Effects of topical corticosteroids on the sciatic nerve: an experimental study to adduce the safety in treating carpal tunnel syndrome

Comparative Efficacy of 5% Dextrose and Corticosteroid Injections in Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to assess the effectiveness of 5% dextrose (D5W) in comparison to corticosteroids for treating carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS).

DATA SOURCES

A comprehensive systematic search was conducted across MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials on November 13, 2023. These were supplemented by manual searches using Google Scholar.

STUDY SELECTION

Two independent authors reviewed the literature, resolving any discrepancies through detailed discussions and consultation with a third author.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data on primary outcomes (pain assessment) and secondary outcomes (symptom severity and functional status using the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire, electrophysiologic measures, cross-sectional area, and adverse effects) were extracted independently by the 2 authors (M.W. and H.H.).

DATA SYNTHESIS

The analysis included 4 randomized controlled trials and 1 quasi-experimental study, encompassing a total of 212 patients (220 hands) with mild to moderate CTS.

RESULTS

Within 3 months, the D5W injections showed a statistically significant improvement in functional status compared to the corticosteroids with a standard mean difference of -0.34 (95% CI, -0.62 to -0.05). D5W was associated with fewer adverse incidents than corticosteroids (risk ratio, 0.13; 95% CI: 0.03-0.51). No difference was observed between the 2 treatments in other areas.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with mild to moderate CTS, D5W injections were more effective than corticosteroid injections in improving functional status and demonstrated fewer adverse effects. D5W injections also paralleled corticosteroids in pain reduction, symptom severity, electrodiagnostic measures, and cross-sectional area of nerve, recommending D5W as a preferred treatment for mild to moderate CTS.

Current Insights into Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: Clinical Strategies for Prevention and Treatment

BACKGROUND

Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is a condition that is caused by medial nerve compression, resulting in symptoms such as numbness, tightness, or weakness in the hand.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to find out the genetic modulation, mechanism, available treatment, and recommendation for carpal tunnel syndrome at its specific stage.

METHODS

Almost 200 papers were searched for this review article, and 145 articles were selected. The literature was collected from different sources like Google scholar, PubMed, a directory of open-access journals, and science.gov by using keywords, such as treatment, risk factors, recommendation, and clinical features of carpal tunnel syndrome.

RESULTS

The most efficient non-surgical treatment is methylprednisolone acetate, which reduces inflammation by acting on the glucocorticoid receptor in conjunction with immunofilling. It has also been used successfully as a second-line drug for the treatment of patients with mild or moderate conditions in order to provide relief. New non-pharmacological options include laser therapy in acupuncture, transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation (TENS), and sham therapy. Modern treatments like TENS, laser therapy, splints, and injections of methylprednisolone acetate have been demonstrated to be helpful in sporadic situations. For patients with mild and moderate problems, more research should be conducted that includes the combination of these surgical and non-surgical treatments.

CONCLUSION

We propose a multifunctional panel construct and define standard data items for future research into carpal tunnel syndrome. A discussion on idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome, risk factors, combination of therapies, using guidelines-based recommendations and treatment should be initiated.

Ultrasound-Guided Interventions for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses

Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is the most common peripheral entrapment, and recently, ultrasound-guided perineural injection (UPIT) and percutaneous flexor retinaculum release (UPCTR) have been utilized to treat CTS. However, no systematic review or meta-analysis has included both intervention types of ultrasound-guided interventions for CTS. Therefore, we performed this review using four databases (i.e., PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane) to evaluate the quality of evidence, effectiveness, and safety of the published studies on ultrasound-guided interventions in CTS. Among sixty studies selected for systemic review, 20 randomized treatment comparison or controlled studies were included in six meta-analyses. Steroid UPIT with ultrasound guidance outperformed that with landmark guidance. UPIT with higher-dose steroids outperformed that with lower-dose steroids. UPIT with 5% dextrose in water (D5W) outperformed control injection and hydrodissection with high-volume D5W was superior to that with low-volume D5W. UPIT with platelet-rich plasma outperformed various control treatments. UPCTR outperformed open surgery in terms of symptom improvement but not functional improvement. No serious adverse events were reported in the studies reviewed. The findings suggest that both UPIT and UPCTR may provide clinically important benefits and appear safe. Further treatment comparison studies are required to determine comparative therapeutic efficacy.

