Intravenous patient-controlled analgesia to manage the postoperative pain in patients undergoing craniotomy

Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Medications in Cranial Neurosurgery: Balancing Opioid-Sparing Analgesia with Bleeding Risk

Postcraniotomy pain is a common problem frequently encountered by neurosurgeons. This is typically managed with opioids; however, opioids have been shown to increase intracranial pressure by way of hypercapnia and straining from the associated constipation. Additionally, opioids can confound and mask the neurologic examination of postcraniotomy patients, as well as be the nidus for a potential opioid addiction. Thus, alternative solutions for opioids have been a major topic of investigation within the neurosurgical community. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) present as a potential solution due to their nonaddictive and analgesic properties, but utilization of NSAIDs in neurosurgical patients has been controversial given that NSAIDs alter platelet function. The degree to which NSAIDs alter platelet function and bleeding time to a clinically relevant manner has remained controversial, although several well-designed studies concluded that the utilization of NSAIDs in post-craniotomy patients does not increase the risk of postoperative bleeding. Herein, we review the pharmacology, efficacy, and safety of NSAIDs with a particular emphasis on NSAID use for postintracranial neurosurgical procedure pain management.

Incidence change of postoperative delirium after implementation of processed electroencephalography monitoring during surgery: a retrospective evaluation study

BACKGROUND

Postoperative delirium (POD) is a common complication in the elderly, which is associated with poor outcomes after surgery. Recognized as predisposing factors for POD, anesthetic exposure and burst suppression during general anesthesia can be minimized with intraoperative processed electroencephalography (pEEG) monitoring. In this study, we aimed to evaluate whether implementation of intraoperative pEEG-guided anesthesia is associated with incidence change of POD.

METHODS

In this retrospective evaluation study, we analyzed intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IVPCA) dataset from 2013 to 2017. There were 7425 patients using IVPCA after a noncardiac procedure under general anesthesia. Patients incapable of operating the device independently, such as cognitive dysfunction or prolonged sedation, were declined and not involved in the dataset. After excluding patients who opted out within three days (N = 110) and those with missing data (N = 24), 7318 eligible participants were enrolled. Intraoperative pEEG has been implemented since July 2015. Participants having surgery after this time point had intraoperative pEEG applied before induction until full recovery. All related staff had been trained in the application of pEEG-guided anesthesia and the assessment of POD. Patients were screened twice daily for POD within 3 days after surgery by staff in the pain management team. In the first part of this study, we compared the incidence of POD and its trend from 2013 January-2015 July with 2015 July-2017 December. In the second part, we estimated odds ratios of risk factors for POD using multivariable logistic regression in case-control setting.

RESULTS

The incidence of POD decreased from 1.18 to 0.41% after the administration of intraoperative pEEG. For the age group ≧ 75 years, POD incidence decreased from 5.1 to 1.56%. Further analysis showed that patients with pEEG-guided anesthesia were associated with a lower odd of POD (aOR 0.33; 95% CI 0.18-0.60) than those without after adjusting for other covariates.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of intraoperative pEEG was associated with a lower incidence of POD within 3 days after surgery, particularly in the elderly. Intraoperative pEEG might be reasonably considered as part of the strategy to prevent POD in the elder population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Not applicable.

Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs versus tramadol in pain management following transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary adenomas: a randomized, double-blind, noninferiority trial

OBJECTIVE

Opioid-minimizing or nonopioid therapy using nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or tramadol has been encouraged for pain management. This study aimed to examine the noninferiority of NSAIDs to tramadol for pain management following transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary adenomas in terms of analgesic efficacy, adverse events, and rescue opioid use.

METHODS

This was a randomized, single-center, double-blind noninferiority trial. Patients 18-70 years old with planned transsphenoidal surgery for pituitary adenomas were randomly assigned (in a 1-to-1 ratio) to receive NSAIDs (parecoxib injection and subsequent loxoprofen tablets) or tramadol (tramadol injection and subsequent tramadol tablets). The primary outcome was pain score assessed by a visual analog scale (VAS) for 24 hours following surgery; the secondary outcomes were VAS scores for 48 and 72 hours. Other prespecified outcomes included nausea, vomiting, dizziness, upset stomach, skin rash, peptic ulcer, gastrointestinal bleeding, and pethidine use to control breakthrough pain. Noninferiority of NSAIDs to tramadol was established if the upper limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the VAS score difference was < 1 point and the rate difference of adverse events and pethidine use < 5%. The superiority of NSAIDs was assessed when noninferiority was verified. All analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis.

