A randomised controlled trial of perineural vs intravenous dexamethasone for foot surgery

Comparison of intravenous versus perineural dexamethasone as a local anaesthetic adjunct for peripheral nerve blocks in the lower limb: A meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

As a local anaesthetic adjunct, the systemic absorption of perineural dexamethasone in the lower limb could be restricted because of decreased vascularity when compared with the upper limb.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the pharmacodynamic characteristics of intravenous and perineural dexamethasone in the lower limb.

DESIGN

Systematic review of randomised controlled trials with meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Systematic search of Central, Google Scholar, Ovid Embase and Ovid Medline to 18 July 2023.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials, which compared the intravenous with perineural administration of dexamethasone as a local anaesthetic adjunct in peripheral nerve blocks for surgery of the lower limb.

RESULTS

The most common peripheral nerve blocks were femoral, sciatic and ankle block. The local anaesthetic was long acting in all trials and the dose of dexamethasone was 8 mg in most trials. The primary outcome, the duration of analgesia, was investigated by all nine trials ( n  = 546 patients). Overall, compared with intravenous dexamethasone, perineural dexamethasone increased the duration of analgesia from 19.54 to 22.27 h, a mean difference [95% confidence interval (CI) of 2.73 (1.07 to 4.38) h; P  = 0.001, I2  = 87]. The quality of evidence was moderate owing to serious inconsistency. However, analysis based on the location of the peripheral nerve block, the type of local anaesthetic or the use of perineural adrenaline showed no difference in duration between intravenous and perineural dexamethasone. No differences were shown for any of the secondary outcomes related to efficacy and side effects.

CONCLUSION

In summary, moderate evidence supports the superiority of perineural dexamethasone over intravenous dexamethasone in prolonging the duration of analgesia. However, this difference is unlikely to be clinically relevant. Consideration of the perineural use of dexamethasone should recognise that this route of administration remains off label.

Primary outcomes and anticipated effect sizes in randomised clinical trials assessing adjuncts to peripheral nerve blocks: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Prolonging effects of adjuncts to local anaesthetics in peripheral nerve blocks have been demonstrated in randomised clinical trials. The chosen primary outcome and anticipated effect size have major impact on the clinical relevance of results in these trials. This scoping review aims to provide an overview of frequently used outcomes and anticipated effect sizes in randomised trials on peripheral nerve block adjuncts.

METHODS

For our scoping review, we searched MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL for trials assessing effects of adjuncts for peripheral nerve blocks published in 10 major anaesthesia journals. We included randomised clinical trials assessing adjuncts for single-shot ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve blocks, regardless of the type of interventional adjunct and control group, local anaesthetic used and anatomical localization. Our primary outcome was the choice of primary outcomes and corresponding anticipated effect size used for sample size estimation. Secondary outcomes were assessor of primary outcomes, the reporting of sample size calculations and statistically significant and non-significant results related to the anticipated effect sizes.

RESULTS

Of 11,854 screened trials, we included 59. The most frequent primary outcome was duration of analgesia (35/59 trials, 59%) with absolute and relative median (interquartile range) anticipated effect sizes for adjunct versus placebo/no adjunct: 240 min (180-318) and 30% (25-40) and for adjunct versus active comparator: 210 min (180-308) and 17% (15-28). Adequate sample size calculations were reported in 78% of trials. Statistically significant results were reported for primary outcomes in 45/59 trials (76%), of which 22% did not reach the anticipated effect size.

CONCLUSION

The reported outcomes and associated anticipated effect sizes can be used in future trials on adjuncts for peripheral nerve blocks to increase methodological homogeneity.

The efficacy and safety of ankle blocks for foot and ankle surgery: A systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

Peripheral nerve blocks may be essential elements in a multimodal pain management regime following foot and ankle surgery. We assessed the effects of ankle blocks compared with no intervention/sham block or a sciatic nerve block in patients undergoing surgery of the foot or ankle.

METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, Medline, and Embase for randomised clinical trials comparing ankle block with no intervention/sham block or a sciatic nerve block for patients undergoing surgery of the foot or ankle. Our primary outcomes were duration of analgesia and cumulative 24-hour opioid consumption. We followed the recommendations of the Cochrane Handbook, and performed meta-analysis, Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA), and assessed the risk of bias and certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

We included five trials (362 participants) comparing ankle block with no intervention/sham block and three trials (247 participants) comparing ankle block with a sciatic nerve block. Ankle block may increase the duration of analgesia when compared with no intervention/sham block (MD 431 min; 96.7% CI 208 to 654), but the evidence was very uncertain. Duration was decreased when compared with a sciatic nerve block (MD -410 min; 96.7% CI -462 to -358). The ankle block duration was probably important in both comparisons. The effects on cumulative 24-hour opioid consumption were very uncertain in both comparisons.

CONCLUSIONS

Ankle block may increase the duration of analgesia when compared with no intervention/sham block, but the evidence was very uncertain, and decrease the duration of analgesia when compared with a sciatic nerve block. The ankle block duration was probably clinically important in both comparisons. The effects on cumulative 24-hour opioid consumption were very uncertain.

Dexmedetomidine with different concentrations added to local anesthetics in erector spinae plane block: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Dexmedetomidine has been used as a perineural local anesthetic (LA) adjuvant to facilitate the potency of erector spinal plane block (ESPB). This quantitative review aimed to evaluate whether perineural dexmedetomidine for ESPB can improve the effects of analgesia compared to LA alone.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the addition of dexmedetomidine to LA compared to LA alone in ESPB were included. The pain scores, duration of sensory block, the time to first analgesia requirement, postoperative morphine consumption, rescue analgesia, and dexmedetomidine-related side effects were analyzed and combined using random-effects models.

Results

A total of 823 patients from 13 RCTs were analyzed. Dexmedetomidine was used at the concentration of 0.5 μg/kg in three trials and 1 μg/kg in nine trials, and both in one trial. Both concentrations of dexmedetomidine perineurally administrated significantly reduced the rest VAS scores postoperatively at 12 h (0.5 μg/kg dexmedetomidine: MD = -0.86; 95% CI: -1.59 to -0.12; p = 0.02; 1 μg/kg dexmedetomidine: MD = -0.49; 95% CI: -0.83 to -0.16; p = 0.004), and 24 h (0.5 μg/kg dexmedetomidine: MD = -0.43; 95% CI: -0.74 to -0.13; p = 0.005; 1 μg/kg dexmedetomidine: MD = -0.62; 95% CI: -0.84 to -0.41; p < 0.00001). Both concentrations of dexmedetomidine added in LAs improved the dynamic VAS scores postoperatively at 12 h (0.5 μg/kg dexmedetomidine: MD = -0.55; 95% CI: -0.95 to -0.15; p = 0.007; 1 μg/kg dexmedetomidine: MD = -0.66; 95% CI: -1.05 to -0.28; p = 0.0006) and 24 h (0.5 μg/kg dexmedetomidine: MD = -0.52; 95% CI: -0.94 to -0.10; p = 0.01; 1 μg/kg dexmedetomidine: MD = -0.46; 95% CI: -0.75 to -0.16; p = 0.002). Furthermore, perineural dexmedetomidine prolonged the duration of the sensory block and the time to first analgesia requirement, reduced postoperative morphine consumption, and lowered the incidence of rescue analgesia and chronic pain.

Conclusion

The meta-analysis showed that using perineural dexmedetomidine at either 0.5 μg/kg or 1 μg/kg doses in ESPB can effectively and safely enhance pain relief.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO (CRD42023424532: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/).

Prophylactic dexamethasone for rebound pain after peripheral nerve block in adult surgical patients: systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Rebound pain occurs after the resolution of peripheral nerve block and hampers patient recovery in the postoperative period. We sought to synthesise available data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy of prophylactic dexamethasone for rebound pain in adult patients undergoing surgery with a peripheral nerve block.

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, RCTs reporting rebound pain and use of dexamethasone in the context of a peripheral nerve block were searched in various databases and updated in May 2023. The primary outcome was the incidence of rebound pain; secondary outcomes included the severity and time to onset of rebound pain, patient satisfaction with pain control, sleep disturbance because of pain, and adverse effects of dexamethasone. Subgroup analysis was conducted based on the effect of route of administration (intravenous or perineural) on the incidence of rebound pain. Trial sequential analysis was performed to rule out the possibility of a false positive result.

