Acute Pain Service: A 10-Year Experience

Infectious complications following regional anesthesia: a narrative review and contemporary estimates of risk

INTRODUCTION

Infectious complications following regional anesthesia (RA) while rare, can be devastating. The objective of this review was to estimate the risk of infectious complications following central neuraxial blocks (CNB) such as epidural anesthesia (EA), spinal anesthesia (SA) and combined spinal epidural (CSE), and peripheral nerve blocks (PNB).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases to identify reference studies reporting infectious complications in the context of RA subtypes. Both prospective and retrospective studies providing incidence of infectious complications were included for review to provide pooled estimates (with 95% CI). Additionally, we explored incidences specifically associated with spinal anesthesia, incidences of central nervous system (CNS) infections and, the incidences of overall and CNS infections following CNB in obstetric population.

RESULTS

The pooled estimate of overall infectious complications following all CNB was 9/100 000 (95% CI: 5, 13/100 000). CNS infections following all CNB was estimated to be 2/100 000 (95% CI: 1, 3/100 000) and even rarer following SA (1/100 000 (95% CI: 1, 2/100 000)). Obstetric population had a lower rate of overall (1/100 000 (95% CI: 1, 3/100 000)) and CNS infections (4 per million (95% CI: 0.3, 1/100 000)) following all CNB. For PNB catheters, the reported rate of infectious complications was 1.8% (95% CI: 1.2, 2.5/100).

DISCUSSION

Our review suggests that the risk of overall infectious complications following neuraxial anesthesia is very rare and the rate of CNS infections is even rarer. The infectious complications following PNB catheters seems significantly higher compared with CNB. Standardizing nomenclature and better reporting methodologies are needed for the better estimation of the infectious complications.

Acute Pain Services and pain-related patient-reported outcomes in Hungarian hospitals

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pain management is an important part of surgical care, where Acute Pain Service offers added value in terms of patient outcomes and costs. The technology, however, has hardly been adopted in Hungary, with only two hospitals operating Acute Pain Service and whose performance has not been evaluated yet. This research compared pain management outcomes of surgical, orthopedic, and traumatology patients in Hungarian hospitals with and without Acute Pain Service.

METHODS

We recruited 348 patients, 120 in the APS group and 228 in the control group, whose experience was surveyed with an adapted version of the American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire. The questionnaire covered pain intensity, pain interference with physical and emotional functions, side effects, patient satisfaction, information received, and participation in treatment decisions. The differences were analyzed by Fisher's exact test and Mann-Whitney U test.

RESULTS

The APS group showed better results with lower pain intensity scores regarding worst postoperative pain (χ2 = 18.919, p = 0.0043). They reported less pain interference with activities in bed (χ2 = 21.978, p = 0.0006) and out of bed (χ2 = 14.341, p = 0.0129). Furthermore, patients in the APS group experienced fewer pain-management-related side effects, like nausea (χ2 = 15.240, p = 0.0101), drowsiness (χ2 = 26.965, p = 0.0001), and dizziness (χ2 = 13.980, p = 0.0124). However, patient information (χ2 = 3.480, p = 0.0945) and patient satisfaction (χ2 = 5.781, p = 0.2127) did not differ significantly between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings confirm earlier international evidence on the benefits of Acute Pain Service in postoperative pain management and support the wider adoption of the technology in Hungarian hospitals. Nevertheless, close attention should be paid to patient information and involvement as better outcomes alone do not necessarily increase patient satisfaction.

Efficacy and safety of patient-controlled intravenous analgesia after APS team standardized postoperative pain management: A 6-year experience of an acute pain service in 107802 Chinese patients

There are few studies on the impact of postoperative pain management (such as Acute Pain Service, APS) on the prognosis of patients, especially the research on large samples, even less data on Chinese patients. It is reported that only 25.12 % of hospitals in China have established APS or similar teams, and less than 10 % of them are responsible for the whole process of postoperative analgesia services. Tongji Hospital affiliated to Tongji Medical College of Huazhong University of Science and Technology has established a professional APS team led by anesthesiologists (TJ-APS), and has a standardized workflow and management system. Based on the TJ-APS standardized postoperative pain management, the incidence and adverse effects of postoperative pain in different types of surgical patients were analyzed. In total, 107,802 patients receiving intravenous PCA from the Tongji Hospital affiliated to Tongji Medical College of Huazhong University of Science and Technology were selected between January 2016 and December 2021, which were under TJ-APS standardized postoperative analgesia process, postoperative analgesia strategy based on the principle of "low opioid, multimodal, specialization and individualization", as well as regular ward rounds and 24-h on call on-duty system. We assessed the incidence and adverse effects of postoperative pain in different types of surgical patients. Based on the TJ-APS standardized postoperative pain management, the incidence of poor postoperative analgesia in patients with intravenous PCA is significantly lower than that reported in the current literature (20 %), and mainly occurs in biliary-pancreatic surgery, extrahepatic surgery and gastrointestinal surgery. The overall incidence of adverse effects was 5.52 %, of which nausea and vomiting was the highest, especially among gynecological tumors and gynecological patients, which were 10.75 % and 8.68 % respectively, but both were lower than the level reported in the current literature (20 %). This APS multimodal management and analgesia process can provide reference and guidance for PCA management of postoperative acute pain.