RESULTS

Two hundred two patients were enrolled between November 1, 2020, and May 31, 2021 (101 in the NSAIDs group, 101 in the tramadol group). Baseline characteristics between groups were well balanced. Mean VAS scores for 24 hours following transsphenoidal surgery were 2.6 ± 1.8 in the NSAIDs group and 3.5 ± 2.1 in the tramadol group (-0.9 difference, 95% CI -1.5 to -0.4; p value for noninferiority < 0.001, p value for superiority < 0.001). Noninferiority and superiority were also achieved for both secondary outcomes. VAS scores improved over time in both groups. Incidences of nausea (39.6% vs 61.4%, p = 0.002), vomiting (3.0% vs 42.6%, p < 0.001), and dizziness (12.9% vs 47.5%, p < 0.001) were significantly lower, while incidence of upset stomach (9.9% vs 2.0%, p = 0.017) was slightly higher in the NSAIDs group compared with the tramadol group. The percentage of opioid use was 4.0% in the NSAIDs group and 15.8% in the tramadol group (-11.8% difference, 95% CI -19.9% to -3.7%; p value for noninferiority < 0.001, p value for superiority = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

NSAIDs significantly reduced acute pain following transsphenoidal surgery, caused few adverse events, and limited opioid use compared with tramadol.

Multimodal analgesia in neurosurgery: a narrative review

Pain following brain surgery can compromise the result of surgery. Several pharmacological interventions have been used to prevent postoperative pain in adults undergoing brain surgery. Pain following craniotomy is considered to be moderate to severe during the first two post-operative days. Opioids have been historically the mainstay and are the current prominent strategy for pain treatment. They produce analgesia but may alter respiratory, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, and neuroendocrine functions. All these side effects may affect the normal postoperative course of craniotomy by affecting neurological function and increasing intracranial pressure. Therefore, their use in neurosurgery is limited, and opioids are used in case of strict necessity or as rescue medication. In addition to opioids, drugs with differing mechanisms of actions target pain pathways, resulting in additive and/or synergistic effects. Some of these agents include acetaminophen/non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), alpha-2 agonists, NMDA receptor antagonists, gabapentinoids, and local anesthesia techniques. Multimodal analgesia should be a balance between adequate analgesia and less drug-induced sedation, respiratory depression, hypercapnia, nausea, and vomiting, which may increase intracranial pressure. Non-opioid analgesics can be an useful pharmacological alternative in multimodal regimes to manage post-craniotomy pain. This narrative review aims to outline the current clinical evidence of multimodal analgesia for post craniotomy pain control.

Pharmacological interventions for the prevention of acute postoperative pain in adults following brain surgery