RESULTS

Seven RCTs comprising 574 patients were included in this review. The dexamethasone group was associated with a reduction in the incidence of rebound pain with an odds ratio of 0.16 (95% confidence interval 0.10-0.27, P=0.00, I2=0%) compared with the control group. Trial sequential analysis confirmed the adequate information size for the beneficial effect of dexamethasone. Subgroup analysis showed that both intravenous and perineural administration were associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of rebound pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence suggests that both intravenous and perineural dexamethasone reduce the incidence of rebound pain after a peripheral nerve block provided for postoperative analgesia.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL

PROSPERO CRD42023424031.

How Does the Addition of Dexamethasone to a Brachial Plexus Block Change Pain Patterns After Surgery for Distal Radius Fractures? A Randomized, Double-blind Study

BACKGROUND

Although brachial plexus block in volar plating surgery for distal radius fractures is reportedly associated with lower postoperative pain scores, rebound pain has been reported to occur after the initial block wears off. Dexamethasone can be used in multimodal strategies for antiemesis and to control pain postoperatively. Although prior studies have suggested that anesthesia can be prolonged by adding dexamethasone to regional blocks, no randomized trials we are aware of have ascertained whether doing so will make a clinically important difference in pain after surgery for distal radius fractures.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

Do patients who receive supplemental dexamethasone in a brachial plexus block for volar plating of unstable distal radius fractures have (1) better pain scores at 4, 8, 24, and 48 hours postoperatively than patients who have not received dexamethasone, and (2) lower fentanyl consumption and administration of antiemetic drugs without change in serum blood glucose, as well as a longer analgesic duration from the block after surgery than patients who have not received dexamethasone?

METHODS

This randomized, double-blind trial included 69 patients undergoing surgery for distal radius fractures under ultrasound-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus blocks who were randomly allocated into two groups: a nondexamethasone group receiving a brachial plexus block with 0.5% ropivacaine and a dexamethasone group receiving 0.5% ropivacaine and 5 mg of dexamethasone. Thirty-four patients were allocated to the dexamethasone group and 35 were allocated to the nondexamethasone group. Nine patients (four in the dexamethasone group and five in the nondexamethasone group) were excluded after randomization because local anesthetics were used during their surgical procedures owing to an incomplete block or they requested patient-controlled analgesia after surgery. The treatment groups did not differ in any important ways, including age, gender, BMI, hand dominance, and AO/Orthopaedic Trauma Association classification. All patients received the same surgical procedure and perioperative care protocol, except for the injected agents during their brachial plexus block. The primary outcome was postoperative pain, evaluated using a 10-mm VAS at 4, 8, 12, 24, and 48 hours after surgery. The minimum clinically important difference for the VAS score was 2 of 10 points. Secondary outcome variables included fentanyl administration as a rescue analgesic, the number of patients receiving antiemetic medications because of fentanyl administration, and the duration of brachial plexus block. Serum blood glucose was measured 1 day before, immediately after, and 24 hours after surgery. Patients, surgeons, and outcome assessors were blinded to treatment allocation.

RESULTS

The only clinically important between-group difference in VAS pain scores was at 8 hours, favoring the group that received dexamethasone over the group that did not (1.9 ± 1.6 versus 4.7 ± 2.7; mean difference -2.8 [95% CI -3.9 to -1.6]; p < 0.001). After brachial plexus block, the most severe pain score in both groups was reported at 12 hours postoperatively and gradually diminished over time. There was no between-group difference in fentanyl use between those who received dexamethasone and those who did not (21 ± 38 mcg versus 31 ± 29 mcg; mean difference -10 [95% CI -27.4 to 7.4]; p = 0.26). Furthermore, the use of antiemetics did not differ between the groups (27% [eight of 30] versus 37% [11 of 30]; odds ratio 1.6 [95% CI 0.5 to 4.8]; p = 0.41). Baseline and 24-hour postoperative serum blood glucose level did not differ between the groups. However, the immediately postoperative serum blood glucose level was higher in the dexamethasone group than in the nondexamethasone group (121 ± 29 versus 104 ± 20; mean difference 16 [95% CI 3.3 to 28.8]; p = 0.02). The brachial plexus block duration was 3 hours longer (95% CI 0.8 to 5.2 hours) in the dexamethasone group than that in the nondexamethasone group (11 ± 5 hours versus 8 ± 3 hours; p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

