Thoracic epidural analgesia reduces myocardial injury in ischemic patients undergoing major abdominal cancer surgery

Epidural analgesia during surgery and its relation to postoperative myocardial infarction: meta-analysis

Introduction

Epidural analgesia has been studied for its potential advantages after surgery in a number of randomized clinical trials, with most finding improvements in pain and secondary endpoints like the incidence of postoperative complications.

Aim

To assess the relationship between use of epidural analgesia and adverse cardiac outcomes expressed by myocardial infarction (MI).

Material and methods

Fifty-three studies were recruited to quantify the influence of different surgical-related analgesic methods on clinical parameters (mortality and adverse events). The results of these trials were analysed using a random effects model, which was then used to calculate the mean difference (MD) with 95 per cent confidence intervals (CIs).

Results

Epidural analgesia resulted in preferred cardiac outcomes compared with traditional analgesia. These findings were supported by significantly lower MI events for the epidural analgesia group as follows: p = 0.005, p = 0,007, and p = 0.03 for the total number of included studies, studies with high risk of bias, and studies with low risk of bias, respectively. Studies with intermediate risk showed a non-significant difference between both groups (p = 0.7).

Conclusions

Epidural analgesia has a significant protective cardiac effect through the reduction of postoperative MI events among surgery subjects.

Comparison of dexmedetomidine and opioids as local anesthetic adjuvants in patient controlled epidural analgesia: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Data on the efficacy and incidence of adverse effects associated with dexmedetomidine (DEX) as a local anesthetic adjuvant for patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) are inconclusive. This meta-analysis assessed the efficacy and risks of DEX for PCEA using opioids as a reference.

METHODS

Two researchers independently searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and China Biology Medicine for randomized controlled trials comparing DEX and opioids as local anesthetic adjuvants in PCEA.

RESULTS

In total, 636 patients from seven studies were included in this meta-analysis. Postoperative patients who received DEX had lower visual analog scale (VAS) scores than those who received opioids at 4-8 h (mean difference [MD]: 0.61, 95% CI [0.45, 0.76], P < 0.001, I2 = 0%), 12 h (MD: 0.85, 95% CI [0.61, 1.09], P < 0.001, I2 = 0%), 24 h (MD: 0.59, 95% CI [0.06, 1.12], P = 0.030, I2 = 82%), and 48 h (MD: 0.54, 95% CI [0.05, 1.02], P = 0.030, I2 = 91%). Additionally, patients who received DEX had a lower incidence of itching (odds ratio [OR]: 2.86, 95% CI [1.18, 6.95], P = 0.020, I2 = 0%) and nausea and vomiting (OR: 6.83, 95% CI [3.63, 12.84], P < 0.001, I2 = 24%). In labor analgesia, no significant differences in neonatal (pH and PaO2 of cord blood, fetal heart rate) or maternal outcomes (duration of labor stage, mode of delivery) were found between the DEX and opioid groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with opioids, using DEX as a local anesthetic adjuvant in PCEA improved postoperative analgesia and reduced the incidence of itching and nausea and vomiting without increasing the incidence of adverse events.

Could epidural analgesia be safely used for acute postoperative pain in older adults to enhance recovery?

Epidural analgesia is often considered cornerstone in multimodal analgesia when used in major surgeries. However, its role in managing acute postoperative pain in elderly patients is debatable because of its known potential complications. Furthermore, postoperative pain in elderly patients is under-treated because of complex comorbidities, and they are more prone to adverse events related to pain therapies. All systemic analgesic drugs have pharmacological limitations and precautions in elderly people. Recent meta-analyses showed that epidural analgesia provided better postoperative pain control compared to intravenous opioids. Interestingly, peripheral nerve blocks had no superior control of pain over epidural analgesia. In addition, epidural analgesia has shown to positively affect perioperative morbidities and mortalities, and reduce opioid-related side effects because of its non-analgesic effects on each organ system. When tailored in a specific multimodal approach, it shortens the intensive care and hospital stays. In conclusion, if complications are identified and treated early, and contraindications are ruled out, epidural analgesia can achieve sufficient postoperative pain management with insignificant adverse events in this population.

