1
|
Pfeiler PP, Rieder P, Kimelman M, Moog P, Dornseifer U. Limitations of Patient-Controlled Epidural Analgesia Following Abdominoplasty. Ann Plast Surg 2024:00000637-990000000-00498. [PMID: 38984655 DOI: 10.1097/sap.0000000000004020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/11/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Effective postoperative pain management is essential for patient satisfaction and an uneventful postoperative course, particularly in body contouring procedures. Systemic analgesic regimens can be supported by regional procedures, such as the transverse abdominis plane (TAP) block, but these have a limited duration of action. In contrast, thoracic epidural analgesia offers the possibility of a longer-lasting, individualized regional anesthesia administered by a patient-controlled analgesia pump. OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of a patient-controlled epidural analgesia to better classify the clinical value of this procedure in abdominoplasties. MATERIALS AND METHODS This work reviewed the digital medical charts of patients who underwent selective abdominoplasty without combined surgical procedures between September 2018 and August 2022. Evaluated data comprise the postoperative analgesia regimen, including on-demand medication, mobilization time, inpatient length of stay, and clinical outcome. The patients were grouped by the presence of a thoracic epidural catheter. This catheter was placed before anesthetic induction and a saturation dose was preoperatively applied. Postoperative PCEA patients received a basal rate and could independently administer boluses. Basal rate was individually adjusted during daily additional pain visits. RESULTS The study cohort included 112 patients. Significant differences in the demand for supportive nonepidural opiate medication were shown between the patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) group (n = 57) and the non-PCEA group (n = 55), depending on the time after surgery. PCEA patients demanded less medication during the early postoperative days (POD 0: PCEA 0.13 (±0.99) mg vs non-PCEA 2.59 (±4.55) mg, P = 0.001; POD 1: PCEA 0.79 mg (±3.06) vs non-PCEA 2.73 (±3.98) mg, P = 0.005), but they required more during the later postoperative phase (POD 3: PCEA 2.76 (±5.60) mg vs non-PCEA 0.61 (±2.01) mg, P = 0.008; POD 4: PCEA 1.64 (±3.82) mg vs non-PCEA 0.07 (±2.01) mg, P = 0.003). In addition, PCEA patients achieved full mobilization later (PCEA 2.67 (±0.82) days vs non-PCEA 1.78 (±1.09) days, P = 0.001) and were discharged later (PCEA 4.84 (±1.23) days vs non-PCEA 4.31 (±1.37) days, P = 0.005). CONCLUSION Because the postoperative benefits of PCEA are limited to potent analgesia immediately after abdominoplasty, less cumbersome, time-limited regional anesthesia procedures (such as TAP block) appear not only adequate but also more effective.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Peter Paul Pfeiler
- From the Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, ISAR Klinikum
| | - Paulina Rieder
- From the Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, ISAR Klinikum
| | - Michael Kimelman
- From the Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, ISAR Klinikum
| | - Philipp Moog
- Clinic for Plastic, Reconstructive and Hand Surgery, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany
| | - Ulf Dornseifer
- From the Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, ISAR Klinikum
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Wang F, Lü Q, Wang M, Xu H, Xie D, Yang Z, Ye Q. Ultrasound-guided caudal anaesthesia combined with epidural anaesthesia for caesarean section: a randomized controlled clinical trial. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2024; 24:105. [PMID: 38308257 PMCID: PMC10835986 DOI: 10.1186/s12884-024-06298-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/05/2023] [Accepted: 01/28/2024] [Indexed: 02/04/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although epidural anaesthesia and spinal anaesthesia are currently the general choices for patients undergoing caesarean section, these two neuraxial anaesthesia methods still have drawbacks. Caudal anaesthesia has been considered to be more appropriate for gynaecological surgery. The purpose of this study was to compare epidural anaesthesia combined with caudal anaesthesia, spinal anaesthesia and single-space epidural anaesthesia for caesarean section with respect to postoperative comfort and intraoperative anaesthesia quality. METHODS In this clinical trial, 150 patients undergoing elective caesarean section were recruited and randomized into three groups according to a ratio of 1:1:1to receive epidural anaesthesia only, spinal anaesthesia only or epidural anaesthesia combined with caudal anaesthesia. The primary outcome was postoperative comfort in the three groups. Secondary outcomes included intraoperative anaesthesia quality and the incidences of nausea, vomiting, postdural puncture headache, maternal bradycardia, or hypotension. RESULTS More patients were satisfied with the intraoperative anaesthesia quality in the EAC group than in the EA group (P = 0.001). The obstetrician was more significantly satisfied with the intraoperative anaesthesia quality in the SA and EAC groups than in the EA group (P = 0.004 and 0.020, respectively). The parturients felt more comfortable after surgery in the EA and EAC groups (P = 0.007). The incidence of maternal hypotension during caesarean section was higher in the SA group than in the EA and EAC groups (P = 0.001 and 0.019, respectively). CONCLUSIONS Epidural anaesthesia combined with caudal anaesthesia may be a better choice for elective caesarean section. Compared with epidural anaesthesia and spinal anaesthesia, it has a higher quality of postoperative comfort and intraoperative anaesthesia.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fangjun Wang
- Department of Anesthesiology, Affiliated Hospital, North Sichuan Medical College, No. 63, Cultural Road, Shunqing District, NanchongCity, Sichuan Province, China.
