intensity at 12 hours and low for the remaining outcomes. Cumulative 24-hour postoperative opioid consumption was significantly lower in the perineural dexamethasone group compared with placebo (MD 19.25 mg, 95% CI 5.99 to 32.51; participants 380; studies 6). Intravenous dexamethasone versus placeboDuration of sensory block was significantly longer in the intravenous dexamethasone group compared with placebo (MD 6.21, 95% CI 3.53 to 8.88; participants 499; studies 8). Postoperative pain intensity at 12 and 24 hours was significantly lower in the intravenous dexamethasone group compared with placebo (MD -1.24, 95% CI -2.44 to -0.04; participants 162; studies 3) and (MD -1.26, 95% CI -2.23 to -0.29; participants 257; studies 5), respectively. There was no significant difference at 48 hours (MD -0.21, 95% CI -0.83 to 0.41; participants 172; studies 3). The quality of evidence is moderate for duration of sensory block and postoperative pain intensity at 24 hours, and low for the remaining outcomes. Cumulative 24-hour postoperative opioid consumption was significantly lower in the intravenous dexamethasone group compared with placebo (MD -6.58 mg, 95% CI -10.56 to -2.60; participants 287; studies 5). Perinerual versus intravenous dexamethasoneDuration of sensory block was significantly longer in the perineural dexamethasone group compared with intravenous by three hours (MD 3.14 hours, 95% CI 1.68 to 4.59; participants 720; studies 9). We found that postoperative pain intensity at 12 hours and 24 hours was significantly lower in the perineural dexamethasone group compared with intravenous, however, the MD did not surpass our pre-determined minimally important difference of 1.2 on the Visual Analgue Scale/Numerical Rating Scale, therefore the results are not clinically significant (MD -1.01, 95% CI -1.51 to -0.50; participants 217; studies 3) and (MD -0.77, 95% CI -1.47 to -0.08; participants 309; studies 5), respectively. There was no significant difference in severity of postoperative pain at 48 hours (MD 0.13, 95% CI -0.35 to 0.61; participants 227; studies 3). The quality of evidence is moderate for duration of sensory block and postoperative pain intensity at 24 hours, and low for the remaining outcomes. There was no difference in cumulative postoperative 24-hour opioid consumption (MD -3.87 mg, 95% CI -9.93 to 2.19; participants 242; studies 4). Incidence of severe adverse eventsFive serious adverse events were reported. One block-related event (pneumothorax) occurred in one participant in a trial comparing perineural dexamethasone and placebo; however group allocation was not reported. Four non-block-related events occurred in two trials comparing perineural dexamethasone, intravenous dexamethasone and placebo. Two participants in the placebo group required hospitalization within one week of surgery; one for a fall and one for a bowel infection. One participant in the placebo group developed Complex Regional Pain Syndrome Type I and one in the intravenous dexamethasone group developed pneumonia. The quality of evidence is very low due to the sparse number of events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low- to moderate-quality evidence suggests that when used as an adjuvant to peripheral nerve block in upper limb surgery, both perineural and intravenous dexamethasone may prolong duration of sensory block and are effective in reducing postoperative pain intensity and opioid consumption. There is not enough evidence to determine the effectiveness of dexamethasone as an adjuvant to peripheral nerve block in lower limb surgeries and there is no evidence in children. The results of our review may not apply to participants at risk of dexamethasone-related adverse events for whom clinical trials would probably be unsafe.There is not enough evidence to determine the effectiveness of dexamethasone as an adjuvant to peripheral nerve block in lower limb surgeries and there is no evidence in children. The results of our review may not be apply to participants who at risk of dexamethasone-related adverse events for whom clinical trials would probably be unsafe. The nine ongoing trials registered at ClinicalTrials.gov may change the results of this review.

Safety of Perioperative Glucocorticoids in Elective Noncardiac Surgery

Background

Glucocorticoids are increasingly used perioperatively, principally to prevent nausea and vomiting. Safety concerns focus on the potential for hyperglycemia and increased infection. The authors hypothesized that glucocorticoids predispose to such adverse outcomes in a dose-dependent fashion after elective noncardiac surgery.

Methods

The authors conducted a systematic literature search of the major medical databases from their inception to April 2016. Randomized glucocorticoid trials in adults specifically reporting on a safety outcome were included and meta-analyzed with Peto odds ratio method or the quality effects model. Subanalyses were performed according to a dexamethasone dose equivalent of low (less than 8 mg), medium (8 to 16 mg), and high (more than 16 mg). The primary endpoints of any wound infection and peak perioperative glucose concentrations were subject to meta-regression.

