Liposomal Bupivacaine for Pain Control After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Prospective, Double-Blinded, Randomized, Positive-Controlled Trial

Less than 1% risk of donor-site quadriceps tendon rupture post-ACL reconstruction with quadriceps tendon autograft: a systematic review

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to develop a comprehensive complications profile for quadriceps tendon-autograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (QT ACL-R).

METHODS

A traditional and grey literature search was conducted in accordance with PRISMA and R-AMSTAR guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane, Web of Science, and many grey literature sources were searched from inception to May 29, 2022. All studies were searched and screened in duplicate with included studies being of all levels of evidence, reporting complications, and with patients of all ages undergoing primary ACL reconstruction with quadriceps tendon autograft in the last 15 years. Studies were excluded if they had cadaveric or animal subjects or were reviews. Risk of bias assessment was conducted using MINORS criteria for non-randomised studies and Cochrane's RoB 2.0 for randomised studies. Data were summarised with weighted event rates generated under a random-effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 55 studies (5315 reconstructions) were included: 32 used quadriceps tendon with bone block (B-QT), 19 used all-soft tissue quadriceps tendon (S-QT), and four did not report the QT graft subtype used. Included patients had an age range of 6.2-58 years and an average reported follow-up time of 28.1 months (range, 6-90 months) for non-randomised studies and 34.3 months (range, 0.233-120 months) for randomised studies. Pooled incidence rates for clinically relevant major complications included contralateral ACL injury at 6.0%, postoperative meniscal issues at 5.4%, cyclops lesions at 4.8%, graft failure at 4.1%, patellar fracture at 2.2%, hardware removal at 1.7%, infection at 1.5%, and donor-site quadriceps tendon rupture at 0.7%. Pooled incidence rates for clinically relevant minor complications included anterior knee pain at 9.7%, kneeling pain at 9.5%, sensation deficits at 4.4%, loss of extension at 4.2%, donor-site tendinopathy at 3.9%, cosmetic issues at 1.8%, and hematoma at 1.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

QT ACL-R resembles other graft types in its rates and types of postoperative complications. In this exploratory systematic review, no complications of QT ACL-R were found to be disproportionately represented in the literature. This graft type should remain an option with comparable complication rates to other graft choices.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

REGISTRATION

This study was preregistered under PROSPERO with preregistration code CRD42022302078.

Liposomal Bupivacaine and Ropivacaine Adductor Canal Blocks for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Provide Similar Postoperative Analgesia

The purpose of this study was to compare postoperative pain following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) in patients receiving an adductor canal block (ACB) with ropivacaine (R-ACB) or liposomal bupivacaine (LB-ACB). The secondary purpose was to compare opioid consumption. A prospective cohort study of patients undergoing ACLR at an academic medical center was conducted from November 1, 2018 to November 21, 2019. The first cohort received R-ACB and 30 tablets of 5/325 mg oxycodone/acetaminophen. After June 13, 2019, the second cohort received LB-ACB and 20 tablets of 5/325 mg oxycodone/acetaminophen with the reduction in opioids prescribed resulting from a hospital quality improvement initiative to decrease narcotic consumption. From postoperative days 0 through 6, pain was assessed thrice daily using a numeric rating scale. Total postoperative opioid consumption was reported via tablet count and converted to oral morphine equivalents (OMEs). During this period, 165 subjects underwent ACLR, and 126 met the eligibility criteria (44.4% female, 55.6% male; mean ± standard deviation: 28.7 ± 13.7 years). Sixty-six (52.4%) received LB-ACB, and 60 (47.6%) received R-ACB (p = 0.53). The most common graft utilized was quadriceps autograft (63.6% LB-ACB; 58.3% R-ACB, p = 0.76). Mean postoperative pain scores were similar between groups during the entire postoperative period (p ≥ 0.08 for POD 0-6). While postoperative opioid consumption was lower among patients receiving LB-ACB (median OME [interquartile range]: 28.6 [7.5-63.8] vs. 45.0 [15.0-75.0], p = 0.023), this only amounted to an average of 2.2 tablets. Patients receiving LB-ACB in the setting of ACLR reported similar postoperative pain compared with those receiving R-ACB. Despite the second aim of our study, we cannot make conclusions about the effect of each block on opioid consumption given that each cohort received different numbers of opioid tablets due to institutional pressure to reduce opioid prescribing. As few patients completed their opioid prescriptions or requested refills, further reduction in prescription size is warranted. Future studies are necessary to further elucidate the effect of LB-ACB versus R-ACB on postoperative pain and opioid consumption after ACLR.