Exploring postoperative atrial fibrillation after non-cardiac surgery: mechanisms, risk factors, and prevention strategies

Atrial fibrillation (AF) stands as the most prevalent persistent arrhythmia and a common complication after surgical procedures. Although the majority of non-cardiac surgery patients experience postoperative AF (POAF) and the condition is typically self-limited and asymptomatic, its detrimental impact on patient outcomes, prolonged hospitalization, and heightened risk of stroke and overall mortality has become increasingly evident. Of significant concern, POAF emerges as a noteworthy risk factor for stroke, myocardial infarction, and mortality in comparison to patients with non-surgical atrial fibrillation. Multiple studies have corroborated the association between POAF and an elevated risk of stroke and mortality. The development of postoperative atrial fibrillation is multifactorial, with the inflammatory response being a primary contributor; additionally, factors such as hypovolemia, intraoperative hypotension, anemia, trauma, and pain can trigger POAF. Risk factors for POAF in non-cardiac surgery primarily relate to age, hypertension, obesity, prior cardiac disease, obstructive sleep apnea, and male sex. Prophylactic treatment with β-blockers, amiodarone, or magnesium has demonstrated efficacy, but further trials are warranted, especially in high-risk populations. This review provides an account of the incidence rate, pathophysiology, and prognosis of atrial fibrillation after non-cardiac surgery, elucidates the underlying mechanisms of its occurrence, and explores various preventive strategies investigated in this domain.

Graded Epidural Anesthesia for Non-cardiac Surgery in the Prone Position in a Patient With Low Ejection Fraction

Ischemic heart disease (IHD), also known as coronary artery disease, occurs due to the blockage of coronary arteries which reduces the blood supply of the myocardium. The main goal of the anesthetic management of IHD patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery is to maintain the balance between myocardial oxygen supply and demand. Here, we report the anesthetic management of an IHD patient with a low ejection fraction who was posted for percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the prone position. We opted for graded epidural anesthesia with a low dose of a local anesthetic drug and opioid. Graded epidural anesthesia is a safe alternative over general anesthesia for patients with IHD and low ejection fraction as it reduces stress response to surgery, provides good postoperative analgesia, and avoids myocardial depressant drugs and coagulation responses.

The Effects of Body Mass Index on the Use of Patient-Controlled Intravenous Analgesia After Open Gastrointestinal Tumor Surgery: A Retrospective Analysis

Purpose

To investigate the impact of body mass index (BMI) on the analgesic effects and adverse reactions of patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA).

Methods

From 2017 to 2018, 390 patients undergoing open gastrointestinal surgery were reviewed at West China Hospital, Sichuan University. All used PCIA of sufentanil combined with dexmedetomidine and flurbiprofen axetil. According to their BMIs, they were placed into six groups: group A (BMI < 18.5kg/m², 29), group B (18.5kg/m² ≤ BMI< 22kg/m², 124), group C (22kg/m² ≤ BMI < 24kg/m², 99), group D (24kg/m² ≤ BMI < 26kg/m², 69), group E (26kg/m² ≤ BMI < 28kg/m², 46) and group F (BMI ≥28kg/m², 23). Main data of the perioperative use of analgesics, postoperative visual analogue score (VAS), and adverse reactions were collected.

Results

Twenty-four hours (h) after surgery, patients in group A had a higher resting VAS than the other groups, especially B (p_A-B = 0.011). VAS of patients during activity in group B was lower than those in group C 48 h after surgery (p = 0.013). Compared with groups B to F, group A had a significantly lower incidence of hypertension (p = 0.012) and a significantly higher incidence of vomiting 24 h after surgery (p = 0.009). Binary logistic analysis found that higher age was a risk factor for vomiting 24 h after surgery (OR 1.158, p = 0.045).