The combined treatment of entrapped Infrapatellar Branch of the Saphenous Nerve after ACL reconstruction: Ultrasound-guided perineural injection and acupotomy

BACKGROUND

The anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) under the arthroscopy is a widespread procedure for ACL rupture, which could stabilize knee and promote recovery. However, one of its complications is the injury of infrapatellar branch of saphenous nerve (IBSN). In traditional Chinese medicine, acupotomy functions via releasing and stripping adhesion tissues. Accordingly, acupotomy is suitable for the treatment of entrapped nerve injury and tissues adhesion.

CASE DESCRIPTION

A 14-year-old man, who had ACLR before and returned to normal activity, presented with severe pain after a mild strain two weeks ago. The physical and imaging examinations revealed the compression injury of IBSN.

METHODS

We provided the ultrasound-guided perineural injection of 0.4% lidocaine, while it only alleviates the symptoms temporally and partially. Acupotomy using a small needle knife (0.4*40 mm) was performed.

RESULTS

The severe pain was immediately resolved. The visual analog pain scale (VAS) decreased from 10 to 1 and return to normal walking. The diameter of IBSN became smaller and the signal of peripheral soft tissue became hypoechoic in ultrasound.

CONCLUSION

In this case, the combined treatments of ultrasound-guided perineural injection and acupotomy are thought to be innovative procedures for IBSN entrapment with relative long-lasting therapeutic effects.

Comparison of the effects of perineural or intravenous dexamethasone on thoracic paravertebral block in Ivor‐Lewis esophagectomy: A double‐blind randomized trial

Efforts to prolong thoracic paravertebral block (TPVB) analgesia include local anesthetic adjuvants, such as dexamethasone (Dex). Previous studies showed that both perineural (PN) and intravenous (i.v.) routes could prolong analgesia. As PN Dex is an off‐label use, anesthesiologists should be fully informed of the clinical differences, if any, on block duration. This study was designed to evaluate the two administration routes of Dex for duration of analgesia in TPVB. Ninety‐five patients scheduled for Ivor‐Lewis esophagectomy were randomized to receive TPVB (0.5% ropivacaine 15 ml), PN or i.v. Dex 8 mg. The primary end point was the duration of analgesia. The secondary end points included pain scores, analgesic consumption, adverse effects rate, and incidence of chronic pain at 3 months postoperatively. The PN‐Dex group showed better analgesic effects than the i.v.‐Dex group (p < 0.05). Similarly, the visual analogue scale scores in patients at 2, 4, 8, and 12 h postoperatively were lower in the PN‐Dex group than the i.v.‐Dex group (p < 0.05). The analgesic consumption in both the PN‐Dex and i.v.‐Dex groups was significantly lower than that in the control group (p < 0.05). Regarding the incidence of chronic pain, regardless of route, Dex decreased the incidence of chronic postsurgical pain and neuropathic pain at 3 months after surgery (p < 0.05), but there were no clinical differences between the i.v.‐Dex and PN‐Dex groups. Perineural dexamethasone improved the magnitude and duration of analgesia compared to that of the i.v.‐Dex group in TPVB in Ivor‐Lewis esophagectomy. However, there were no clinically significant differences between the two groups in the incidence of chronic pain.

Ultrasound-Guided Nerve Hydrodissection With 5% Dextrose 4 Weeks After Steroid Injection in Treatment of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Retrospective Study

Objective

To investigate the efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided nerve hydrodissection (HD) with 5% dextrose (D5W) as add-on therapy after corticosteroid injection in carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS), and provide a novel strategy.

Methods

In this retrospective study, patients with CTS who received ultrasound-guided nerve HD with D5W as add-on therapy after corticosteroid injection (combination group) were enrolled. Patients who received corticosteroid injection without add-on therapy (steroid group) were recruited as the control group. Ultrasound-guided nerve HD with D5W was performed 4 weeks after corticosteroid injection. Treatment effectiveness were assessed by visual analog scale (VAS) and Boston Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Questionnaire (BCTQ). The assessment was performed at baseline and 4, 8, and 12 weeks after corticosteroid injection. In addition, adverse events were recorded in this study.

Results

A total of 49 patients and 62 wrists meeting the criteria were included, with 24 patients and 31 wrists in the steroid group and 25 patients and 31 wrists in the combination group. Compared with baseline data, both groups showed greater improvement in VAS, BCTQs (BCTQ severity), and BCTQf (BCTQ function) at 4, 8, and 12 weeks follow-up. VAS, BCTQs, and BCTQf scores at baseline and week 4 were comparable between steroid group and combination group. Compared with steroid group, combination group exhibited a significant reduction in VAS, BCTQs, and BCTQf at 8- and 12-week follow-up (P ≤ 0.01). No adverse event occurred in any group.