BACKGROUND

Pain following brain surgery can compromise recovery. Several pharmacological interventions have been used to prevent pain after craniotomy; however, there is currently a lack of evidence regarding which interventions are most effective.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives are to assess the effectiveness of pharmacological interventions for prevention of acute postoperative pain in adults undergoing brain surgery; compare them in terms of additional analgesic requirements, incidence of chronic headache, sedative effects, length of hospital stay and adverse events; and determine whether these characteristics are different for certain subgroups.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL, Web of Science and two trial registries together with reference checking and citation searching on 28th of November 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included blinded and non-blinded, randomized controlled trials evaluating pharmacological interventions for the prevention of acute postoperative pain in adults undergoing neurosurgery, which had at least one validated pain score outcome measure.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. We calculated mean differences for the primary outcome of pain intensity; any pain scores reported on a 0 to 100 scale were converted to a 0 to 10 scale.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 42 completed studies (3548 participants) and identified one ongoing study. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs) Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs) reduce pain up to 24 hours (0 to 6 hours, MD -1.16, 95% CI -1.57 to -0.76; 12 hours, MD -0.62, 95% CI -1.11 to -0.14; 24 hours, MD -0.66, 95% CI -1.18 to -0.13; 6 studies, 742 participants; all high-quality evidence). Results for other outcomes were imprecise (additional analgesic requirements: MD 1.29 mg, 95% CI -5.0 to 2.46, 4 studies, 265 participants; nausea and vomiting RR 1.34, 95% CI 0.30 to 5.94, 2 studies, 345 participants; both low-quality evidence). Dexmedetomidine reduces pain up to 12 hours (0 to 6 hours, MD -0.89, 95% CI -1.27 to -0.51, moderate-quality evidence; 12 hours, MD -0.81, 95% CI -1.21 to -0.42, low-quality evidence). It did not show efficacy at 24 hours (MD -0.08, 95% CI -0.32 to 0.16; 2 studies, 128 participants; low-quality evidence). Dexmedetomidine may decrease additional analgesic requirements (MD -21.36 mg, 95% CI -34.63 to -8.1 mg, 2 studies, 128 participants, low-quality evidence). Results for other outcomes were imprecise (nausea and vomiting RR -0.43, 95% CI 0.06 to 3.08, 3 studies, 261 participants; hypotension RR 0.5, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.28, 3 studies, 184 participants; both low-quality evidence). Scalp blocks may reduce pain up to 48 hours (0 to 6 hours, MD -0.98, 95% CI -1.66 to -0.3, 10 studies, 414 participants; 12 hours, MD -0.95, 95% CI -1.53 to -0.37, 8 studies, 294 participants; 24 hours, MD -0.78, 95% CI -1.52 to -0.05, 9 studies, 433 participants, all low-quality evidence; 48 hours, MD -1.34, 95% CI -2.57 to -0.11, 4 studies, 135 participants, very low-quality evidence. When studies with high risk of bias were excluded, significance remained at 12 hours only. Scalp blocks may decrease additional analgesia requirements (SMD -1.11, 95% CI -1.97 to -0.25, 7 studies, 314 participants). Results for other outcomes were imprecise (nausea and vomiting RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.32, 4 studies, 165 participants, very low-quality evidence). Scalp Infiltration may reduce pain postoperatively but efficacy was inconsistent, with a significant effect at 12 and 48 hours only (12 hours, MD -0.71, 95% CI -1.34 to -0.08, 7 studies, 309 participants, low-quality evidence; 48 hours, MD - 1.09, 95% CI -2.13 to - 0.06, 3 studies, 128 participants, moderate-quality evidence). No benefit was observed at other times (0 to 6 hours, MD -0.64, 95% CI -1.28 to -0.00, 9 studies, 475 participants, moderate-quality evidence; 24 hours, MD -0.39, 95% CI -1.06 to 0.27,6 studies, 260 participants, low-quality evidence. Scalp infiltration may reduce additional analgesia requirements MD -9.56 mg, 95% CI -15.64 to -3.49, 6 studies, 345 participants, very low-quality evidence). When studies with high risk of bias were excluded, scalp infiltration lost the pain benefit at 12 hours and effects on additional analgesia requirements, but retained the pain-reducing benefit at 48 hours (MD -0.56, 95% CI -1.20 to -0.32, 2 studies, 100 participants, very low-quality evidence). Results for other outcomes were imprecise (nausea and vomiting, RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.41, 4 studies, 318 participants, low-quality evidence). Pregabalin or gabapentin may reduce pain up to 6 hours (2 studies, 202 participants), MD -1.15,95% CI -1.66 to -0.6, 2 studies, 202 participants, low-quality evidence). One study examined analgesic efficacy at 12 hours showing significant benefit. No analgesia efficacy was shown at later times (24 hours, MD -0.29, 95% CI -0.78 to -0.19; 48 hours, MD - 0.06, 95% CI -0.86 to 0.77, 2 studies, 202 participants, low-quality evidence). Additional analgesia requirements were not significantly less (MD -0.37 (95% CI -1.10 to 0.35, 3 studies, 234 participants, low-quality evidence). Risk of nausea and vomiting was significantly reduced (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.89, 3 studies, 273 participants, low-quality evidence). Results for other outcomes were imprecise (additional analgesia requirements: MD -0.37, 95% CI -1.10 to 0.35, 3 studies, 234 participants, low-quality evidence). Acetaminophen did not show analgesic benefit (0 to 6 hours, MD -0.35, 95% CI -1.00 to 0.30; 12 hours, MD -0.51, 95% CI -1.04 to 0.03, 3 studies, 332 participants, moderate-quality evidence; 24 hours, MD -0.34, 95% CI -1.20 to 0.52, 4 studies, 439 participants, high-quality evidence). Results for other outcomes remained imprecise (additional analgesia requirements, MD 0.07, 95% CI -0.86 to 0.99, 4 studies, 459 participants, high-quality evidence; length of hospitalizations, MD -3.71, 95% CI -14.12 to 6.7, 2 studies, 335 participants, moderate-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is high-quality evidence that NSAIDs reduce pain up to 24 hours postoperatively. The evidence for reductions in pain with dexmedetomidine, pregabalin or gabapentin, scalp blocks, and scalp infiltration is less certain and of very low to moderate quality. There is low-quality evidence that scalp blocks and dexmedetomidine may reduce additional analgesics requirements. There is low-quality evidence that gabapentin or pregabalin may decrease nausea and vomiting, with the caveat that the total number of events for this comparison was low.