Reduced Opioid Use Among Patients Who Received Liposomal Bupivacaine for ACL Reconstruction

Standard multimodal pain management for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction typically includes a combination of local anesthetics, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and opioids. Opioids present a substantial risk, and there is a rising number of prescription opioid-related overdoses in the United States. The goal of this study was to evaluate the quantity of opioids prescribed to patients who received liposomal bupivacaine as a component of their multi-modal pain regimen. The electronic medical records of patients who underwent anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction by a single surgeon at an urban hospital during a 2-year period were evaluated. Patients in the case group received liposomal bupivacaine and those in the control group did not. Statistical analysis of the number of pills prescribed and numeric pain rating scale scores was performed with a 2-tailed unequal variance t test. Statistical analysis of opioid prescription refills was performed with a chi-square test. A total of 67 patients were included. The mean number of 5-mg oxycodone tablets prescribed to the case group (9.29±10.29 tablets) was significantly lower (P<.01) compared with the number prescribed to the control group (66.26±37.13 tablets). Patients in the case group also were less likely to require an opioid prescription refill at the first follow-up appointment (P<.01; absolute risk reduction, 50%; number needed to treat, 2). Mean numeric pain rating scale score at 2 weeks was 2.8±2.1 in the case group and 3.8±2.4 in the control group (P=.09). Patients who received liposomal bupivacaine as part of multimodal pain management had significantly fewer opioid prescriptions. Despite the reduction in opioids prescribed, patients in the case group only showed a trend toward a reduction in pain at 2-week follow-up. [Orthopedics. 2021;44(2):e229-e235.].

The Efficacy of Liposomal Bupivacaine for Opioid and Pain Reduction: A Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials

Background The opioid crisis has prompted surgeons to search for alternative postoperative methods of analgesia. Liposomal bupivacaine is a long-acting local anesthetic formulation used for pain, potentially reducing opioid use. Evaluation of liposomal bupivacaine as a viable alternative for pain management is needed. The objective was to assess the efficacy of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of liposomal bupivacaine in postoperative pain management and opioid consumption. Material and Methods The authors extracted RCTs comparing liposomal bupivacaine versus placebo or active comparators for postoperative pain or opioid reduction from PubMED/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Exclusion criteria included nonhuman studies, non-RCTs, pooled studies, and inability to access full text. The following variables were abstracted: surgical specialty, number of subjects, pain and opioid outcomes, and authors' financial conflicts of interest. Results We identified 77 published RCTs, of which 63 studies with a total of 6770 subjects met inclusion criteria. Liposomal bupivacaine did not demonstrate significant pain relief compared to placebo or active agents in 74.58% of RCTs. Of the studies evaluating narcotic use, liposomal bupivacaine did not show a reduction in opioid consumption in 85.71% of RCTs. Liposomal bupivacaine, when compared to standard bupivacaine or another active agent, yielded no reduction in opioid use in 83.33% and 100.00% of studies, respectively. Clinical trials with a financial conflict of interest relating to the manufacturer of liposomal bupivacaine were significantly more likely to show pain relief (OR: 14.31 [95% CI, 2.8, 73.10], P = 0.0001) and decreased opioid consumption (OR: 12.35 [95% CI 1.40, 109.07], P = 0.0237). Of the 265 unpublished RCTs on ClinicalTrials.gov, 47.54% were withdrawn, terminated, suspended, or completed without study results available. Conclusions The efficacy of liposomal bupivacaine for providing superior postoperative pain control relative to placebo or another active agent is not supported by a majority of RCTs. Underreporting of trial results and bias due to underlying financial relationships amongst authors are two major concerns that should be considered when evaluating the available evidence.

The analgesic efficacy of liposomal bupivacaine compared with bupivacaine hydrochloride for the prevention of postoperative pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND/IMPORTANCE

Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) is a prolonged release formulation of conventional bupivacaine designed for prolonging local or peripheral regional single injection anesthesia. To this day, the benefit of the new substance on relevant end points is discussed controversial.

