Comparison of Epidural Analgesia with Transversus Abdominis Plane Analgesia for Postoperative Pain Relief in Patients Undergoing Lower Abdominal Surgery: A Prospective Randomized Study

Local anesthetic dosing and toxicity of adult truncal catheters: a narrative review of published practice

BACKGROUND/IMPORTANCE

Anesthesiologists frequently use truncal catheters for postoperative pain control but with limited characterization of dosing and toxicity.

OBJECTIVE

We reviewed the published literature to characterize local anesthetic dosing and toxicity of paravertebral and transversus abdominis plane catheters in adults.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

We searched the literature for bupivacaine or ropivacaine infusions in the paravertebral or transversus abdominis space in humans dosed for 24 hours. We evaluated bolus dosing, infusion dosing and cumulative 24-hour dosing in adults. We also identified cases of local anesthetic systemic toxicity and toxic blood levels.

FINDINGS

Following screening, we extracted data from 121 and 108 papers for ropivacaine and bupivacaine respectively with a total of 6802 patients. For ropivacaine and bupivacaine, respectively, bolus dose was 1.4 mg/kg (95% CI 0.4 to 3.0, n=2978) and 1.0 mg/kg (95% CI 0.18 to 2.1, n=2724); infusion dose was 0.26 mg/kg/hour (95% CI 0.06 to 0.63, n=3579) and 0.2 mg/kg/hour (95% CI 0.06 to 0.5, n=3199); 24-hour dose was 7.75 mg/kg (95% CI 2.1 to 15.7, n=3579) and 6.0 mg/kg (95% CI 2.1 to 13.6, n=3223). Twenty-four hour doses exceeded the package insert recommended upper limit in 28% (range: 17%-40% based on maximum and minimum patient weights) of ropivacaine infusions and 51% (range: 45%-71%) of bupivacaine infusions. Toxicity occurred in 30 patients and was associated with high 24-hour dose, bilateral catheters, cardiac surgery, cytochrome P-450 inhibitors and hypoalbuminemia.

CONCLUSION

Practitioners frequently administer ropivacaine and bupivacaine above the package insert limits, at doses associated with toxicity. Patient safety would benefit from more specific recommendations to limit excessive dose and risk of toxicity.

Ultrasound-Guided Transversus Abdominis Plane Block Versus Single-Shot Epidural Block for Postoperative Analgesia in Patients Undergoing Inguinal Hernia Surgery

Background Transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block and epidural analgesia are two frequently used regional anaesthesia techniques that attenuate postoperative pain after inguinal hernia repair.  Aim To compare the analgesic efficacy between the single-shot epidural block and TAP block for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing inguinal hernia repair surgery.  Methods Forty patients of either gender undergoing elective inguinal hernia surgery of American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class Ⅰ and Ⅱ were randomly allocated into two groups. Group E received a single-shot epidural with 20 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine. Group T received a TAP block with 20 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine under ultrasound guidance. Postoperative pain was evaluated by the visual analog scale (VAS). Rescue analgesia was given on VAS score ≥ 4 or on-demand in the postoperative period. The primary outcome included VAS score at 15 min, 1st h, 2nd h, 6th h, 12th h, and 24th h after the block. The secondary outcome was the analgesia duration, the total rescue analgesia dose required, and the patient satisfaction level. Results The VAS pain scores were significantly lower in the epidural group compared to the TAP group at the 2nd, 6th, 12th, and 24th h postoperatively (p<0.0001). The mean duration of analgesia was significantly more in Group E (576.75±96.64 min) compared to Group T (276.75±105.56 min). The total analgesic consumption was seen significantly more in 24 h in Group T than in Group E. Patient satisfaction score was significantly higher with a mean value of 5.55±0.6 in group E compared to 4.75±0.72 in group T. Conclusion A single-shot epidural provides better postoperative pain control than a TAP block. The duration of the first analgesic demand was prolonged, with less analgesic consumption in the epidural group.