Conclusions

Our results showed that ultrasound-guided nerve HD with D5W as add-on therapy after corticosteroid injection was efficacious and safe in CTS, and combination therapy is more beneficial than corticosteroid monotherapy in the improvement of symptoms and function at 8- and 12-week follow-up.

Dexamethasone added to local anesthetics in ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plain (TAP) block for analgesia after abdominal surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the analgesic efficacy of dexamethasone added to local anesthetics in ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block for the patients after abdominal surgery.

METHODS

PubMed, CENTRAL, EMBASE, Web of science were searched to identify eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared dexamethasone added to local anesthetics in ultrasound-guided TAP block with control for postoperative analgesia in adult patients undergoing abdominal surgery. Primary outcomes included postoperative pain intensity, the time to the first request for additional analgesics, and opioid consumption over 24 h after surgery. Secondary outcome was the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Analysis was performed by RevMan 5.3 software and the quality of evidence was rated using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach.

RESULTS

Nine RCTs involving 575 patients were included. Compared to the control, dexamethasone added to local anesthetics in ultrasound-guided TAP block significantly decreased visual analogue scale (VAS) scores at rest at 4h (mean difference [MD] = -1.01; 95% confidence intervals [CI], -1.29 to -0.73; P<0.00001; moderate quality of evidence), 6h (MD = -1.21; 95% CI, -1.74 to -0.69; P<0.00001; low quality of evidence), and 12h after surgery (MD = -0.79; 95% CI, -0.97 to -0.60; P<0.00001; moderate quality of evidence). No difference was found at 2h (MD = -0.64; 95% CI, -1.35 to 0.08; P = 0.08; low quality of evidence) and 24 h (MD = -0.41; 95% CI, -0.91 to 0.09; P = 0.11; moderate quality of evidence) in VAS scores. The time to the first request for additional analgesics was prolonged in the dexamethasone group (MD = 3.08; 95% CI, 2.37 to 3.78; P<0.00001; moderate quality of evidence). Opioid consumption over 24 h after surgery was also reduced (MD = -5.42; 95% CI, -8.20 to -2.63; P = 0.0001; low quality of evidence). Meanwhile, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting was significantly decreased in the dexamethasone group (risk ratios [RR] = 0.40; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.58; P<0.00001; high quality of evidence). No complications were reported in all the included studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Dexamethasone added to local anesthetics in ultrasound-guided TAP block was a safe and effective strategy for postoperative analgesia in adult patients undergoing abdominal surgery.

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.

The Effect of Perineural Administration of Dexmedetomidine on Narcotic Consumption and Pain Intensity in Patients Undergoing Femoral Shaft Fracture Surgery; A Randomized Single-Blind Clinical Trial

Dexmedetomidine is a selective α-2 adrenoceptor agonist with anxiolytic, sedative, and analgesic properties that prolongs analgesia and decreases opioid-related side effects when used in neuraxial and perineural areas as a local anesthetics adjuvant. The current study was designed to evaluate the effects of a single perineural administration of dexmedetomidine without local anesthetics on narcotic consumption and pain intensity in patients with femoral shaft fractures undergoing surgery. This prospective randomized single-blind clinical trial was conducted in patients undergoing femoral fracture shaft surgery. Based on block permuted randomization, the patients were randomly divided into intervention and control groups. The intervention group received 100µg dexmedetomidine, for a femoral nerve block without any local anesthetics. Total intraoperative opioid consumption, postoperative opioid consumption, visual analogue score (VAS) for pain, and hemodynamic parameters were recorded and compared. Finally the data from 60 patients with a mean age of 30.4±12.3 were analyzed (90% male). There were no significant differences between the baseline characteristics of the two groups (p>0.05). The mean total consumption of narcotics was reduced during induction and maintenance of anesthesia in the intervention group (p<0.05). The amount of postoperative narcotics required showed a significant difference in the intervention group compared with the control group (p<0.05). It is likely that perineural administration of dexmedetomidine significantly not only reduced intra and postoperative narcotic requirement but also decreased postoperative pain intensity in patients undergoing femoral shaft surgery. Femoral blockade by dexmedetomidine can provide excellent analgesia while minimizing the side-effects of opioids.