Evaluating clinical pharmacists' involvement in postoperative acute pain services: a multicenter survey in Guangdong Province, China

Objective: Postoperative pain management is an important part of surgical pharmacy. Postoperative acute pain services in China are in their initial stages. This survey aimed to investigate the attitudes, involvement, and knowledge of clinical pharmacists in China regarding postoperative acute pain services. The results can provide valuable information to guide clinical pharmacists in developing targeted strategies to improve their postoperative acute pain service capabilities. Methods: A questionnaire was distributed to the pharmacy departments of 133 grade A tertiary hospitals in Guangdong province, and the responses were collected electronically. Results: 123 completed questionnaires were collected from clinical pharmacists. Although 95.93% of clinical pharmacists believed they should participate in postoperative pain services, only 62.6% reported substantial involvement. Overall satisfaction with the postoperative pain service was 93.5%. Understanding of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and opioid analgesics by clinical pharmacists was comparable (p > 0.05). Furthermore, 98.37% of clinical pharmacists desired systematic learning in postoperative pain management, and 40.65% expressed a strong need. Conclusion: Clinical pharmacists in China demonstrate a positive attitude toward participating in postoperative acute pain services. However, the actual level of involvement was concerning, and the lack of systematic training and well-established work protocols may be contributing factors. Efforts should be made to establish comprehensive and standardized processes and work protocols for postoperative acute pain services and provide systematic and hierarchical professional training to enhance clinical pharmacists' capabilities in postoperative acute pain services.

New insight into the analgesic recipe: A cohort study based on smart patient-controlled analgesia pumps records

Purpose: Intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) has been widely used; however, regimen criteria have not yet been established. In China, the most often used opioid is sufentanil, for which repeated doses are a concern, and empirical flurbiprofen axetil (FBP) as an adjuvant. We hypothesized that hydromorphone would be a better choice and also evaluated the effectiveness of FBP as an adjuvant.

Methods: This historical cohort study was conducted in two tertiary hospitals in China and included 12,674 patients using hydromorphone or sufentanil for IV-PCA between April 1, 2017, and January 30, 2021. The primary outcome was analgesic insufficiency at static (AIS). The secondary outcomes included analgesic insufficiency with movement (AIM) and common opioid-related adverse effects such as postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and dizziness.

Results: Sufentanil, but not the sufentanil-FBP combination, was associated with higher risks of AIS and AIM compared to those for hydromorphone (OR 1.64 [1.23, 2.19], p < 0.001 and OR 1.42 [1.16, 1.73], p < 0.001). Hydromorphone combined with FBP also decreased the risk of both AIS and AIM compared to those for pure hydromorphone (OR 0.74 [0.61, 0.90], p = 0.003 and OR 0.80 [0.71, 0.91], p < 0.001). However, the risk of PONV was higher in patients aged ≤35 years using FBP (hydromorphone-FBP vs. hydromorphone and sufentanil-FBP vs. hydromorphone, OR 1.69 [1.22, 2.33], p = 0.001 and 1.79 [1.12, 2.86], p = 0.015).

Conclusion: Hydromorphone was superior to sufentanil for IV-PCA in postoperative analgesia. Adding FBP may improve the analgesic effects of both hydromorphone and sufentanil but was associated with an increased risk of PONV in patients <35 years of age.

Propofol total intravenous anaesthesia versus inhalational anaesthesia for acute postoperative pain in patients with morphine patient-controlled analgesia: a large-scale retrospective study with covariate adjustment

Background

To compare the postoperative analgesic effect of propofol total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) versus inhalational anaesthesia (GAS) in patients using morphine patient-controlled analgesia (PCA).

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was performed in a single tertiary university hospital. Adult patients who used PCA morphine after general anaesthesia across 15 types of surgeries were included. Patients who received propofol TIVA were compared to those who had inhalational anaesthesia. Primary outcomes assessed were postoperative numerical rating scale (NRS) pain scores and postoperative opioid consumption.