Conclusion

Using the same PCIA, patients with BMIs of less than 18.5 kg/m² had worse analgesia on the first day after surgery and were more likely to vomit. Postoperative analgesia and related experiences in patients with BMIs of less than 18.5 kg/m² need to be improved.

Study on the prevention of infection in terminal cancer patients applying epidural analgesia by adding cefazolin to anesthetics: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To observe the antibacterial effect of adding cefazolin into anesthetics in patients with terminal cancer undergoing long-term epidural analgesia.

METHODS

Patients undergoing epidural analgesia with terminal cancer were randomly divided into two groups: the conventional drug group (group C) and the cefazolin group (group G). Both groups were given levobupivacaine and morphine, while cefazolin was added to group G. The mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), respiratory rates (R), visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, satisfaction and complications of patients in the two groups were observed. 3 ml of the used analgesic was taken for bacterial culture when replacing the new analgesic case.

RESULTS

HR, MAP, R, VAS scores, dosages of morphine, satisfaction of the analgesic and the complications were not significantly different between the two groups (P > 0.05). The overall satisfaction of patients in group G was significantly higher than that in group C (P < 0.05). One patient's anesthetics in group C were infected with colibacillus. Four patients in group C got infected in their epidural puncture sites. There was no infection in group G (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Adding cefazolin to local anesthetics could effectively prevent bacterial infection and ensured the safety of epidural analgesia for patients with terminal cancer.

Effects of epidural combined with general anesthesia versus general anesthesia alone in gastric cancer surgery: a propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

This study was conducted retrospectively to investigate the survival of patients undergoing gastric cancer surgery with epidural combined with general anesthesia (EGA) and general anesthesia alone (GA).

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 596 patients with gastric cancer who were scheduled for radical resection. Propensity score matching was performed at a 1:1 ratio between GA (n=97) and EGA (n=97) to reduce selection bias. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify factors significantly correlated with recurrence and/or metastasis and prognosis. The 5-year overall survival rates of patients receiving EGA and GA alone were compared.

RESULTS

After the propensity scores were matched, there were 97 patients who underwent EGA and 97 patients who underwent GA. For the entire population, reconstruction type, pN stage, and complications were significantly correlated with prognosis based on multivariate analyses. For patients with a recurrence and/or metastasis, lymphadenectomy and pN stage were shown to be independent prognostic factors by multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, patients might benefit from EGA as a result of better analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects, fewer postoperative complications, higher safety, and a lower rate of metastasis and recurrence is conducive to postoperative recovery in patients with gastric cancer.

Epidural dexmedetomidine infusion for perioperative analgesia in patients undergoing abdominal cancer surgery: randomized trial

Objective

To assess the postoperative analgesic efficacy of epidural dexmedetomidine added to bupivacaine infusion for patients undergoing major abdominal cancer surgery.

Methods

Patients scheduled for major upper abdominal cancer surgery were allocated to group bupivacaine (n =32), in which patients received epidural bupivacaine infusion (6 mL/h bupivacaine 0.1%) for 48 hours postoperatively, or group bupivacaine + dexmedetomidine (n=32), in which patients received epidural dexmedetomidine added to bupivacaine infusion (6 mL/h of bupivacaine 0.1% + dexmedetomidine, 0.5 µg/mL) for 48 hours postoperatively. The cumulative morphine consumption, the time to first analgesic request, and the VAS pain score were evaluated.

Results

The cumulative morphine consumption was significantly reduced in group bupivacaine + dexmedetomidine compared with group bupivacaine: mean ± SD of 10.40±5.16 mg vs 23.23±8.37 mg with an estimated difference (95% CI) of −12.83 (−16.43, −9.24), (P<0.001). The time to the first analgesic demand was significantly delayed in group bupivacaine + dexmedetomidine compared with group bupivacaine: median (IQR) of 6 (1.75, 8.25) h vs 1 (0, 4)h, (P<0.001). The mean collapsed over time of overall VAS pain scores at rest and movement was significantly reduced in group bupivacaine + dexmedetomidine compared with group bupivacaine : mean ± SE of 1.6±0.08 vs 2.38±0.08 with an estimated difference (95% CI) of −0.8 (−1, −0.86), (P<0.001), and mean ± SE of 2.17±0.07 vs 3.25±0.07 with an estimated difference (95% CI) of −1.1 (−1.27, – 0.89), (P<0.001), respectively.