Effects of decompression on behavioral, electrophysiologic, and histomorphologic recovery in a chronic sciatic nerve compression model of streptozotocin-induced diabetic rats

Purpose

To determine susceptibility to decompression surgery in diabetic and nondiabetic peripheral neuropathy using a chronic compression neuropathy model.

Materials and methods

Twenty-four streptozotocin-induced diabetic rats were randomly divided into three groups: group I, chronic compression of the left sciatic nerve for 4 weeks with decompression; group II, similar without decompression; and group III, sham exposing the sciatic nerve only. The other 24 nondiabetic rats were assigned to groups IV–VI, which received compression–decompression, compression, and the sham operation, respectively. Mixed-nerve-elicited somatosensory evoked potentials (M-SSEPs) and compound muscle action potentials (CMAPs) were measured to verify the compression neuropathy in the posttreatment follow-up. Behavioral observations in thermal hyperalgesia tests were quantified before electrophysiologic examinations. Treated and contralateral nerves were harvested for histomorphologic analysis.

Results

Chronic compression of sciatic nerve induced significant reduction of amplitude and increment of latency of M-SSEP and CMAP in both diabetic and nondiabetic rats. Diabetic group changes were more susceptible. Decompression surgery significantly improved both sensory and motor conduction, thermal hyperalgesia, and the mean myelin diameter of the rat sciatic nerve in both diabetic and nondiabetic groups. Near full recovery of motor and sensory function occurred in the nondiabetic rats, but not in the diabetic rats 8 weeks postdecompression.

Conclusion

Behavioral, electrophysiologic, and histomorphologic findings indicate that decompression surgery is effective in both diabetic and nondiabetic peripheral neuropathy.

Which is your choice for prolonging the analgesic duration of single-shot interscalene brachial blocks for arthroscopic shoulder surgery? intravenous dexamethasone 5 mg vs. perineural dexamethasone 5 mg randomized, controlled, clinical trial

The aim of this study was to compare the effect of intravenous (I.V.) dexamethasone with that of perineural dexamethasone on the prolongation of analgesic duration of single-shot interscalene brachial plexus blocks (SISB) in patients undergoing arthroscopic shoulder surgery. We performed a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients undergoing elective arthroscopic shoulder surgery with ultrasound-guided SISB were enrolled and randomized into 2 groups. A total volume of 12 mL of the study drug was prepared with a final concentration of 0.5% ropivacaine. In the I.V. group, patients received SISB using ropivacaine 5 mg mL with normal saline (control) with dexamethasone 5 mg I.V. injection. In the perineural group, patients received SISB using ropivacaine 5 mg mL with dexamethasone 5 mg, with normal saline 1 mL I.V. injection. The primary outcome was the time to the first analgesic request, defined as the time between the end of the operation and the first request of analgesics by the patient. The secondary outcomes included patient satisfaction scores, side effects, and neurological symptoms. Patients were randomly assigned to 1 of the 2 groups using a computer-generated randomization table. An anesthesiologist blinded to the group assignments prepared the solutions for injection. The patients and the investigator participating in the study were also blinded to the group assignments. One hundred patients were randomized. Data were analyzed for 99 patients. One case in the I.V. group was converted to open surgery and was therefore not included in the study. Perineural dexamethasone significantly prolonged analgesic duration (median, standard error: 1080 minutes, 117.5 minutes) compared with I.V. dexamethasone (810 minutes, 48.1 minutes) (P = 0.02). There were no significant differences in side effects, neurological symptoms, or changes in blood glucose values between the 2 groups. Our results show that perineural dexamethasone 5 mg is more effective than I.V. dexamethasone 5 mg with regard to analgesic duration of SISB for arthroscopic shoulder surgery.

A double-blind randomized controlled trial comparing dexamethasone and clonidine as adjuvants to a ropivacaine sciatic popliteal block for foot surgery

Background and aims

A popliteal block is effective in managing postoperative pain for foot surgery, but since the duration of analgesia is limited following a single-shot popliteal fossa block technique, methods to prolong effective postoperative analgesia are mandatory. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of adjuvants to ropivacaine on the duration of sensory and motor block.