Results

Data from 4202 patients were analysed. The overall adjusted NRS pain scores were significantly lower in patients who received propofol TIVA at rest (GEE: β estimate of the mean on a 0 to 10 scale = -0.56, 95% CI = (-0.74 to -0.38), p < 0.001; GAS as reference group) and with movement (β estimate = -0.89, 95% CI = (-1.1 to -0.69), p < 0.001) from postoperative days (POD) 1–3. Propofol TIVA was associated with lower overall adjusted postoperative morphine consumption (β estimate = -3.45, 95% CI = (-4.46 to -2.44), p < 0.001). Patients with propofol TIVA had lower adjusted NRS pain scores with movement for hepatobiliary/pancreatic (p < 0.001), upper gastrointestinal (p < 0.001) and urological surgeries (p = 0.005); and less adjusted postoperative morphine consumption for hepatobiliary/pancreatic (p < 0.001), upper gastrointestinal (p = 0.006) and urological surgeries (p = 0.002). There were no differences for other types of surgeries.

Conclusion

Propofol TIVA was associated with statistically significant, but small reduction in pain scores and opioid consumption in patients using PCA morphine. Subgroup analysis suggests clinically meaningful analgesia possibly for hepatobiliary/pancreatic and upper gastrointestinal surgeries.

Trial registration

This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03875872).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12871-022-01683-9.

Postoperative Thoracic Epidural Analgesia: Adverse Events from a Single-Center Series of 3126 Patients

Purpose

Thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) has been shown to reduce postsurgical morbidity and mortality; nevertheless, major and minor complications can occur. We report our 10-year experience with TEA and incidence of complications.

Patients and Methods

Patients received continuous infusion TEA (0.2% ropivacaine and 2 µg ml⁻¹ fentanyl) to control postoperative pain. Every 8 hours, the acute pain service recorded the analgesia regimen and occurrence of side effects. The initial infusion rate was tapered daily in response to improvement in pain symptoms or occurrence of side effects.

Results

A total of 3126 patients received TEA. The median age was 65 years (range, 18–94) and the duration of catheter placement was 3.5 days (range, 2–8). Three major complications were identified (1:1042): two subarachnoid blocks and one epidural abscess which led to permanent sequela (1:3126). Minor complications were hypotension (4.8%), pruritus (4.4%), accidental catheter removal (3.7%), insertion site inflammation (2.5%), motor weakness (2.0%), postoperative nausea and vomiting (1.8%), catheter disconnection (1.9%), catheter occlusion (0.3%), post-dural puncture headache (0.5%), and catheter fragment retention (0.06%), which were the reasons for a 7.4% rate of early discontinuation of epidural analgesia. No occurrence of epidural hematoma, local anesthetic systemic toxicity, and cardiovascular/respiratory depression was recorded.

Conclusion

Postoperative TEA is an advanced technique that poses certain difficulties that can subvert its great potential. While serious complications were rare, minor complications occurred more often and affected the postoperative course negatively. A risk/benefit evaluation of each patient should be done before employing the technique.

Sufentanil Sublingual Tablet System (SSTS) for the management of postoperative pain after major abdominal and gynecological surgery within an ERAS protocol: an observational study

Background

The Sufentanil Sublingual Tablet System (SSTS) is a new, pre-programmed, noninvasive, handheld system for patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) which may allow a faster postoperative recovery compared with standard PCA. The efficacy of SSTS in controlling pain after open abdominal surgery has already been documented. However, to our knowledge SSTS has never been investigated in patients undergoing major surgery within an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol.

Methods

This observational, retrospective analysis included consecutive patients undergoing elective major abdominal and gynecological surgery. All patients received the SSTS device once they were fully awake and had a good control of pain at the end of the surgery. We analyzed changes in pain intensity according to the numerical rating scale (NRS) throughout the treatment as well as its duration, the number of administrations, and possible related adverse events. Patients were also interviewed to assess their quality of sleep and overall satisfaction with the SSTS device.

Results

The study included 308 patients. Compared to the first SSTS administration, pain intensity decreased from a median NRS of 6 to 0 at day 3, for an overall reduction of 79%. Results were already statistically significant at postoperative day 1 (p<0.01). Adverse reactions were observed in 62 patients, with nausea being the most frequent (12%), and in 93% of patients SSTS was discontinued because it was considered no longer necessary. Patient satisfaction was high, with 89% of them judging the device as “easy” or “very easy” to use.

Conclusions

Although the retrospective and observational nature of the study as well as the absence of a comparative group limits the strength of evidence, our results consider SSTS an effective and safe tool for the management of postoperative pain after major abdominal and gynecological surgery within an ERAS protocol.