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to determine whether there is a difference in postoperative pain scores and morphine consumption between patients treated with LB and bupivacaine hydrochloride in a systematic review and meta-analysis.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

Randomized controlled trials (RCT) were identified in Embase, CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Web of Science up to May 2020. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane methodology. Primary end points were the mean pain score difference and the relative morphine equivalent (MEQ) consumption expressed as the ratio of means (ROM) 24 and 72 hours postoperatively.

FINDINGS

23 RCTs including 1867 patients were eligible for meta-analysis. The mean pain score difference at 24 hours postoperatively was significantly lower in the LB group, at -0.37 (95% CI -0.56 to -0.19). The relative MEQ consumption after 24 hours was also significantly lower in the LB group, at 0.85 (0.82 to 0.89). At 72 hours, the pain score difference was not significant at -0.25 (-0.71 to 0.20) and the MEQ ratio was 0.85 (0.77 to 0.95).

CONCLUSION

The beneficial effect on pain scores and opioid consumption was small but not clinically relevant, despite statistical significance. The effect was stable among all studies, indicating that it is independent of the application modality.

Perineural Liposomal Bupivacaine Is Not Superior to Nonliposomal Bupivacaine for Peripheral Nerve Block Analgesia

BACKGROUND

Liposomal bupivacaine is purported to extend analgesia of peripheral nerve blocks when administered perineurally. However, evidence of the clinical effectiveness of perineural liposomal bupivacaine is mixed. This meta-analysis seeks to evaluate the effectiveness of perineural liposomal bupivacaine in improving peripheral nerve block analgesia as compared with nonliposomal local anesthetics.

METHODS

The authors identified randomized trials evaluating the effectiveness of peripheral nerve block analgesic that compared liposomal bupivacaine with nonliposomal local anesthetics. The primary outcome was the difference in area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) of the pooled 24- to 72-h rest pain severity scores. Secondary outcomes included postoperative analgesic consumption, time to first analgesic request, incidence of opioid-related side effects, patient satisfaction, length of hospital stay, liposomal bupivacaine side effects, and functional recovery. AUC pain scores were interpreted in light of a minimal clinically important difference of 2.0 cm · h.

RESULTS

Nine trials (619 patients) were analyzed. When all trials were pooled, AUC pain scores ± SD at 24 to 72 h were 7.6 ± 4.9 cm · h and 6.6 ± 4.6 cm · h for nonliposomal and liposomal bupivacaine, respectively. As such, perineural liposomal bupivacaine provided a clinically unimportant benefit by improving the AUC (95% CI) of 24- to 72-h pain scores by 1.0 cm · h (0.5 to 1.6; P = 0.003) compared with nonliposomal bupivacaine. Excluding an industry-sponsored trial rendered the difference between the groups nonsignificant (0.7 cm · h [-0.1 to 1.5]; P = 0.100). Secondary outcome analysis did not uncover any additional benefits to liposomal bupivacaine in pain severity at individual timepoints up to 72 h, analgesic consumption, time to first analgesic request, opioid-related side effects, patient satisfaction, length of hospital stay, and functional recovery. No liposomal bupivacaine side effects were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Perineural liposomal bupivacaine provided a statistically significant but clinically unimportant improvement in the AUC of postoperative pain scores compared with plain local anesthetic. Furthermore, this benefit was rendered nonsignificant after excluding an industry-sponsored trial, and liposomal bupivacaine was found to be not different from plain local anesthetics for postoperative pain and all other analgesic and functional outcomes. High-quality evidence does not support the use of perineural liposomal bupivacaine over nonliposomal bupivacaine for peripheral nerve blocks.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

Clinical Effectiveness of Liposomal Bupivacaine Administered by Infiltration or Peripheral Nerve Block to Treat Postoperative Pain

The authors provide a comprehensive summary of all randomized, controlled trials (n = 76) involving the clinical administration of liposomal bupivacaine (Exparel; Pacira Pharmaceuticals, USA) to control postoperative pain that are currently published. When infiltrated surgically and compared with unencapsulated bupivacaine or ropivacaine, only 11% of trials (4 of 36) reported a clinically relevant and statistically significant improvement in the primary outcome favoring liposomal bupivacaine. Ninety-two percent of trials (11 of 12) suggested a peripheral nerve block with unencapsulated bupivacaine provides superior analgesia to infiltrated liposomal bupivacaine. Results were mixed for the 16 trials comparing liposomal and unencapsulated bupivacaine, both within peripheral nerve blocks. Overall, of the trials deemed at high risk for bias, 84% (16 of 19) reported statistically significant differences for their primary outcome measure(s) compared with only 14% (4 of 28) of those with a low risk of bias. The preponderance of evidence fails to support the routine use of liposomal bupivacaine over standard local anesthetics.