Transverse abdominis plane block compared with patient-controlled epidural analgesia following abdominal surgery: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

Thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) and transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block are used for pain control after abdominal surgery. Although there have been several meta-analyses comparing these two techniques, the conclusion was limited by a small number of studies and heterogeneity among studies. Our meta-analysis used the Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane central library databases from their inception through September 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing TEA and TAP block were included. The pre-specified primary outcome was the pain score at rest at 12 h postoperatively. Twenty-two RCTs involving 1975 patients were included. Pooled analyses showed the pain score at rest at 12 h postoperatively was significantly different between groups favoring TEA group (Mean difference [MD] 0.58, 95% confidence interval CI - 0.01, 1.15, P = 0.04, I² = 94%). TEA group significantly reduced the pain score at 48 h at rest (MD 0.59, 95% CI 0.15, 1.03, P = 0.009, I² = 86%) and at 48 h at movement (MD 0.53, 95% CI 0.07, 0.99, P = 0.03, I² = 76%). However, there was no significant difference at other time points. Time to ambulation was shorter in TAP block but the incidence of hypotension at 24 h and 72 h was significantly lower in TAP block compared to TEA. Trial sequential analysis showed that the required information size has not yet been reached. Our meta-analysis demonstrated there was no significant or clinically meaningful difference in the postoperative pain scores between TEA and TAP block group. Given the insufficient information size revealed by TSA, the high risk of bias of our included studies, and the significant heterogeneity of our meta-analysis results, our results should be interpreted carefully but it is not likely that the addition of further studies could prove any clinically meaningful difference in pain score between these two techniques.

Association of Patient Controlled Analgesia and Total Inpatient Opioid Use After Pancreatectomy

INTRODUCTION

The initial settings on an intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) pump can represent a significant source of postoperative opioid exposure. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of first day IV-PCA use on total inpatient opioid use after open pancreatectomy, before and after standardization of initial dosing.

METHODS

Inpatient oral morphine equivalents (OMEs) were reviewed for pancreatectomy patients treated with IV-PCA at a single institution before and after (3/2016-8/2017 versus 3/2019-11/2020) implementation of a standardized initial IV-PCA dosing regimen (initial limit 0.1 mg hydromorphone, or 1 mg OME, every 10 min as needed). IV-PCA OME in the first 24 h and the total inpatient OME were compared between cohorts.

RESULTS

Of 220 total patients, 132 were in the prestandardization (PRE) historical cohort. A first-24-h IV-PCA use was different (PRE median 95 mg versus poststandardization [POST] 15 mg, P < 0.001). The median total inpatient OME was different (P < 0.001) between PRE (525 mg, interquartile range [IQR] 239-951 mg) and POST patients (129 mg, IQR 65-204 mg) with 77% (median 373 mg) of total inpatient OMEs contributed by IV-PCA in the PRE and 56% (median 64 mg) in the POST cohorts. There were similar patient-reported pain scores between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Standardizing initial IV-PCA settings was associated with a reduced first-24-h opioid exposure, proportional and absolute total IV-PCA use, and total inpatient OMEs. Because of the contribution of an IV-PCA to the total inpatient opioid exposure, purposeful reduction or omission of an IV-PCA is critical to perioperative opioid reduction strategies.

Perioperative parameters to consider for enhanced recovery in surgery (ERS) in gynecology (excluding breast surgery)