Results

Fifty-six trials from 18 countries were identified, predominantly assessing dexamethasone. Glucocorticoids did not impact on any wound infection (odds ratio, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.6 to 1.2) but did result in a clinically unimportant increase in peak perioperative glucose concentration (weighted mean difference, 20.0 mg/dl; CI, 11.4 to 28.6; P &lt; 0.001 or 1.1 mM; CI, 0.6 to 1.6). Glucocorticoids reduced peak postoperative C-reactive protein concentrations (weighted mean difference, −22.1 mg/l; CI, −31.7 to −12.5; P &lt; 0.001), but other adverse outcomes and length of stay were unchanged. No dose–effect relationships were apparent.

Conclusions

The evidence at present does not highlight any safety concerns with respect to the use of perioperative glucocorticoids and subsequent infection, hyperglycemia, or other adverse outcomes. Nevertheless, collated trials lacked sufficient surveillance and power to detect clinically important differences in complications such as wound infection.

Randomized clinical trial of preoperative dexamethasone on postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopy for suspected appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Few studies have investigated the effects of preoperative dexamethasone in acute surgical patients. This study examined the effects of 8 mg dexamethasone administered intravenously 30 min before surgery for suspected acute appendicitis.

METHODS

A multicentre, parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted at two university hospitals in Denmark. Adults undergoing laparoscopic surgery for suspected appendicitis were eligible for inclusion. Participants, healthcare staff and investigators were blinded until all data analysis had been done. The primary outcome was the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) during the first postoperative day. Secondary outcomes were pain, fatigue, sleep, opioid consumption, use of antiemetics, quality of recovery and duration of convalescence. Analysis was done according to the intention-to-treat principle.

RESULTS

A total of 120 patients were enrolled; 57 patients in the dexamethasone group and 59 in the placebo group were eligible for primary analysis. In the dexamethasone group, 47 (95 per cent c.i. 35 to 60) per cent of patients experienced PONV compared with 63 (50 to 74) per cent) in the placebo group. The absolute risk reduction in PONV was 15 (-3 to 33) per cent in favour of the dexamethasone group (P = 0·098). Patients in the dexamethasone group had less pain at rest (difference in score on visual analogue scale (VAS) 9 (95 per cent c.i. 1 to 17) mm; P = 0·024), were less fatigued (difference in VAS score 7 (0 to 14) mm; P = 0·038), used fewer opioids (absolute risk reduction 17 (2 to 33) per cent; P = 0·033) and had better quality of recovery (difference in QoR-15 score 13 (4 to 22); P = 0·006) during the first postoperative day. There was no difference in postoperative complications (P = 0·595).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative dexamethasone did not reduce PONV by the target level of 50 per cent. Registration number: NCT02415335 ( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Postoperative analgesic effect, of preoperatively administered dexamethasone, after operative fixation of fractured neck of femur: randomised, double blinded controlled study

BACKGROUND

Fractured neck of femur is a common cause of hospital admission in the elderly and usually requires operative fixation. In a variety of clinical settings, preoperative glucocorticoid administration has improved analgesia and decreased opioid consumption. Our objective was to define the postoperative analgesic efficacy of single dose of dexamethasone administered preoperatively in patients undergoing operative fixation of fractured neck of femur.

METHODS

Institutional ethical approval was granted and written informed consent was obtained from each patient. Patients awaiting for surgery at Cork University Hospital were recruited between July 2009 and August 2012. Participating patients, scheduled for surgery were randomly allocated to one of two groups (Dexamethasone or Placebo). Patients in the dexamethasone group received a single dose of intravenous dexamethasone 0.1 mg kg ^-1 immediately preoperatively. Patients in the placebo group received the same volume of normal saline. Patients underwent operative fixation of fractured neck of femur using standardised spinal anaesthesia and surgical techniques. The primary outcome was pain scores at rest 6 h after the surgery.

RESULTS

Thirty seven patients were recruited and data from thirty patients were analysed. The groups were similar in terms of patient characteristics. Pain scores at rest 6 h after the surgery (the principal outcome) were lesser in the dexamethasone group compared with the placebo group [0.8(1.3) vs. 3.9(2.9), mean(SD) p = 0.0004]. Cumulative morphine consumption 24 h after the surgery was also lesser in the dexamethasone group [7.7(8.3) vs. 15.1(9.4), mean(SD) mg, p = 0.04].

CONCLUSIONS

A single dose of intravenous dexamethasone 0.1 mg kg ^-1 administered before operative fixation of fractured neck of femur improve significantly the early postoperative analgesia.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01550146 , date of registration: 07/03/2012.

Percutaneous Epidural Adhesiolysis with Epidural Steroid Injection: A Non-inferiority Test of Non-particulate Steroids Versus Particulate Steroids

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of dexamethasone sodium phosphate (DSP), a non-particulate steroid, during percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis (PEA), as compared with triamcinolone acetate (TA).

DESIGN

Retrospective observational study.

SETTING

Interventional pain management clinic in a tertiary care center.

SUBJECTS

Patients scheduled to receive PEA between March 2011 and January 2014.