Liposomes for Intra-Articular Analgesic Drug Delivery in Orthopedics: State-of-Art and Future Perspectives. Insights from a Systematic Mini-Review of the Literature

Background and objectives: Liposomal structures are artificial vesicles composed of one or several lamellae of phospholipids which surround an inner aqueous core. Given the amphoteric nature of phospholipids, liposomes are promising systems for drug delivery. The present review provides an updated synthesis of the main techniques for the production of liposomes for orthopedic applications, focusing on the drawbacks of the conventional methods and on the advantages of high pressure techniques. Materials and Methods: Articles published in any language were systematically retrieved from two major electronic scholarly databases (PubMed/MEDLINE and Scopus) up to March 2020. Nine articles were retained based on the “Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses” (PRISMA) guidelines. Results: Liposome vesicles decrease the rate of inflammatory reactions after local injections, and significantly enhance the clinical effectiveness of anti-inflammatory agents providing controlled drug release, reducing toxic side effects. Conclusions: This review presents an update on the improvement in musculoskeletal ailments using liposome treatment.

Advances of Nano-Structured Extended-Release Local Anesthetics

Extended-release local anesthetics (LAs) have drawn increasing attention with their promising role in improving analgesia and reducing adverse events of LAs. Nano-structured carriers such as liposomes and polymersomes optimally meet the demands of/for extended-release, and have been utilized in drug delivery over decades and showed satisfactory results with extended-release. Based on mature technology of liposomes, EXPAREL, the first approved liposomal LA loaded with bupivacaine, has seen its success in an extended-release form. At the same time, polymersomes has advances over liposomes with complementary profiles, which inspires the emergence of hybrid carriers. This article summarized the recent research successes on nano-structured extended-release LAs, of which liposomal and polymeric are mainstream systems. Furthermore, with continual optimization, drug delivery systems carry properties beyond simple transportation, such as specificity and responsiveness. In the near future, we may achieve targeted delivery and controlled-release properties to satisfy various analgesic requirements.

A Cost-Minimization Analysis Evaluating the Use of Liposomal Bupivacaine in Reconstructive Plastic Surgery Procedures

BACKGROUND

Postsurgical pain management is critical to patient satisfaction and value. Several studies have evaluated liposomal bupivacaine in postoperative pain management protocols; however, its economic feasibility remains undefined. This study analyzes the economic impact of liposomal bupivacaine using a national claims database to assess postoperative clinical and financial outcomes in plastic and reconstructive procedures.

METHODS

The Vizient Clinical Data Base/Resource Manager electronic database was reviewed for plastic surgery procedures (i.e., abdominoplasty, abdominal wall reconstruction, mastectomy with immediate tissue expander placement, mastectomy with direct-to-implant reconstruction, autologous breast reconstruction, and augmentation mammaplasty) at participating hospitals from July 1, 2016, to July 1, 2017. The main outcome measures were the length of stay; 7-, 14-, and 30-day readmission rates; and direct and total costs observed.

RESULTS

During the study period, 958 total cases met inclusion criteria. Liposomal bupivacaine was used in 239 cases (25 percent). Compared with cases that did not use liposomal bupivacaine, liposomal bupivacaine cases had a decreased length of stay (9.2 days versus 5.8 days), decreased cost (total cost, $39,531 versus $28,021; direct cost, $23,960 versus $17,561), and lower 30-day readmission rates (4 percent versus 0 percent). The 14- and 7-day readmission rates were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of liposomal bupivacaine may contribute to a reduction in length of stay, hospital costs, and 30-day readmission rates for abdominal and breast reconstructive procedures, which could contribute to a favorable economic profile from a system view. Focusing on the measurement and improvement of value in the context of whole, definable, patient processes will be important as we transition to value-based payments.

