The role of liposomal bupivacaine in thoracic surgery

Anesthetic technique and postoperative pulmonary complications (PPC) after Video Assisted Thoracic (VATS) lobectomy: A retrospective observational cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Thoracic surgery is associated with an 8-10% incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs). Introduction of minimally invasive Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) aimed to reduce pain related and pulmonary complications. However, PPCs remain a common cause of morbidity after VATS.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was searched for VATS lobectomy cases from 2017 to 2021 with General Anesthesia (GA) as the primary anesthetic technique. Cases were stratified into four groups-GA alone, GA+local, GA+Regional and GA+Epidural. Generalized linear regression models were used to examine whether PPCs differ by anesthetic technique, controlling for morbidity risk factors. The study's primary outcome was the occurrence of any PPC (pneumonia, reintubation or prolonged mechanical ventilation). The secondary outcome was length of hospital stay (LOS).

RESULTS

A total of 15,084 VATS lobectomy cases were identified and 14,477 cases met inclusion criteria. The PPC rate was between 3.5-5.2%. There was no statistically significant difference in the odds of PPCs across the groups. Compared to the GA alone group, the regional and local group had significantly shorter LOS (9.1% and 5.5%, respectively, both ps < .001), whereas the epidural group had significantly longer LOS (18%, p < .001).

CONCLUSION

Our analysis suggests that the addition of regional or local anesthesia is associated with shorter LOS after VATS lobectomy. However, these techniques were not associated with lower PPC incidence. Future randomized controlled trials could help to elucidate the best anesthetic technique to reduce pain and enhance recovery.

Liposomal bupivacaine intercostal block placed under direct vision reduces morphine use in thoracic surgery

Background

Thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) and liposomal bupivacaine (LB) are two methods used for postoperative pain control after thoracic surgery. Some studies have compared LB to standard bupivacaine. However, data comparing the outcomes of LB to TEA after minimally invasive lung resection is limited. Therefore, the objective of our study was to compare postoperative pain, opioid usage, and outcomes between patients who received TEA vs. LB.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients who underwent minimally invasive lung resections over an 8-month period. Intraoperatively, patients received either LB under direct vision or a TEA. Pain scores were obtained in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) and at 12, 24, and 48 hours postoperatively. Morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) were calculated at 24 and 48 hours postoperatively. Postoperative outcomes were then compared between groups.

Results

In total, 391 patients underwent minimally invasive lung resection: 236 (60%) wedge resections, 51 (13%) segmentectomies, and 104 (27%) lobectomies. Of these, 326 (83%) received LB intraoperatively. Fewer patients in the LB group experienced postoperative complications (18% vs. 34%, P=0.004). LB patients also had lower median pain scores at 24 (P=0.03) and 48 hours (P=0.001) postoperatively. There was no difference in MMEs at 24 hours (P=0.49). However, at 48 hours, patients who received LB required less narcotics (P=0.02). Median hospital length of stay (LOS) was significantly shorter in patients who received LB (2 vs. 4 days, P<0.001). On multivariable analysis, increasing age, postoperative complications, and use of TEA were independently associated with a longer hospital LOS.

Conclusions

Compared to TEA, LB intercostal block placed under direct vision reduced morphine use 48 hours after thoracic surgery. It was also associated with fewer postoperative complications and shorter median hospital LOS. LB is a good alternative to TEA for pain management after minimally invasive lung resection.

Regional anesthesia and acute perioperative pain management in thoracic surgery: a narrative review

Background and Objective

Thoracic surgery causes significant pain which can negatively affect pulmonary function and increase risk of postoperative complications. Effective analgesia is important to reduce splinting and atelectasis. Systemic opioids and thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) have been used for decades and are effective at treating acute post-thoracotomy pain, although both have risks and adverse effects. The advancement of thoracoscopic surgery, a focus on multimodal and opioid-sparing analgesics, and the development of ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia techniques have greatly expanded the options for acute pain management after thoracic surgery. Despite the expansion of surgical techniques and analgesic approaches, there is no clear optimal approach to pain management. This review aims to summarize the body of literature regarding systemic and regional anesthetic techniques for thoracic surgery in both thoracotomy and minimally invasive approaches, with a goal of providing a foundation for providers to make individualized decisions for patients depending on surgical approach and patient factors, and to discuss avenues for future research.

Methods

We searched PubMed and Google Scholar databases from inception to May 2021 using the terms “thoracic surgery”, “thoracic surgery AND pain management”, “thoracic surgery AND analgesia”, “thoracic surgery AND regional anesthesia”, “thoracic surgery AND epidural”. We considered articles written in English and available to the reader.