The postoperative pain level in patients who received supplemental dexamethasone in a regional block was not clinically different from that of patients who received conventional brachial plexus block anesthesia when undergoing volar plating for distal radius fractures. However, patients who received a brachial plexus block with dexamethasone experienced slight prolongation of their block and decrease in pain 8 hours after surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, therapeutic study.

Regional anaesthesia for ambulatory surgery

Regional anaesthesia (RA) has an important and ever-expanding role in ambulatory surgery. Specific practices vary depending on the preferences and resources of the anaesthesia team and hospital setting. It is used for various purposes, including as primary anaesthetic technique for surgery but also as postoperative analgesic modality. The limited duration of action of currently available local anaesthetics limits their application in postoperative pain control and enhanced recovery. The search for the holy grail of regional anaesthetics continues. Current evidence suggests that a peripheral nerve block performed with long-acting local anaesthetics in combination with intravenous or perineural dexamethasone gives the longest and most optimal sensory block. In this review, we outline some possible blocks for ambulatory surgery and additives to perform RA. Moreover, we give an update on local anaesthesia drugs and adjuvants, paediatric RA in ambulatory care and discuss the impact of RA by COVID-19.

Dexmedetomidine as an Adjuvant in Peripheral Nerve Block

Peripheral nerve block technology is important to balanced anesthesia technology. It can effectively reduce opioid usage. It is the key to enhance clinical rehabilitation as an important part of the multimodal analgesia scheme. The emergence of ultrasound technology has accelerated peripheral nerve block technology development. It can directly observe the nerve shape, surrounding tissue, and diffusion path of drugs. It can also reduce the dosage of local anesthetics by improving positioning accuracy while enhancing the block's efficacy. Dexmedetomidine is a highly selective drug α₂-adrenergic receptor agonist. Dexmedetomidine has the characteristics of sedation, analgesia, anti-anxiety, inhibition of sympathetic activity, mild respiratory inhibition, and stable hemodynamics. Numerous studies have revealed that dexmedetomidine in peripheral nerve blocks can shorten the onset time of anesthesia and prolong the time of sensory and motor nerve blocks. Although dexmedetomidine was approved by the European Drug Administration for sedation and analgesia in 2017, it has not yet been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). It is used as a non-label drug as an adjuvant. Therefore, the risk-benefit ratio must be evaluated when using these drugs as adjuvants. This review explains the pharmacology and mechanism of dexmedetomidine, the effect of dexmedetomidine on various peripheral nerve block as an adjuvant, and compare it with other types of adjuvants. We summarized and reviewed the application progress of dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant in nerve block and look forward to its future research direction.

Efficacy of perineural dexamethasone in prolonging duration of analgesia with peripheral nerve blocks compared to intravenous dexamethasone: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Perineural dexamethasone has been regarded as a promising adjunct for prolonging the duration of nerve blocks. However, it is uncertain whether its effects are due to local effects on the nerves or from systemic absorption. This systematic review aimed to compare the duration of postoperative analgesia associated with perineural versus intravenous dexamethasone as an adjunct to peripheral nerve blocks.

Methods

A total of 2,216 relevant academic articles were identified after a comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov from 1967 until 2020. All randomized controlled trials that compared perineural and intravenous dexamethasone as adjuncts to peripheral nerve limb blocks were included.

Results

Fifteen randomized controlled trials (1,467 cases; 738 perineural dexamethasone, 729 intravenous dexamethasone) were eligible. The primary outcome (duration of analgesia) was significantly longer in the perineural than in the intravenous dexamethasone group (mean difference [MD]: 2.72 h, 95% CI [1.42, 4.01], P < 0.001). Perineural dexamethasone was also found to prolong the sensory block (MD: 3.45 h, 95% CI [1.36, 5.54], P = 0.001) and lower 24 h postoperative pain scores (MD: −0.74 h, 95% CI [−1.40, −0.07], P = 0.03).