Methods

In this double-blind randomized placebo-controlled study, we evaluated the analgesic effect of clonidine or dexamethasone (DXM) when added to ropivacaine for hallux valgus surgery. After obtaining institutional ethics research board approval and written informed consent, a total of 72 patients were randomly allocated. Fifty-seven of these patients were statistically analyzed. All patients received an ultrasound-guided single-shot popliteal fossa block with 30 mL of ropivacaine 0.75%, supplemented with saline, clonidine 100 µg, or DXM 5 mg. The primary end point was time to first pain sensation. Secondary end points were time to complete sensory and motor block regression.

Results

Compared to saline, duration to first pain sensation was prolonged by 9 hours (mean ± standard deviation: 31±9 hours) (42%) in the DXM group (P=0.024) and by 6 hours (28±10 hours) (27%) in the clonidine group (P=0.024). Compared to saline, DXM prolonged both complete sensory and motor blockade by 12 hours (25±7 hours) (46%) and 13 hours (36±6 hours) (55%), respectively, while clonidine prolonged complete sensory and motor blockade by 7 hours (30±7 hours) (27%) and 2 hours (22±5 hours) (10%), respectively. DXM prolonged sensory block regression time by 6 hours (21±7 hours) (41%) and clonidine by 2 hours (17±6 hours) (13%) compared to the control group (P=0.006). Similarly, DXM prolonged motor block regression by 7 hours (25±7 hours) (46%) and clonidine by 4 hours (21±4 hours) (19%) (P<0.0001).

Conclusion

Addition of DXM and clonidine to ropivacaine significantly prolonged the duration of postoperative sensory and motor block.

The effects of locally injected triamcinolone on entrapment neuropathy in a rat chronic constriction injury model

PURPOSE

Patients with idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome are commonly treated by steroid injections into the carpal tunnel. We administered triamcinolone (Tr) to chronic constriction injury model rats. We hypothesized that Tr administration would have both favorable behavioral effects and quantifiable immunohistological effects on compressed nerves.

METHODS

Thirty-six male Wister rats were used. For rats to be treated with Tr, we loosely ligated their right sciatic nerves at 4 sites. Sham rats had their nerves exposed without ligation. On postoperative day 7, we reexposed their ligated nerves, after which we delivered either 0.1 mg of Tr (0.1-mg group), 0.5 mg of Tr (0.5-mg group), or normal saline (saline group) around the nerve fibers at the injured sites. Gait was analyzed, and allodynia was assessed with von Frey hairs, before surgery and on postoperative days 3, 7, 10, 14, and 21. The right sciatic nerve was resected and stained using hematoxylin-eosin, and the fourth and fifth lumbar dorsal root ganglia (DRG) were removed and assessed by immunohistochemistry for calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) and activating transcription factor 3 (ATF3) on postoperative day 21. In addition, interleukin-1β (IL-1β) in sciatic nerve was quantified using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays.

RESULTS

Mechanical allodynia was significantly decreased in the 0.5-mg group compared with the saline group. In hematoxylin-eosin sections, the extent of inflammation-induced edema between the nerve fibers and infiltration of inflammatory cells was significantly reduced in the 0.5-mg group compared with the saline group. IL-1β levels at the sciatic nerve in the 0.5-mg group were significantly lower than those in the saline group.

CONCLUSIONS

Tr-treated chronic constriction injury rats exhibited significant alleviation of sensory disturbance, edema, inflammation, and pain-related peptide upregulation. These phenomena suggest the validity of Tr administration as a treatment affecting the nerve itself.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic I.

Perineural but not systemic low-dose dexamethasone prolongs the duration of interscalene block with ropivacaine: a prospective randomized trial

Purpose

To determine the effects of intravenous and perineural dexamethasone on the duration of interscalene brachial plexus block (ISB) with ropivacaine in patients undergoing arthroscopic shoulder surgery.

Patients and methods

In this prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, patients presenting for arthroscopic shoulder surgery with an ISB were randomized to receive ropivacaine 0.75% (group C), ropivacaine 0.75% plus perineural dexamethasone 4 mg (group Dperi), or ropivacaine 0.75% plus intravenous dexamethasone 4 mg (group Div). The primary outcome was the duration of analgesia, defined as the time between performance of the block and the first request for analgesic.

Results

Thirty-nine patients were randomized. The median times of sensory block in groups C, Dperi, and Div were 11.2 hours (interquartile range [IQR] 8.0–15.0 hours), 18.0 hours (IQR 14.5–19.0 hours), and 14.0 hours (IQR 12.7–15.1 hours), respectively. Significant differences were observed between groups Dperi and C (P=0.001). Kaplan–Meier analysis for the first analgesic request showed significant differences between groups Dperi and C (P=0.005) and between groups Dperi and Div (P=0.008), but not between groups C and Div.