Conclusion

Epidural infusion of dexmedetomidine added to bupivacaine for patients undergoing major abdominal cancer surgery significantly reduced morphine consumption, delayed time to first analgesic supplementation, and decreased pain intensity during the first 48 hours postoperatively without harmful derangement on hemodynamics.

Impact of thoracic epidural sympathetic block on cardiac repolarization

PURPOSE

The interval from the peak to the end of the T wave (Tp-Te) on electrocardiography is considered a marker of ventricular arrhythmias. A previous study suggested that right stellate ganglion block prolonged QT and QT dispersion (QTD). We investigated the effect of thoracic epidural sympathetic block with 1% mepivacaine on QT, QTD, Tp-Te, and Tp-Te/QT by using computerized measurement.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

After obtaining the approval of the ethics committee of Dokkyo Medical University Hospital, 23 patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I or II who were scheduled to undergo thoracic surgery were enrolled. An epidural catheter was inserted at the Th4-5 or 5-6 level and then used for injection of 7 mL of 1% mepivacaine. Changes in RR interval, QT, corrected QT (QTc), QTD, QTc dispersion (QTcD), Tp-Te, Tp-Te/QT, and Tp-Te/QTc before and after epidural injection were assessed by computerized measurement. Statistical analysis was performed by one-way ANOVA.

RESULTS

Systolic blood pressure was consistently suppressed 10-15 minutes after injection (baseline: 136±10 mmHg, 11 minutes: 113±12 mmHg, 12 minutes: 112±13 mmHg, 13 minutes: 112±12 mmHg, 14 minutes: 108±17 mmHg, 15 minutes: 111±14 mmHg; P<0.05). However, RR interval, QT, QTc, QTD, QTcD, Tp-Te, Tp-Te/QT, and Tp-Te/QTc were not changed after epidural block.

CONCLUSION

Thoracic epidural injection of 1% mepivacaine did not alter QT, QTc, QTD, QTcD, Tp-Te, Tp-Te/QT, or Tp-Te/QTc. These results emphasize the safety of thoracic epidural sympathetic block with 1% mepivacaine for patients compared with right stellate ganglion block, in terms of cardiac repolarization.

Epidural analgesia versus patient-controlled intravenous analgesia for pain following intra-abdominal surgery in adults