Postoperative Craniotomy Pain in Emergent versus Non-emergent Cases

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pain control in craniotomies poses multiple challenges. Pain must be addressed, but the use of medications must be weighed against risks. Craniotomies risk neurologic injury and so postoperative examinations are critical. Medications used to address pain can alter the neurological examination or cause bleeding leading to misdiagnosis of complications.

OBJECTIVE

Determine if there is a significant difference in postoperative pain from emergent craniotomies vs. non-emergent craniotomies Methods: A retrospective review included 102 cases performed from 2010-2016; pain scores were compared on post-operative days one, two, and three between emergent and non-emergent craniotomies.

RESULTS

Pain scores for emergent cases on post-operative days one through three were 5.1 (standard deviation (SD)=2.9), 5.9 (SD=2.1), 4.7 (SD=3.0) respectively. Pain scores for non-emergent cases on post-operative days one through three were 5.7 (SD=2.6), 4.8 (SD=2.8), and 4.6 (SD=3.0) respectively. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to compare pain scores between groups for each post-operative day. On post-operative day, one there was no significant difference between the groups [F(1,100)=0.49, p=0.485]. On post-operative day two, there was no significant difference between the groups [F(1,100)=2.17, p=0.143]. On post-operative day three, there was no significant difference between the groups [F(1,98)=0.002, p=0.957].

CONCLUSION

There is no significant difference in the level of pain on postoperative days one through three between emergent and non-emergent craniotomy patients.

Designing a pain management protocol for craniotomy: A narrative review and consideration of promising practices

BACKGROUND

Craniotomy is a relatively common surgical procedure with a high incidence of postoperative pain. Development of standardized pain management and enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are necessary and crucial to optimize outcomes and patient satisfaction and reduce health care costs.

METHODS

This work is based upon a literature search of published manuscripts (between 1996 and 2017) from Pubmed, Cochrane Central Register, and Google Scholar. It seeks to both synthesize and review our current scientific understanding of postcraniotomy pain and its part in neurosurgical ERAS protocols.

RESULTS

Strategies to ameliorate craniotomy pain demand interventions during all phases of patient care: preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative interventions. Pain management should begin in the perioperative period with risk assessment, patient education, and premedication. In the intraoperative period, modifications in anesthesia technique, choice of opioids, acetaminophen and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), regional techniques, dexmedetomidine, ketamine, lidocaine, corticosteroids, and interdisciplinary communication are all strategies to consider and possibly deploy. Opioids remain the mainstay for pain relief, but patient-controlled analgesia, NSAIDs, standardization of pain management, bio/behavioral interventions, modification of head dressings as well as patient-centric management are useful opportunities that potentially improve patient care.

CONCLUSIONS

Future research on mechanisms, predictors, treatments, and pain management pathways will help define the combinations of interventions that optimize pain outcomes.

Pain following craniotomy: reassessment of the available options

Pain following craniotomy has frequently been neglected because of the notion that postcraniotomy patients do not experience severe pain. However a gradual change in this outlook is observed because of increased sensitivity of neuroanaesthesiologists and neurosurgeons toward acute postcraniotomy pain. Multiple modalities exist for treating this variety of pain each with its own share of advantages and disadvantages. However, individually none of these modalities has been proclaimed as the best and applicable universally. A considerable amount of dispute remains to ascertain the appropriate therapeutic regimen for treating postcraniotomy pain in spite of numerous trials using different drugs and their combinations. This review aims to highlight the genesis, characteristics, and different strategies that are undertaken for management of acute postcraniotomy pain. Chronic postcraniotomy pain which can be debilitating sequelae is also discussed concisely.

Analgesic use in nonhuman primates undergoing neurosurgical procedures

Animals experiencing major invasive surgery during biomedical research must receive appropriate and sufficient analgesia. The concept of pain management in veterinary medicine has evolved over the past several decades, and a multimodal, preemptive approach to postoperative analgesia is the current standard of care. Here, the pathophysiology of pain and a multimodal approach to analgesia for neurosurgical procedures is discussed, with emphasis on those involving nonhuman primates.

Perioperative pain management in the neurosurgical patient

Perioperative pain management in neurosurgical patients has been inadequately recognized and treated. An increased awareness of pain management and advances in understanding of pain modulation and pathophysiology have led to improved perioperative care of patients. There is a need to assess neurologic function while providing superior analgesia with minimal side effects. Several classes of drugs are currently available or under investigation for use as adjuvants or alternative therapies. There remains a need to determine the best treatment of perioperative pain in this patient population. Improved awareness, assessment, and treatment of pain result in better care and overall patient outcome.