Conclusion

Perineural but not intravenous administration of 4 mg of dexamethasone significantly prolongs the duration of effective postoperative analgesia resulting from a single-shot ISB with ropivacaine 0.75%.

I.V. and perineural dexamethasone are equivalent in increasing the analgesic duration of a single-shot interscalene block with ropivacaine for shoulder surgery: a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND

Interscalene brachial plexus block (ISB) provides excellent, but time-limited analgesia. Dexamethasone added to local anaesthetics prolongs the duration of a single-shot ISB. However, systemic glucocorticoids also improve postoperative analgesia. The hypothesis was tested that perineural and i.v. dexamethasone would have an equivalent effect on prolonging analgesic duration of an ISB.

METHODS

We performed a prospective, double blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study. Patients presenting for arthroscopic shoulder surgery with an ISB were randomized into three groups: ropivacaine 0.5% (R); ropivacaine 0.5% and dexamethasone 10 mg (RD); and ropivacaine 0.5% with i.v. dexamethasone 10 mg (RDiv). The primary outcome was the duration of analgesia, defined as the time between performance of the block and the first analgesic request. Standard hypothesis tests (t-test, Mann-Whitney U-test) were used to compare treatment groups. The primary outcome was analysed by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis with a log-rank test and Cox's proportional hazards regression.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty patients were included after obtaining ethical committee approval and patient informed consent. The median time of a sensory block was equivalent for perineural and i.v. dexamethasone: 1405 min (IQR 1015-1710) and 1275 min (IQR 1095-2035) for RD and RDiv, respectively. There was a significant difference between the ropivacaine group: 757 min (IQR 635-910) and the dexamethasone groups (P<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

I.V. dexamethasone is equivalent to perineural dexamethasone in prolonging the analgesic duration of a single-shot ISB with ropivacaine. As dexamethasone is not licensed for perineural use, clinicians should consider i.v. administration of dexamethasone to achieve an increased duration of ISB.

Epidural steroid injections are associated with less improvement in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a subgroup analysis of the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial

STUDY DESIGN

Subgroup analysis of prospective, randomized database from the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT).

OBJECTIVE

The hypothesis of this study was that patients who received ESI during initial treatment as part of SPORT (The Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial) would have improved clinical outcome and a lower rate of crossover to surgery than patients who did not receive ESI.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The use of epidural steroid injection (ESI) in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis is common, although there is little evidence in the literature to demonstrate its long-term benefit in the treatment of lumbar stenosis.

METHODS

Patients with lumbar spinal stenosis who received ESI within the first 3 months of enrollment in SPORT (ESI) were compared with patients who did not receive epidural injections during the first 3 months of the study (no-ESI).

RESULTS

There were 69 ESI patients and 207 no-ESI patients. There were no significant differences in demographic factors, baseline clinical outcome scores, or operative details between the groups, although there was a significant increase in baseline preference for nonsurgical treatment among ESI patients (ESI 62% vs. no-ESI 33%, P < 0.001). There was an average 26-minute increase in operative time and an increased length of stay by 0.9 days among the ESI patients who ultimately underwent surgical treatment. Averaged over 4 years, there was significantly less improvement in 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) Physical Function among surgically treated ESI patients (ESI 14.8 vs. no-ESI 22.5, P = 0.025). In addition, there was significantly less improvement among the nonsurgically treated patients in SF-36 Body Pain (ESI 7.3 vs. no-ESI 16.7, P = 0.007) and SF-36 Physical Function (ESI 5.5 vs. no-ESI 15.2, P = 0.009). Of the patients assigned to the surgical treatment group, there was a significantly increased crossover to nonsurgical treatment among patients who received an ESI (ESI 33% vs. no-ESI 11%, P = 0.012). Of the patients assigned to the nonoperative treatment group, there was a significantly increased crossover to surgical treatment in the ESI patients (ESI 58% vs. no-ESI 32%, P = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

Despite equivalent baseline status, ESIs were associated with significantly less improvement at 4 years among all patients with spinal stenosis in SPORT. Furthermore, ESIs were associated with longer duration of surgery and longer hospital stay. There was no improvement in outcome with ESI whether patients were treated surgically or nonsurgically.