The current review explores the Enhanced Rehabilitation in Surgery (ERS) approach in the specific context of gynecological surgery. Implementation of an ERS protocol in gynecological surgery reduces postoperative complications and length of stay without increasing morbidity. An ERS approach is based on maintaining an adequate diet and hydration before the operation, according to the recommended time frame, to reduce the phenomenon of insulin resistance, and to optimize patient comfort. On the other hand, the use of anxiolytic treatment as premedication is not recommended. Systematic preoperative digestive preparation, a source of patient discomfort, is not associated with an improvement in the postoperative functional outcome or with a reduction in the rate of complications. A minimally invasive surgical approach is preferrable in the context of ERS. Prevention of surgical site infection includes measures such as optimized antibiotic prophylaxis, skin disinfection with alcoholic chlorhexidine, reduction in the use of drainage of the surgical site, and prevention of hypothermia. Early removal of the bladder catheter is associated with a reduction in the risk of urinary tract infection and a reduction in the length of hospital stay. Prevention of postoperative ileus is based on early refeeding, and prevention of postoperative nausea-vomiting in a multimodal strategy to be initiated during the intraoperative period. Intraoperative hydration should be aimed at achieving euvolemia. Pain control is based on a multimodal strategy to spare morphine use and may include locoregional analgesia. Medicines should be administered orally during the postoperative period to hasten the resumption of the patient's autonomy. The prevention of thromboembolic risk is based on a strategy combining drug prophylaxis, when indicated, and mechanical restraint, as well as early mobilization. However, the eclectic nature of the implementation of these measures as reported in the literature renders their interpretation difficult. Furthermore, beyond the application of one of these measures in isolation, the best benefit on the postoperative outcome is achieved by a combination of measures which then constitutes a global strategy allowing the objectives of the ERS to be met.

Epidural vs. transversus abdominis plane block for abdominal surgery - a systematic review, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

Traditionally, pain relief for abdominal surgery has centred on epidural analgesia, but transversus abdominis plane block is increasingly being used. Our aim was to compare the analgesic efficacy and the side-effect profile of transversus abdominis plane block with epidural analgesia in a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. After a systematic search of the electronic databases, we identified 18 randomised controlled trials with 1220 patients. Confirmed by trial sequential analysis, our first co-primary outcome, postoperative pain score at rest at 12 h, was decreased by a mean difference (95%CI) of 0.69 (0.12-1.27; p = 0.02) with epidural analgesia compared with transversus abdominis plane block, with the quality of evidence graded as low. No difference was found for the second co-primary outcome, postoperative pain score at rest at 24 h, with the quality of evidence rated as very low. Relative to transversus abdominis plane block, epidural analgesia further reduced the need for intravenous morphine-equivalent consumption during the 0-24 h interval by a mean difference (95%CI) of 5.91 mg (2.34-9.49; p = 0.001) at the expense of an increased incidence of hypotension at 72 h, with a risk ratio (95%CI) of 5.88 (2.08-16.67; p < 0.001). Our meta-analysis was limited by detection and performance bias, significant statistical heterogeneity and publication bias. In view of the minimal clinically important difference in postoperative pain scores, epidural analgesia was interpreted to not be clinically different to transversus abdominis plane block after abdominal surgery. With transversus abdominis plane block, the increase in intravenous morphine-equivalent consumption at 24 h should be balanced against the decreased risk of hypotension at 72 h. In choosing between epidural analgesia and transversus abdominis plane block, potential benefits should be balanced against the reported risk of harm, although the confidence in the evidence varied, underlining the uncertainty in our estimates.

The analgesic efficacy compared ultrasound-guided continuous transverse abdominis plane block with epidural analgesia following abdominal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

This review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the analgesic efficacy of continuous transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block compared with epidural analgesia (EA) in adults after abdominal surgery.

METHODS

The databases PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Central Register were searched from inception to June 2019 for all available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the analgesic efficacy of continuous TAP block compared with EA after abdominal surgery. The weighted mean differences (WMDs) were estimates for continuous variables with a 95% confidence interval (CI) and risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data. The pre-specified primary outcome was the dynamic pain scores 24 h postoperatively.