Peripheral Nerve Blocks vs Periarticular Injections in Total Knee Arthroplasty

In patients undergoing surgery, optimal pain management is associated with improved perioperative outcomes, patient satisfaction with surgery, and a more rapid functional recovery. In recent years, the employment of multimodal pain management strategies has become increasingly widespread. In particular, there has been an explosion in the use of peripheral nerve blockade and periarticular injections in total knee arthroplasty. However, there is significant variability in the administration of either modality of anesthesia. As such, a critical evaluation of the current literature is warranted to elucidate the advantages and disadvantages of each technique with the ultimate goal of further refining current pain control strategies. In this symposium, we review each of these modalities and their association with pain management, narcotic consumption, length of hospital stay, and adverse events.

Intercostal Nerve Blockade with Exparel® Results in Lower Opioid Usage during the First 24 Hours after Video-Assisted Thorascopic Surgery

Liposomal bupivacaine (LipoB) provides prolonged local anesthetic effects and has seen usage in several fields of surgery. We review our experience using LipoB intraoperatively for intercostal nerve blocks after video-assisted throacoscopic surgery (VATS). A retrospective, single-center review was conducted for patients undergoing VATS from August 2012 to December 2014. Patients those who received LipoB as an intercostal nerve block were compared with patients who received blocks with standard bupivacaine. Opiate amounts used within the first six hours and then subsequent 18,48, and 72 hours were converted into morphine equivalents for comparison. Forty-seven patients met inclusion criteria: 21 receiving LipoB intercostal nerve block and 26 controls. Groups were similar for age, diabetes, hypertension, chronic kidney disease, body mass index and American Society of Anesthesiologists scores. The LipoB group had a larger portion of males (P < 0.02). Postoperatively, morphine equivalent usage was significantly less in the LipoB group compared with the standard bupivacaine within the first six hours after surgery (15.62 vs 52.41, P = 0.001) and in the subsequent 18 hours (28.98 vs 65.17, P = 0.01). After the first 24 hours there was not a significant difference in opiate usage between the two groups. There was no difference in length of stay between the two groups. In our study group of VATS patients, an intercostal nerve block with LipoB significantly reduced the usage of postoperative opioids in the first 24 hours only when compared with standard bupivacaine.

Intraoperative Infiltration of Liposomal Bupivacaine vs Bupivacaine Hydrochloride for Pain Management in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Prospective Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Pain management after total hip arthroplasty is well studied. Nevertheless, there is no consensus regarding the "cocktail" to use in periarticular infiltration (PAI). Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) is a slow release local anesthetic that can be infiltrated during surgery. In this study, we compared LB to bupivacaine hydrochloride (HCL).

METHODS

Between September 2014 and March 2016, 181 patients were screened for this prospective randomized trial. A total of 107 patients were enrolled and studied. Patients were separated into LB and control groups. LB group (50) received PAI with LB and bupivacaine HCL with epinephrine and the control group (57) received PAI with bupivacaine HCL and epinephrine. Patient morphine equivalent consumption, pain score estimated on visual analog scale, time to first ambulation greater than 20 feet, time to discharge, drug-related side effects, and patient falls were documented. Data were collected up to 72 hours postoperation.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in morphine equivalent consumption in any of the 12-hour time blocks, up to 72 hours. No patient falls were documented in either group. Time to first ambulation greater than 20 feet, ambulation same day as surgery, time to discharge, and drug-related side effects were not significantly different between groups.

CONLCUSION

Intraoperative PAI with LB did not result in significant differences in postoperative opioid consumption, pain scores, opioid-related side effects, time to first ambulation, and length of stay up to 72 hours following total hip arthroplasty compared to a control group.

A Prospective Randomized Study Comparing Bupivacaine Hydrochloride Versus Bupivacaine Liposome for Pain Management After Distal Radius Fracture Repair Surgery

PURPOSE

To compare pain experience and opioid use after distal radius fracture repair surgery performed with perioperative infiltration of the local anesthesia bupivacaine hydrochloride (Marcaine; Pfizer, New York, NY) or bupivacaine liposome (Exparel; Pacira, Parsippany, NJ).