| | - Qi Lü
- Department of Operation Center, Affiliated Hospital, North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, 637000, China
| | - Min Wang
- North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, 637000, China
| | - Hongchun Xu
- Department of Anesthesiology, Affiliated Hospital, North Sichuan Medical College, No. 63, Cultural Road, Shunqing District, NanchongCity, Sichuan Province, China
| | - Dan Xie
- Department of Anesthesiology, Affiliated Hospital, North Sichuan Medical College, No. 63, Cultural Road, Shunqing District, NanchongCity, Sichuan Province, China
| | - Zheng Yang
- North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, 637000, China
| | - Qin Ye
- North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, 637000, China
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Chen J, Li T, Pan Z, Ke Y, Ding J. The impact of sufentanil versus remifentanil on surgical site wound healing in caesarean section primiparas undergoing epidural anaesthesia: A systematic meta-analysis. Int Wound J 2024; 21:e14377. [PMID: 37697689 PMCID: PMC10784625 DOI: 10.1111/iwj.14377] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/15/2023] [Accepted: 08/23/2023] [Indexed: 09/13/2023] Open
Abstract
Caesarean section (C-section) is a prevalent obstetric surgical procedure, with the choice of analgesic agents playing a pivotal role in postoperative recovery. This systematic meta-analysis aimed to compare the effects of sufentanil (ST) and remifentanil (RT) on postoperative wound healing in caesarean section primiparas undergoing epidural anaesthesia. A comprehensive search was conducted across multiple databases, adhering to PRISMA guidelines, yielding eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for inclusion. The primary outcome was wound healing assessment using the REEDA (redness, edema, ecchymosis, discharge, approximation) scale on the third, fifth and tenth postoperative days. The meta-analysis encompassed 691 primiparas. A significant difference in wound healing was observed between ST and RT on the third (I2 = 99%; Random: SMD: 6.75, 95% CIs: 3.11-10.39, p < 0.01) and fifth days (I2 = 99%; Random: SMD: 3.63, 95% CIs: 1.56-5.70, p < 0.01) postcaesarean section. However, no significant difference was noted on the tenth day (I2 = 5%; Random: SMD: 0.00, 95% CIs: -0.45-0.45, p = 0.35). Sufentanil and remifentanil exhibit differential effects on early postoperative wound healing in caesarean section primiparas undergoing epidural anaesthesia. While both opioids are effective analgesics, sufentanil demonstrates a more pronounced impact on wound healing during the immediate postoperative days. Clinicians should consider these findings when selecting an opioid for pain management in this patient population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jiefeng Chen
- Department of AnesthesiaShaoxing Maternity and Child Health Care HospitalShaoxingZhejiangChina
| | - Ting Li
- Department of AnesthesiaShaoxing Maternity and Child Health Care HospitalShaoxingZhejiangChina
| | - Zhengbin Pan
- Department of AnesthesiaShaoxing Maternity and Child Health Care HospitalShaoxingZhejiangChina
| | - Yanjun Ke
- Department of AnesthesiaShaoxing Maternity and Child Health Care HospitalShaoxingZhejiangChina
| | - Jielan Ding
- Department of AnesthesiaShaoxing Maternity and Child Health Care HospitalShaoxingZhejiangChina
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Lewald H, Girard T. Analgesia after cesarean section - what is new? Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 2023; 36:288-292. [PMID: 36994740 PMCID: PMC10609703 DOI: 10.1097/aco.0000000000001259] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/31/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW Cesarean section is the most frequent surgical intervention, and pain following cesarean delivery unfortunately remains a common issue. The purpose of this article is to highlight the most effective and efficient options for postcesarean analgesia and to summarize current guidelines. RECENT FINDINGS The most effective form of postoperative analgesia is through neuraxial morphine. With adequate dosing, clinically relevant respiratory depression is extremely rare. It is important to identify women with increased risk of respiratory depression, as they might require more intensive postoperative monitoring. If neuraxial morphine cannot be used, abdominal wall block or surgical wound infiltration are very valuable alternatives. A multimodal regimen with intraoperative intravenous dexamethasone, fixed doses of paracetamol/acetaminophen, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs reduce postcesarean opioid use. As the use of postoperative lumbar epidural analgesia impairs mobilization, double epidural catheters with lower thoracic epidural analgesia are a possible alternative. SUMMARY Adequate analgesia following cesarean delivery is still underused. Simple measures, such as multimodal analgesia regimens should be standardized according to institutional circumstances and defined as part of a treatment plan. Neuraxial morphine should be used whenever possible. If it cannot be used, abdominal wall blocks or surgical wound infiltration are good alternatives.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Heidrun Lewald
- Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich
- MVZ Perioperative Medicine Munich
- Frauenklinik Dr. Geisenhofer, Munich, Germany
| | - Thierry Girard
- Clinic for Anaesthesia, Intermediate Care, Prehospital Emergency Medicine and Pain Therapy, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Analgesia Effect of Ultrasound-Guided Transversus Abdominis Plane Block Combined with Intravenous Analgesia After Cesarean Section: A Double-Blind Controlled Trial. Pain Ther 2022; 11:1287-1298. [PMID: 35980557 PMCID: PMC9633887 DOI: 10.1007/s40122-022-00425-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/05/2022] [Accepted: 07/29/2022] [Indexed: 10/15/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Complete postoperative analgesia is very important for puerperae after cesarean section. The objective of this study was to explore the optimal postoperative analgesia after cesarean section. METHODS A total of 180 full-term puerperae who underwent cesarean section in Hanzhong People's Hospital from March 2019 to March 2020 were enrolled and were randomly divided into three groups. Group A was given 0.9% normal saline, group B and C were given 0.4% ropivacaine for transversus abdominis plane block (TAPB). Postoperative patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) pumps were 2 μg/kg sufentanil + 2.5 mg droperidol, 1.5 μg/kg and 1.3 μg/kg sufentanil, respectively. All puerperae were given different but effective analgesia programs. The primary outcome indicators were visual analog scores (VAS), the first compression time of postoperative analgesia pump and the total number of compressions in 48 h. The secondary outcome indicators were vital signs, Ramsay sedation scores, comfort scores (BCS), the frequency of analgesic rescue, postoperative side effects and satisfaction. RESULTS The dynamic and static VAS scores of the puerperae in group B at T2 and T6 were significantly lower than group A and at T12, T24 and T48 were significantly lower than group C. Compared with group A, the dynamic and static VAS scores of puerperae in group C were lower at T2 and T6 and higher at T12, T24 and T48. The Ramsay score and BCS score of the puerperae in group C at T12, T24 and T48 were significantly lower than those in groups A and B. CONCLUSIONS PCIA with sufentanil alone or combined with TAPB can be safely and effectively used for postoperative analgesia after cesarean section. PCIA combined with TAPB had better analgesic effect and lower incidence of side effects while reducing the dose of opioids. The results of this study provide new ideas and insights for the choice of analgesia after cesarean section.
Collapse
|
6
|
Kita T, Furutani K, Baba H. Epidural administration of 2% Mepivacaine after spinal anesthesia does not prevent intraoperative nausea and vomiting during cesarean section: A prospective, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial. Medicine (Baltimore) 2022; 101:e29709. [PMID: 35777058 PMCID: PMC9239613 DOI: 10.1097/md.0000000000029709] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/05/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Intraoperative nausea and vomiting (IONV) is a common symptom during cesarean section (CS) delivery causing significant discomfort to patients. Combined spinal and epidural anesthesia (CSEA) can provide both intraoperative anesthesia and postoperative analgesia. During CSEA, it is reasonable to administer local anesthetics to the epidural space before patient complaints to compensate for the diminished effect of spinal anesthesia. Therefore, we hypothesized that intraoperative epidural administration of 2% mepivacaine would reduce the incidence of IONV. METHODS Patients who were scheduled for elective CS were randomly allocated to 2 groups. Patients and all clinical staff except for an attending anesthesiologist were blinded to the allocation. After the epidural catheter was inserted at the T11-12 or T12-L1 interspace, spinal anesthesia was performed at the L2-3 or L3-4 interspace to intrathecally administer 10 mg of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine. Twenty min after spinal anesthesia, either 5 mL of 2% mepivacaine (group M) or saline (group S) was administered through an epidural catheter. Vasopressors were administered prophylactically to keep both the systolic blood pressure ≥ 80 % of the baseline value with the absolute value ≥ 90 mm Hg and the mean blood pressure ≥ 60 mm Hg. The primary endpoint was the incidence of IONV. The secondary endpoints were degree of nausea, the