RESULTS

Eight trials including 453 patients (TAP block:224 patients; EA: 229 patients) ultimately met the inclusion criteria and seven trials were included in the meta-analysis. Dynamic pain scores after 24 h were equivalent between TAP block and EA groups (WMD:0.44; 95% CI: 0.1 to 0.99; I² = 91%; p = 0.11). The analysis showed a significant difference between the subgroups according to regularly administering (4 trials; WMD:-0.11; 95% CI: - 0.32 to 0.09; I² = 0%; p = 0.28) non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or not (3 trials; WMD:1.02; 95% CI: 0.09 to 1.96; I² = 94%; p = 0.03) for adjuvant analgesics postoperatively. The measured time of the urinary catheter removal in the TAP group was significantly shorter (3 trials, WMD:-18.95, 95% CI:-25.22 to - 12.71; I² = 0%; p < 0.01), as was time to first ambulation postoperatively (4 trials, WMD:-6.61, 95% CI: - 13.03 to - 0.19; I² = 67%; p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Continuous TAP block, combined with NSAIDs, can provide non-inferior dynamic analgesia efficacy compared with EA in postoperative pain management after abdominal surgery. In addition, continuous TAP block is associated with fewer postoperative side effects.

The Analgesic Efficacy of Transverse Abdominis Plane Block versus Epidural Block after Caesarean Delivery: Which One Is Effective? TAP Block? Epidural Block?

Introduction and Objective

TAP block has gained popularity to provide postoperative analgesia after abdominal surgery but its advantage over epidural analgesia is disputed. For lower abdominal surgeries, epidural analgesia has been the gold standard and time-tested technique for providing postoperative analgesia, but contraindications for the same would warrant need for other equally good analgesic techniques. The objective of this study is to compare the analgesic efficacy of both the techniques.

Materials and Methods

Eighty patients in the ASA I-II risk group, undergone an elective C-section, were randomly assigned to the study. In the TAP group, before the C-section, a single-dose spinal anaesthesia was performed by administering 3 ml of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine to the patients when they were in the sitting position. After the C-section, an ultrasound-guided bilateral TAP block was performed in these patients in the recovery room for postoperative analgesia. In the single-dose EPI group, the patients received 16 cc of isobaric bupivacaine, 3 mg of morphine, and 50 mcg of fentanyl, making a total volume of 20 cc and being administered to the epidural space.

Results

A higher level of patient satisfaction was observed in the EPI group (p=0.003). The amount (mg) of total analgesics received by the patients in the first 24 hours of the postoperative period was statistically significantly higher (p=0.021) in the TAP group compared to the EPI group. The visual analogue scale (VAS) scores of the EPI group were significantly lower compared to that of the TAP group (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

The epidural anaesthesia is still the golden standard to achieve a postcaesarean analgesia. Epidural anaesthesia is a considerably effective method in controlling the postoperative pain. We are of the opinion that epidural anaesthesia should be preferred in the first place to achieve a successful postcaesarean analgesia as it provides more effective pain control.

New Advances in Acute Postoperative Pain Management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Postoperative pain remains one of the most common challenges following inpatient and outpatient surgeries. With our advances in modern medicine, pain following surgical procedures still remains a challenge, though significant accomplishments have been made over the past few decades. This article highlights some of the promising new advances and approaches in postoperative pain management.

RECENT FINDINGS

Over the last decade, Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) pathways and protocols are becoming the benchmark standards for enhancing postoperative recovery. Multimodal analgesia (MMA) is an essential component of such care. Further, in the wake of serious and persistent concern on the opioid epidemic in the USA, there has been a recent renewal of interest in non-opioid alternatives or adjuncts in controlling postoperative pain, often in the context of MMA. Intravenous (IV) acetaminophen, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), magnesium, ketamine, dexmedetomidine, liposomal bupivacaine, and newer neuraxial and peripheral regional techniques as well as patient-controlled modalities are gaining importance. Gabapentinoids have become popular but recent meta-analytic reviews have cast doubt on their routine use in perioperative settings. Among opioids, sublingual sufentanil, IV oxycodone, and iontophoretic transdermal fentanyl hold promise. Acupuncture and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation may be useful as adjuncts in MMA packages. Genetic testing, derivatives of herbal preparations, and an extended role of acute pain services may emerge as potential areas of importance in the future. There are, however, critical gaps in good quality evidence in many of the practice guideline recommendations. In the era of opioid epidemic, several lines of evidence have emerged to support non-opioid-based drugs and approaches along with a few newer opioid formulations for postoperative pain management, although more research is needed to find the right balance of efficacy and safety.