Conclusions

This review confirms the greater efficacy of perineural compared to intravenous dexamethasone in prolonging the analgesic duration of peripheral nerve blocks. However, the extent of prolongation was small and may not represent a clinically meaningful difference.

The Facilitatory Effects of Adjuvant Pharmaceutics to Prolong the Duration of Local Anesthetic for Peripheral Nerve Block: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Peripheral nerve block (PNB) with perineural local anesthetic is used for anesthesia or analgesia with many benefits. To extend these benefits, various adjuvant drugs have been used to prolong the duration of analgesia. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of various adjuvants at prolonging the duration of sensory and motor blockade for PNB.

METHODS

A network meta-analysis of placebo-controlled and active randomized controlled trials was performed comparing 10 adjuvants. Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane library were searched, with articles before May 21, 2020 included. Two authors independently selected studies and extracted data. The primary outcomes were sensory block (SB) and motor block (MB) time, and the secondary outcome was time of first analgesia rescue (FAR). Effect size measures were described as mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Confidence in evidence was assessed using Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA). The study protocol was preregistered with the prospectively registered systematic reviews in health and social care international database (PROSPERO), as number CRD42020187866.

RESULTS

Overall 16,364 citations were identified, of which 53 studies were included with data for 3649 patients. In network meta-analyses, 4 of 7 included treatment strategies were associated with more efficacious analgesia compared with placebo therapy, including dexamethasone (SB time: 5.73 hours, 95% CI, 4.16-7.30; MB time: 4.20 hours, 95% CI, 2.51-5.89; time of FAR: 8.71 hours, 95% CI, 6.63-10.79), dexmedetomidine (SB time: 4.51 hours, 95% CI, 3.52-5.50; MB time: 4.04 hours, 95% CI, 2.98-5.11; time of FAR: 5.25 hours, 95% CI, 4.08-6.43), fentanyl (SB time: 3.59 hours, 95% CI, 0.11-7.06; MB time: 4.42 hours, 95% CI, 0.78-8.06), and clonidine (SB time: 2.75 hours, 95% CI, 1.46-4.04; MB time: 2.93 hours, 95% CI, 1.69-4.16; time of FAR: 3.35 hours, 95% CI, 1.82-4.87). In a subgroup analysis, addition of dexamethasone to ropivacaine significantly increased the time of FAR when compared to dexmedetomidine (time of FAR: 5.23 hours, 95% CI, 2.92-7.54) or clonidine (time of FAR: 6.61 hours, 95% CI, 4.29-8.92) with ropivacaine.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings provide evidence for the consideration of dexmedetomidine, dexamethasone, and clonidine as adjuvants to prolong the duration of PNB. The addition of dexamethasone to ropivacaine has a longer time of FAR compared with clonidine or dexmedetomidine.

Effect of intravenous dexamethasone on the duration of postoperative analgesia for popliteal sciatic nerve block: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Background

Intravenous (IV) dexamethasone prolongs the duration of a peripheral nerve block; however, there is little available information about its optimal effective dose. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of three different doses of IV dexamethasone on the duration of postoperative analgesia to determine the optimal effective dose for a sciatic nerve block.

Methods

Patients scheduled for foot and ankle surgery were randomly assigned to receive normal saline or IV dexamethasone (2.5 mg, 5 mg, or 10 mg). An ultrasound-guided popliteal sciatic nerve block was performed using 0.75% ropivacaine (20 ml) before general anesthesia. The duration of postoperative analgesia was the primary outcome, and pain scores, use of rescue analgesia, onset time, adverse effects, and patient satisfaction were assessed as secondary outcomes.

Results

Compared with the control group, the postoperative analgesic duration of the sciatic nerve block was prolonged in groups receiving IV dexamethasone 10 mg (P < 0.001), but not in the groups receiving IV dexamethasone 2.5 mg or 5 mg. The use of rescue analgesics was significantly different among the four groups 24 h postoperatively (P = 0.001) and similar thereafter. However, pain scores were not significantly different among the four groups 24 h postoperatively. There were no statistically significant differences in the other secondary outcomes among the four groups.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated that compared to the controls, only IV dexamethasone 10 mg increased the duration of postoperative analgesia following a sciatic nerve block for foot and ankle surgery without the occurrence of adverse events.