degree and incidence of pain, and Bromage score. RESULTS Ninety patients were randomized, and 3 patients were excluded from the final analysis. There was no significant difference in the incidence of IONV between the groups (58% in group M and 61% in group S, respectively, P = .82). In contrast, the incidence and degree of intraoperative pain in group M were significantly lower compared to group S. In addition, the incidence of rescue epidural administration of fentanyl (18% vs 47%) or mepivacaine (2.3% vs 25%) for intraoperative pain was lower in group M compared to group S. CONCLUSIONS Our results indicate that epidural administration of 2% mepivacaine 20 minutes after spinal anesthesia does not reduce the incidence of IONV in CS under CSEA. However, intraoperative epidural administration of 2% mepivacaine was found to improve intraoperative pain.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Takayuki Kita
- Department of Anesthesiology, Uonuma Kikan Hospital, Minami-Uonuma, Niigata 949-7302, Japan
| | - Kenta Furutani
- Department of Anesthesiology, Niigata University Medical and Dental Hospital, Niigata 951-8520, Japan
- *Correspondence: Kenta Furutani, Department of Anesthesiology, Niigata University Medical and Dental Hospital, 1-754 Asahimachi-Dori, Chuo-ku, Niigata 951-8520, Japan (e-mail: )
| | - Hiroshi Baba
- Department of Anesthesiology, Niigata University Medical and Dental Hospital, Niigata 951-8520, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Chen YH, Chou WH, Yie JC, Teng HC, Wu YL, Wu CY. Influence of Catheter-Incision Congruency in Epidural Analgesia on Postcesarean Pain Management: A Single-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial. J Pers Med 2021; 11:jpm11111099. [PMID: 34834451 PMCID: PMC8619661 DOI: 10.3390/jpm11111099] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/02/2021] [Revised: 10/20/2021] [Accepted: 10/26/2021] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) or epidural morphine may alleviate postcesarean pain; however, conventional lumbar epidural insertion is catheter–incision incongruent for cesarean delivery. Methods: In total, 189 women who underwent cesarean delivery were randomly divided into four groups (low thoracic PCEA, lumbar PCEA, low thoracic morphine, and lumbar morphine groups) for postcesarean pain management. Pain intensities, including static pain, dynamic pain, and uterine cramp, were measured using a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS). The proportion of participants who experienced dynamic wound pain with a VAS score of >33 mm was evaluated as the primary outcome. Adverse effects, including lower extremity blockade, pruritus, postoperative nausea and vomiting, sedation, and time of first passage of flatulence, were evaluated. Results: The low thoracic PCEA group had the lowest proportion of participants reporting dynamic pain at 6 h after spinal anesthesia (low thoracic PCEA, 28.8%; lumbar PCEA, 69.4%; low thoracic morphine, 67.3%; lumbar morphine group, 73.9%; p < 0.001). The aforementioned group also reported the most favorable VAS scores for static, dynamic, and uterine cramp pain during the first 24 h after surgery. Adverse effect profiles were similar among the four groups, but a higher proportion of participants in the lumbar PCEA group (approximately 20% more than in the other three groups) reported prolonged postoperative lower extremity motor blockade (p = 0.005). In addition, the first passage of flatulence after surgery reported by the low thoracic PCEA group was approximately 8 h earlier than that of the two morphine groups (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Epidural congruency is essential to PCEA for postcesarean pain. Low thoracic PCEA achieves favorable analgesic effects and may promote postoperative gastrointestinal recovery without additional adverse effects.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ying-Hsi Chen
- Department of Anesthesiology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei 100, Taiwan; (Y.-H.C.); (W.-H.C.); (J.-C.Y.); (H.-C.T.)
| | - Wei-Han Chou
- Department of Anesthesiology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei 100, Taiwan; (Y.-H.C.); (W.-H.C.); (J.-C.Y.); (H.-C.T.)
| | - Jr-Chi Yie
- Department of Anesthesiology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei 100, Taiwan; (Y.-H.C.); (W.-H.C.); (J.-C.Y.); (H.-C.T.)
| | - Hsiao-Chun Teng
- Department of Anesthesiology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei 100, Taiwan; (Y.-H.C.); (W.-H.C.); (J.-C.Y.); (H.-C.T.)
| | - Yi-Luen Wu
- Department of Medical Education, National Taiwan University, Taipei 100, Taiwan;
| | - Chun-Yu Wu
- Department of Anesthesiology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei 100, Taiwan; (Y.-H.C.); (W.-H.C.); (J.-C.Y.); (H.-C.T.)
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +886-2-2356-2158; Fax: +886-2-2341-5736
| |
Collapse
|