BACKGROUND

Intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IVPCA) with opioids and epidural analgesia (EA) using either continuous epidural administration (CEA) or patient-controlled (PCEA) techniques are popular approaches for analgesia following intra-abdominal surgery. Despite several attempts to compare the risks and benefits, the optimal form of analgesia for these procedures remains the subject of debate.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to update and expand a previously published Cochrane Review on IVPCA versus CEA for pain after intra-abdominal surgery with the addition of the comparator PCEA. We have compared both forms of EA to IVPCA. Where appropriate we have performed subgroup analysis for CEA versus PCEA.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases for relevant studies: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2017; Issue 8), MEDLINE (OvidSP) (1966 to September 2017), and Embase (OvidSP) (1988 to September 2017) using a combination of MeSH and text words. We searched the following trial registries: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the EU Clinical Trials Register in September 2017, together with reference checking and citation searching to identify additional studies.We included only randomized controlled trials and used no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all parallel and cross-over randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CEA or PCEA (or both) with IVPCA for postoperative pain relief in adults following intra-abdominal surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (JS and EY) independently identified studies for eligibility and performed data extraction using a data extraction form. In cases of disagreement (three occasions) a third review author (MB) was consulted. We appraised each included study to assess the risk of bias as outlined in Section 8.5 of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 32 studies (1716 participants) in our review. There are 10 studies awaiting classification and one ongoing study. A total of 869 participants (51%) received EA and 847 (49%) received IVPCA. The EA trials included 16 trials with CEA (418 participants) and 16 trials with PCEA (451 participants). The studies included a broad range of surgical procedures (including hysterectomies, radical prostatectomies, Caesarean sections, colorectal and upper gastrointestinal procedures), a wide range of adult ages, and were performed in several different countries.Our pooled analyses suggested a benefit with regard to pain scores (using a visual analogue scale between 0 and 100) in favour of EA techniques at rest. The mean pain reduction at rest from waking to six hours after operation was 5.7 points (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.9 to 9.5; 7 trials, 384 participants; moderate-quality evidence). From seven to 24 hours, the mean pain reduction was 9.0 points (95% CI 4.6 to 13.4; 11 trials, 558 participants; moderate-quality evidence). From 24 hours the mean pain reduction was 5.1 points (95% CI 0.9 to 9.4; 7 trials, 393 participants; moderate-quality evidence). Due to high statistical heterogeneity, no pooled analysis was possible for the estimation of pain on movement at any time. Two single studies (one using CEA and one PCEA) reported lower pain scores with EA compared to IVPCA at 0 to 6 hours and 7 to 24 hours. At > 24 hours the results from 2 studies (both CEA) were conflicting.We found no difference in mortality between EA and IVPCA, although the only deaths reported were in the EA group (5/287, 1.7%). The risk ratio (RR) of death with EA compared to using IVPCA was 3.37 (95% CI 0.72 to 15.88; 9 trials, 560 participants; low-quality evidence).A single study suggested that the use of EA may result in fewer episodes of respiratory depression, with an RR of 0.47 (95% CI 0.04 to 5.69; 1 trial; low-quality evidence). The successful placement of an epidural catheter can be technically challenging. The improvements in pain scores above were accompanied by an increase in the risk of failure of the analgesic technique with EA (RR 2.48, 95% CI 1.13 to 5.45; 10 trials, 678 participants; moderate-quality evidence); the occurrence of pruritus (RR 2.36, 95% CI 1.67 to 3.35; 8 trials, 492 participants; moderate-quality evidence); and episodes of hypotension requiring intervention (RR 7.13, 95% CI 2.87 to 17.75; 6 trials, 479 participants; moderate-quality evidence). There was no clear evidence of an advantage of one technique over another for other adverse effects considered in this review (Venous thromboembolism with EA (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.03 to 2.95; 2 trials, 101 participants; low-quality evidence); nausea and vomiting (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.27; 10 trials, 645 participants; moderate-quality evidence); sedation requiring intervention (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.87; 4 trials, 223 participants; moderate-quality evidence); or episodes of desaturation to less than 90% (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.71 to 2.37; 5 trials, 328 participants; moderate-quality evidence)).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The additional pain reduction at rest associated with the use of EA rather than IVPCA is modest and unlikely to be clinically important. Single-trial estimates provide low-quality evidence that there may be an additional reduction in pain on movement, which is clinically important. Any improvement needs to be interpreted with the understanding that the use of EA is also associated with an increased chance of failure to successfully institute analgesia, and an increased likelihood of episodes of hypotension requiring intervention and pruritus. We have rated the evidence as of moderate quality given study limitations in most of the contributing studies. Further large RCTs are required to determine the ideal analgesic technique. The 10 studies awaiting classification may alter the conclusions of the review once assessed.

Effects of long periods of pneumoperitoneum combined with the head-up position on heart rate-corrected QT interval during robotic gastrectomy: an observational study

Objective

Pneumoperitoneum and the head-up position reportedly stimulate the sympathetic nervous system, potentially increasing the risk of cardiac arrhythmia. We evaluated the effects of a long duration of pneumoperitoneum in the head-up position on the heart rate-corrected QT (QTc) interval during robotic gastrectomy.