Catheter use in regional anesthesia: pros and cons

Continuous peripheral nerve blocks refer to a local anesthetic solution administered via perineurally placed catheters in an effort to extend the benefits of a single-shot peripheral nerve block. They offer several advantages in the postoperative period including excellent analgesia, reduced opioid consumption and associated side effects, enhanced rehabilitation and improved patient satisfaction. The current trend towards less invasive, one-day surgery and enhanced recovery programs may decrease the requirement of catheter use. Prolonged motor block in particular is associated with undesirable outcomes. Should we routinely use continuous peripheral nerve blocks in our daily practice? This PRO-CON debate aims at answering the question from the experts' perspectives. Fascial compartment and wound catheters are outside the scope of this debate.

Lower extremity regional anesthesia: essentials of our current understanding

The advent of ultrasound guidance has led to a renewed interest in regional anesthesia of the lower limb. In keeping with the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine's ongoing commitment to provide intensive evidence-based education, this article presents a complete update of the 2005 comprehensive review on lower extremity peripheral nerve blocks. The current review article strives to (1) summarize the pertinent anatomy of the lumbar and sacral plexuses, (2) discuss the optimal approaches and techniques for lower limb regional anesthesia, (3) present evidence to guide the selection of pharmacological agents and adjuvants, (4) describe potential complications associated with lower extremity nerve blocks, and (5) identify informational gaps pertaining to outcomes, which warrant further investigation.

Effect of Perineural Dexamethasone on the Duration of Single Injection Saphenous Nerve Block for Analgesia After Major Ankle Surgery: A Randomized, Controlled Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Patients undergoing major elective ankle surgery often experience pain from the saphenous nerve territory persisting beyond the duration of a single-injection saphenous nerve block. We hypothesized that perineural dexamethasone as an adjuvant for the saphenous nerve block prolongs the duration of analgesia and postpones as well as reduces opioid-requiring pain.

METHODS

Forty patients were included in this prospective, randomized, controlled study. All patients received a continuous sciatic catheter and were randomized to receive a single-injection saphenous nerve block with 10 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine with addition of 1 mL of saline or 1 mL of 0.4% (ie, 4 mg) dexamethasone. The primary outcome was duration of saphenous nerve block estimated as the time until the first opioid request. Secondary outcomes were opioid consumption and pain.

RESULTS

The mean (SD) duration of the saphenous nerve block until first opioid request was 29.4 (8.4) hours in the dexamethasone group and 23.2 (10.3) hours in the control group (P = 0.048). The median opioid consumption [interquartile range] during the first 24 hours was 0 mg [0-0] versus 1.5 mg [0-14.2] in the dexamethasone and control groups, respectively. Nonparametric comparison of opioid consumption from 0 to 24 hours was statistically significant. The opioid consumption was similar in the two groups in the time interval 24 to 48 postoperative hours.

CONCLUSION

Perineural dexamethasone as an adjuvant for the single-injection subsartorial saphenous nerve block can prolong analgesia and reduce opioid-requiring pain after major ankle surgery.

Perineural Versus Systemic Dexamethasone in Front-Foot Surgery Under Ankle Block: A Randomized Double-Blind Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Among the different adjuvants, dexamethasone is one of the most accepted to prolong the effect of local anesthetics. This study aims to determine the superiority of perineural over systemic dexamethasone administration after a single-shot ankle block in metatarsal osteotomy.

METHODS

We performed a prospective, double-blind, randomized study. A total of 100 patients presenting for metatarsal osteotomy with an ankle block were randomized into 2 groups: 30 mL ropivacaine 0.375% + perineural dexamethasone 4 mg (1 mL) + 2.5 mL of systemic saline solution (PNDex group, n = 50) and 30 mL ropivacaine 0.375% + 1 mL of perineural saline solution + intravenous dexamethasone 10 mg (2.5 mL) (IVDex group, n = 50). The primary end point was the duration of analgesia defined as the time between the performance of the ankle block and the first administration of rescue analgesia with tramadol.