METHODS

We conducted a prospective comparison of consecutive patients scheduled to undergo distal radius fracture repair surgery. Patients were randomized to either Marcaine or Exparel. Patients in the Marcaine group received 20 mL 0.5% bupivacaine without epinephrine into the incision and surgical site before incision. Patients in the Exparel group first received 10 mL 0.5% Marcaine with no epinephrine into the incision and surgical site before incision; then, upon completion of the surgery and wound closure, they also received 10 mL Exparel into the same site that had been preinjected with Marcaine. All operations were performed with the same surgical technique. Daily opioid pill consumption, pain levels, and any adverse reactions were recorded from postoperative days 0 to 5.

RESULTS

On the day of surgery, patients in the Exparel group reported significantly lower pain levels (3.9 vs 5.8) and consumed significantly fewer prescribed opioid pills (1.2 vs 2.0) compared with patients in the Marcaine group. However, there were no other significant differences between the Exparel and Marcaine groups on any subsequent days or in the total number of pills consumed at the end of the study period (7.5 vs 8.9 pills, respectively). No major adverse reactions were noted in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

Exparel use was found to result in decreased pain and opioid consumption only on the day of surgery and not thereafter.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic II.

Leading the Way to Solutions to the Opioid Epidemic: AOA Critical Issues

BACKGROUND

In the past 2 decades, overdoses and deaths from prescription opioids have reached epidemic proportions in the United States. The widespread use of opioids complicates management of the orthopaedic surgery patient in the acute and chronic settings. Orthopaedic surgeons are some of the top prescribers of opioids in the complex setting of chronic use, abuse, and diversion.

METHODS

The literature regarding the basic science of pharmacologic options for pain management (e.g., opioids and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs), the impact of strategies on bone and soft-tissue healing, and pain relief are summarized as they relate to the management of orthopaedic injuries and conditions. Additionally, a section on designing solutions to address the current opioid crisis is presented.

RESULTS

The mechanism of action of different classes of analgesic medications is discussed, as well as the basic scientific evidence regarding the impact of narcotic and nonnarcotic analgesic medications on bone-healing and on other organ systems. Differences between pain and nociception, various treatment strategies, and clinical comparisons of the effectiveness of various analgesics compared with opioids are summarized. Finally, options for addressing the opioid crisis, including the description of a large system-wide intervention to impact prescriber behavior at the point of care using health-information solutions, are presented.

CONCLUSIONS

Orthopaedic leaders, armed with information and strategies, can help lead the way to solutions to the opioid epidemic in their respective communities, institutions, and subspecialty societies. Through leadership and education, orthopaedic surgeons can help shape the solution for this critical public health issue.

Perioperative Care of Elderly Surgical Outpatients

The ambulatory setting offers potential advantages for elderly patients undergoing elective surgery due to the advancement in both surgical and anesthetic techniques resulting in quicker recovery times, fewer complications, higher patient satisfaction, and reduced costs of care. This review article aims to provide a practical guide to anesthetic management of elderly outpatients. Important considerations in the preoperative evaluation of elderly outpatients with co-existing diseases, as well as the advantages and disadvantages of different anesthetic techniques on a procedural-specific basis, and recommendations regarding the management of common postoperative complications (e.g., pain, postoperative nausea and vomiting [PONV], delirium and cognitive dysfunction, and gastrointestinal dysfunction) are discussed. The role of anesthesiologists as perioperative physicians is important for optimizing surgical outcomes for elderly patients undergoing ambulatory surgery. The implementation of high-quality, evidence-based perioperative care programs for the elderly on an ambulatory basis has assumed increased importance. Optimal management of perioperative pain using opioid-sparing multimodal analgesic techniques and preventing PONV using prophylactic antiemetics are key elements for achieving enhanced recovery after surgery.

Liposomal bupivacaine versus indwelling interscalene nerve block for postoperative pain control in shoulder arthroplasty: a prospective randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Pain management strategies following shoulder arthroplasty vary significantly. Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) is an extended-release delivery of a phospholipid bilayer encapsulating bupivacaine that can result in drug delivery up to 72 hours. Prior studies in lower extremity surgery demonstrated efficacy of LB in comparison to a single-shot peripheral nerve block; however, no study has investigated LB in a total shoulder arthroplasty population. Therefore, this study compared LB vs. an indwelling interscalene nerve block (IINB).

METHODS

This is a prospective, randomized study of 83 consecutive shoulder arthroplasty patients; 36 patients received LB and a "bridge" of 30 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine, and 47 patients received an IINB. Postoperative visual analog scale pain levels, opiate consumption measured with oral morphine equivalents, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complications were recorded. Continuous variables were compared using an analysis of variance with significance set at P < .05.