Methods

This prospective observational study involved 28 patients undergoing robotic gastrectomy. The QTc interval was recorded at the following time points: before anaesthetic induction (baseline); 10 minutes after tracheal intubation; 1, 5, 30, 60, and 90 minutes after pneumoperitoneum induction in the head-up position; after pneumoperitoneum desufflation in the supine position; and at the end of surgery. The primary outcome was the QTc interval, which was measured 90 minutes after pneumoperitoneum combined with the head-up position.

Results

Compared with baseline, the QTc interval was significantly prolonged at 1 and 60 minutes after pneumoperitoneum, peaked at 90 minutes, and was sustained and notably prolonged until the end of surgery. However, no considerable haemodynamic changes developed.

Conclusion

A long period of carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum application in a head-up position significantly prolonged the QTc interval during robotic gastrectomy. Therefore, diligent care and close monitoring are required for patients who are susceptible to developing ventricular arrhythmia.

Trial Registration: Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02604979; Registration number NCT02604979

Thoracic paravertebral block versus thoracic epidural analgesia for post-operative pain control in open pancreatic surgery: A randomized controlled trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of bilateral ultrasound guided thoracic paravertebral catheters to a thoracic epidural after open pancreatic surgery.

DESIGN

This was a prospective non-blinded randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

Academic hospital operating room, postoperative recovery area, and ward.

PATIENTS

53 patients aged 18 and above who had open pancreatic surgery.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients received either bilateral thoracic paravertebral block at T8 with an infusion of 0.2% ropivacaine or thoracic epidural analgesia at T7/8 with an infusion of 0.125% bupivacaine with hydromorphone 6 μg/mL.

MEASUREMENTS

Pain scores, opioid use, length of recovery room and hospital stay, adverse events, and incidence of nausea and vomiting.

MAIN RESULTS

There was no difference in baseline demographics between the two groups. There were no significant differences in pain scores between the two groups in each of the first five days after surgery. There was no difference in length of stay nor nausea and vomiting. There was significantly less modality related adverse events in the paravertebral group compared to the epidural group (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of thoracic paravertebral catheters provided comparable analgesia and less modality related adverse events when compared to a thoracic epidural in patients undergoing open pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Combined epidural-general anesthesia was associated with lower risk of postoperative complications in patients undergoing open abdominal surgery for pheochromocytoma: A retrospective cohort study

Background

Current evidences show that regional anesthesia is associated with decreased risk of complications after major surgery. However, the effects of combined regional-general anesthesia remain controversial. The purpose of our study was to analyze the impact of anesthesia (combined epidural-general anesthesia vs. general anesthesia) on the risk of postoperative complications in patients undergoing open surgery for pheochromocytoma.

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort study. 146 patients who underwent open surgery for pheochromocytoma (100 received combined epidural-general anesthesia and 46 received general anesthesia) in Peking University First Hospital from January 1, 2002 to December 31, 2015 were enrolled. The primary outcome was the occurrence of postoperative complications during hospital stay after surgery. Multivariate Logistic regression models were used to analyze the association between the choice of anesthetic method and the risk of postoperative complications.

Results

17 (11.6%) patients developed complications during postoperative hospital stay. The incidence of postoperative complications was lower in patients with combined epidural-general anesthesia than in those with general anesthesia (6% [6/100] vs. 23.9% [11/46], P = 0.006). Multivariate Logistic regression analysis showed that use of combined epidural-general anesthesia (OR 0.219, 95% CI 0.065–0.741; P = 0.015) was associated with lower risk, whereas male gender (OR 5.213, 95% CI 1.283–21.177; P = 0.021) and perioperative blood transfusion (OR 25.879; 95% CI 3.130–213.961; P = 0.003) were associated with higher risk of postoperative complications.

Conclusions

For patients undergoing open surgery for pheochromocytoma, use of combined epidural-general anesthesia may decrease the occurrence of postoperative complications.