RESULTS

Time period to first rescue analgesia with tramadol was similar in the IVDex group and the PNDex group. Data are expressed as mean (SD) or median (range). Duration of analgesia was 23.2 (9.5) hours in the IVDex group and 19 (8.2) hours in the PNDex group (P = 0.4). Consumption of tramadol during the first 48 hours was 0 mg (0-150 mg) in the IVDex group versus 0 mg (0-250 mg) in the PNDex group (P = 0.59). Four (8%) and 12 (24%) patients reported nausea or vomiting in the IVDex group and the PNDex group, respectively (P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

In front-foot surgery, perineural and systemic administrations of dexamethasone are equivalent for postoperative pain relief when used as an adjuvant to ropivacaine ankle block.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT02904538.

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.

Efficacy of perineural vs systemic dexamethasone to prolong analgesia after peripheral nerve block: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Perineural dexamethasone has gained popularity in regional anaesthesia to prolong the duration of analgesia, but its advantage over systemic administration is disputed. The objective of this meta-analysis was to compare the analgesic efficacy of both routes of administration during peripheral nerve block. The methodology followed the PRISMA statement guidelines. The primary outcome was the duration of analgesia analysed according to the type of local anaesthetic administered (bupivacaine or ropivacaine). Secondary outcomes included cumulative opioid consumption in morphine i.v. equivalents, pain scores, and complication rates (neurological complications, infection, or hyperglycaemia). Eleven controlled trials, including 914 patients, were identified. The duration of analgesia was significantly increased with perineural dexamethasone vs systemic dexamethasone by a mean difference of 3 h [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.4, 4.5 h; P=0.0001]. Subgroup analysis revealed that the duration of analgesia was increased by 21% with bupivacaine (mean difference: 4.0 h; 95% CI: 2.8, 5.2 h; P<0.00001) and 12% with ropivacaine (mean difference: 2.0 h; 95% CI: -0.5, 4.5 h; P=0.11). The quality of evidence for our primary outcome was moderate according to the GRADE system. There were no significant differences in other secondary outcomes. No neurological complications or infections were reported. Glucose concentrations were not increased when dexamethasone was injected systemically, but this outcome was reported by only two trials. There is, therefore, moderate evidence that perineural dexamethasone combined with bupivacaine, but not ropivacaine, slightly prolongs the duration of analgesia, without an impact on other pain-related outcomes, when compared with systemic dexamethasone. Injection of perineural dexamethasone should be cautiously balanced in light of the off-label indication for this route of administration.

Perineural versus intravenous dexamethasone as an adjuvant in regional anesthesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Dexamethasone is a common adjuvant for local anesthetics in regional anesthesia, but the optimal route of administration is controversial. Therefore, we did a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to assess the effect of perineural versus intravenous dexamethasone on local anesthetic regional nerve-blockade outcomes.

Materials and methods

Medline (through PubMed), Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Biosis Previews databases were systematically searched (published from inception of each database to January 1, 2017) to identify randomized controlled trials. The data of the selected trials were statistically analyzed to find any significant differences between the two modalities. The primary outcome was the duration of analgesia. Secondary outcomes included duration of motor block, postoperative nausea and vomiting, and postoperative analgesic dose at 24 hours. We conducted a planned subgroup analysis to compare the effects between adding epinephrine or not.

Results

Ten randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria of our analysis, with a total of 749 patients. Without the addition of epinephrine, the effects of perineural and intravenous dexamethasone were equivalent concerning the duration of analgesia (mean difference 0.03 hours, 95% CI –0.17 to 0.24). However, with the addition of epinephrine, the analgesic duration of perineural dexamethasone versus intravenous dexamethasone was prolonged (mean difference 3.96 hours, 95% CI 2.66–5.27). Likewise, the impact of epinephrine was the same on the duration of motor block. The two routes of administration did not show any significant differences in the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, nor on postoperative analgesic consumption at 24 hours.

Conclusion

Our results show that perineural dexamethasone can prolong the effects of analgesic duration when compared to the intravenous route, only when epinephrine is coadministered. Without epinephrine, the two modalities show equivalent effect as adjuvants on regional anesthesia.