RESULTS

Visual analog scale pain scores were statistically higher in the LB cohort immediately postoperatively in the postanesthesia care unit (7.25 vs. 1.91; P = .000) as well as for the remainder of postoperative day 0 (4.99 vs. 3.20; P = .005) but not for the remainder of admission. Opiate consumption was significantly higher among the LB cohort in the postanesthesia care unit (31.79 vs. 7.47; P = .000), on postoperative day 0 (32.64 vs. 15.04; P = .000), and for the total hospital admission (189.50 vs. 91.70, P = .000). Complication numbers and length of stay were not statistically different.

CONCLUSION

Use of an IINB provides superior pain management in the immediate postoperative setting as demonstrated by decreased narcotic medication consumption and lower subjective pain scores.

Phrenic Nerve Palsy and Regional Anesthesia for Shoulder Surgery

Regional anesthesia has an established role in providing perioperative analgesia for shoulder surgery. However, phrenic nerve palsy is a significant complication that potentially limits the use of regional anesthesia, particularly in high-risk patients. The authors describe the anatomical, physiologic, and clinical principles relevant to phrenic nerve palsy in this context. They also present a comprehensive review of the strategies for reducing phrenic nerve palsy and its clinical impact while ensuring adequate analgesia for shoulder surgery. The most important of these include limiting local anesthetic dose and injection volume and performing the injection further away from the C5–C6 nerve roots. Targeting peripheral nerves supplying the shoulder, such as the suprascapular and axillary nerves, may be an effective alternative to brachial plexus blockade in selected patients. The optimal regional anesthetic approach in shoulder surgery should be tailored to individual patients based on comorbidities, type of surgery, and the principles described in this article.

Randomized Controlled Trial of Interscalene Block Compared with Injectable Liposomal Bupivacaine in Shoulder Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Shortcomings of interscalene brachial plexus blockade include technical failure and rebound pain. Bupivacaine liposome injectable suspension, a sustained release preparation, is used for surgical-site administration. The purpose of this study was to evaluate these 2 postoperative pain management strategies in patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty.

METHODS

In a non-blinded, randomized controlled trial of participants undergoing primary shoulder arthroplasty, patients were randomized to interscalene brachial plexus blockade or intraoperative soft-tissue infiltration of bupivacaine liposome injectable suspension. The primary outcome variable was morphine equivalent units consumed over the first 24 hours postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included morphine equivalent units consumed intraoperatively and a visual analog scale (VAS) for pain at 0, 8, 16, and 24 hours.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight patients were randomized to interscalene brachial plexus blockade treatment (the blockade group) and 78 patients were randomized to bupivacaine liposome injectable suspension treatment (the suspension group). The mean total postoperative narcotic consumption (and standard deviation) over 24 hours after the surgical procedure was 14.8 ± 11.3 morphine equivalent units in the blockade group compared with 14.4 ± 16.8 morphine equivalent units in the suspension group (p = 0.849). Intraoperative narcotics were significantly lower (p < 0.001) in the blockade group (8.9 ± 4.1 morphine equivalent units) compared with the suspension group (16.2 ± 7.0 morphine equivalent units). The mean VAS pain score was significantly lower in the blockade group than in the suspension group at 0 hours postoperatively (0.8 ± 2.2 compared with 3.3 ± 2.7 points; p < 0.001) and at 8 hours postoperatively (1.4 ± 2.4 compared with 3.2 ± 2.2 points; p < 0.001), but it was not significantly different at 16 hours postoperatively (4.3 ± 2.8 compared with 3.8 ± 2.4 points; p = 0.348). The VAS pain scores were significantly higher (p = 0.021) in the blockade group (4.9 ± 2.7 points) compared with the suspension group (3.9 ± 2.3 points) at 24 hours postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients treated with bupivacaine liposome injectable suspension required an equivalent amount of postoperative narcotics and greater intraoperative narcotics compared with patients treated with interscalene brachial plexus blockade. Although interscalene brachial plexus blockade provided improved pain scores for the first 8 hours after the surgical procedure, pain scores were worse at 24 hours. The optimal postoperative pain regimen for shoulder arthroplasty and the cost-effectiveness of analgesic techniques require further investigation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.