Key Content and Findings

There is a wide variety of strategies for treating acute pain after thoracic surgery, including multimodal opioid and non-opioid systemic analgesics, regional anesthesia including TEA and paravertebral blocks (PVB), and a recent expansion in the use of novel fascial plane blocks especially for thoracoscopy. The body of literature on the effectiveness of different approaches for thoracotomy and thoracoscopy is a rapidly expanding field and area of active debate.

Conclusions

The optimal analgesic approach for thoracic surgery may depend on patient factors, surgical factors, and institutional factors. Although TEA may provide optimal analgesia after thoracotomy, PVB and emerging fascial plane blocks may offer effective alternatives. A tailored approach using multimodal systemic therapies and regional anesthesia is important, and future studies comparing techniques are necessary to further investigate the optimal approach to improve patient outcomes.

Impact of paravertebral blocks on analgesic and non-analgesic outcomes after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery: A propensity matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

Regional analgesic techniques such as paravertebral blocks (PVBs) have been popularized for analgesia following video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS). In this single center retrospective propensity matched cohort of subjects, we investigate the impact of paravertebral blocks on the analgesic and non-analgesic outcomes.

METHODS

Institutional database was queried to identify all patients undergoing VATS between January 2013 and July 2019 and these patients were divided into those who received paravertebral blocks in combination with general anesthesia (GA) [PVB group] and those who received GA without paravertebral blocks [GA group]. Propensity score matching based on common patient confounders were used to identify patients in each group. Primary outcomes of the study were average pain scores and opioid consumption in the first 24 hours. Secondary analgesic outcomes included pain scores and opioid requirements at other timepoints over the first 48 hours. Non analgesic outcomes were obtained from STS General Thoracic Surgery Database and included length of hospital stay, need for ICU admission, composite outcome of any complication during the hospital course and 30-day mortality. Exploratory analyses were conducted to investigate the impact of PVB on analgesia following different types of surgery and as to whether any other covariates had a greater influence on the included patient centered outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

After propensity score matching, a total of 520 patients (260 per group) were selected for the study out of 1095 patients. The opioid consumption in terms of oral morphine milligram equivalent (MME) [Median (IQR)] for the first 24 hours was significantly lower with the use of PVB [PVB group- 78.5 (96.75); GA group-127.0 (111.5); p<0.001] while the average pain scores in the first 24 hours did not differ significantly [PVB group-4.71 (2.28); GA group-4.85 (2.30); p = 0.70]. The length of hospital stay, opioid requirements at other timepoints, need for ICU admission in the immediate post-operative period and the composite outcome-'any complication' (35% vs 48%) were significantly lower with the use of PVB. Subgroup analysis showed a longer duration of benefit following major lung surgeries compared to others.

CONCLUSION

Paravertebral blocks reduced the length of stay and opioid consumption up to 48 hours after VATS without significantly impacting pain scores.

Retrospective Assessment of the Use of Liposomal Bupivacaine in Lumbar Fusions in Immediate Postoperative Hospital Care

BACKGROUND

Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for administration into surgical sites for postsurgical analgesia. The liposomal formulation allows for sustained effects up to 72 hours.

METHODS

A retrospective study assessed patients undergoing lumbar interbody surgery. Visual analog scale pain scores and amount of opioids consumed were recorded at 12-hour intervals for 72 hours postoperatively, as were patterns of discharge and hospital length of stay (LOS).

RESULTS

A total of 122 patients (97 LB vs. 25 control group) were reviewed. Median LOS was shorter in the LB cohort compared with controls (1.94 vs. 3.08 days, respectively; P = 0.0043). When assessing the percentage of discharges between groups at 12-hour intervals, there were significantly more discharges in the LB cohort at 36-48 hours (P = 0.0226), and no differences elsewhere. There was a decrease in intravenous opioids consumed at 48-60 hours in the LB cohort compared with controls (P = 0.0494), a difference not detected at other time points or with oral or total opioids. Mean visual analog scale scores were significantly higher in the LB cohort compared with controls at 0-12 hours (5.2 vs. 3.9, respectively; P = 0.0079), but insignificantly different subsequently up to 72 hours. The LB cohort and controls were not significantly different in total amount of opioids consumed, overall pain scores, or regarding how the opioid amount consumed or pain scores changed over time.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of LB in lumbar interbody fusion decreases patients' LOS but has little effect on reducing overall pain scores or opioid use in the 72-hour postoperative hospital period.