METHODS

47 patients underwent the procedure with TA (TA group), and 26 patients underwent the procedure with DSP (DSP group). At the end of the procedure, 20 ml of 0.18% ropivacaine containing 3000 units of hyaluronidase and 80 mg of TA or 10 mg of DSP was injected. Success rates and means of percent decreases in terms of verbal numerical rating scale (VNRS) of pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) at follow-up visits 3 and 6 months after PEA were compared. Non-inferiority test was used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

At 3 months, the success rate in VNRS of TA group and DSP group were 59.6% and 53.8%. The mean percent decreases of VNRS were 42.4% and 46.1% in TA group and DSP group, respectively. At this time point, non-inferiority was not demonstrated. In contrast at 6 months, the success rate in aspect of VNRS was 45.2% in TA group and 62.5% in DSP group. The mean of percent decreases in the VNRS was 34.9% in TA group and 52.8% in DSP group. The non-inferiority was met in two measurements.

CONCLUSIONS

DSP presents non-inferiority to TA in terms of success rate and percentage decrease of the VNRS 6 months after PEA.

Granisetron versus Granisetron-Dexamethasone for Prevention of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in Pediatric Strabismus Surgery: A Randomized Double-Blind Trial

Aim. Efficacy of granisetron and combination of granisetron and dexamethasone was evaluated for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in children undergoing elective strabismus surgery. Methods. A total of 136 children (1–15 years) were included. Children received either granisetron (40 mcg/kg) [group G] or combination of granisetron (40 mcg/kg) and dexamethasone (150 mcg/kg) [group GD]. Intraoperative fentanyl requirement and incidence and severity of oculocardiac reflex were assessed. PONV severity was assessed for first 24 hours and if score was >2, it was treated with metoclopramide. Postoperative analgesia was administered with intravenous fentanyl and ibuprofen. Results. The demographic profile, muscles operated, and fentanyl requirement were comparable. Complete response to PONV in first 24 hours was observed in 75% (51/68) of children in group G and 76.9% (50/65) of children in group GD, which was comparable statistically (p = 0.96, Fisher exact test; OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.50, 2.46). Incidence of PONV between 0 and 24 hours was comparable. One child in group G required rescue antiemetic in first 24 hours and none of the children had severe PONV in group GD. There was no significant difference in incidence or severity of oculocardiac reflex. Conclusion. Dexamethasone did not increase efficacy of granisetron for prevention of PONV in elective pediatric strabismus surgery. Registration number of clinical trial was CTRI/2009/091/001000.

Perineural versus intravenous dexamethasone as adjuncts to local anaesthetic brachial plexus block for shoulder surgery

This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study compared the effect of perineural with intravenous dexamethasone, both administered concomitantly with interscalene brachial plexus block for shoulder surgery. Patients received 8 mg dexamethasone mixed with ropivacaine in the block injection (n = 42), 8 mg dexamethasone intravenously at the time of the block (n = 37), or intravenous saline (n = 41) at the time of the block. Perineural and intravenous dexamethasone resulted in prolonged mean (SD) duration of block to 16.9 (5.2) h and 18.2 (6.4) h, respectively, compared with 13.8 (3.8) h for saline (p = 0.001). Mean (SD) opioid consumption (morphine equivalents) during the first 24 h after postanaesthesia recovery arrival was 12.2 (9.3) mg in the perineural dexamethasone, 17.1 (15.9) mg in the intravenous dexamethasone and 24.1 (14.3) mg in the saline groups (p = 0.001). Dexamethasone via either route reduced anti-emetic use (p = 0.046). There was no effect on patient satisfaction. These results suggest that both perineural and intravenous dexamethasone are useful adjuncts to ropivacaine interscalene block, with the intravenous route preferred as this avoids the possibility of neural toxicity of dexamethasone.

Perineural dexamethasone to improve postoperative analgesia with peripheral nerve blocks: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background. The overall effect of perineural dexamethasone on postoperative analgesia outcomes has yet to be quantified. The main objective of this quantitative review was to evaluate the effect of perineural dexamethasone as a nerve block adjunct on postoperative analgesia outcomes. Methods. A systematic search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials that evaluated the effects of perineural dexamethasone as a block adjunct on postoperative pain outcomes in patients receiving regional anesthesia. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effect model. Results. Nine randomized trials with 760 subjects were included. The weighted mean difference (99% CI) of the combined effects favored perineural dexamethasone over control for analgesia duration, 473 (264 to 682) minutes, and motor block duration, 500 (154 to 846) minutes. Postoperative opioid consumption was also reduced in the perineural dexamethasone group compared to control, -8.5 (-12.3 to -4.6) mg of IV morphine equivalents. No significant neurological symptoms could have been attributed to the use of perineural dexamethasone. Conclusions. Perineural dexamethasone improves postoperative pain outcomes when given as an adjunct to brachial plexus blocks. There were no reports of persistent nerve injury attributed to perineural administration of the drug.