Serial Peak Expiratory Flow Rates in Patients Undergoing Upper Abdominal Surgeries Under General Anaesthesia and Thoracic Epidural Analgesia

Should the Erector Spinae Plane Block Be Applied in the Pain Management of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy?

Introduction

This prospective, randomized controlled study aimed to investigate the efficacy and respiratory effects of postoperative pain management with an erector spinae plane block in patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

Methods

Sixty American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I-II patients aged 18-65 years, scheduled to undergo percutaneous nephrolithotomy, were randomized either to the erector spinae plane block (ESPB) or control group. Fifteen mL 0.5% bupivacaine at the T11 level was administered preoperatively using the in-plane technique in the ESPB group. In both groups, 1 gr of intravenous paracetamol was administered intraoperatively. Postoperative pain and agitation were evaluated using the visual analog scale (VAS), dynamic VAS at zero, six, and 24 hours, and the Riker sedation-agitation scale at the 0th hour after surgery. Peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) and oxygen saturation (SpO₂) were measured in preoperative examination and at the 0th, 6th, and 24th hours postoperatively. The time and number of the analgesic requirement, mobilization, and discharge time were also recorded.

Results

A significantly lower VAS and dynamic VAS were observed at the 0th, 6th, and 24th hours in the ESPB group (p<0.05 for each timepoint). The postoperative/preoperative PEFR ratio was lower and there were more agitated patients in the control group (p<0.05).

Conclusion

An erector spinae plane block may have additional clinical advantages while providing effective analgesia in patients who underwent percutaneous nephrolithotomy compared to intravenous analgesia.

Pain Management in Abdominal Wall Reconstruction

Background:

In abdominal wall reconstruction, adequate pain control and minimization of narcotic consumption are essential to improving patient outcomes and satisfaction. Previous studies have examined the role of individual strategies, such as neuraxial analgesia and multimodal analgesia. However, there has not been a study that examined all potential determinants of postoperative narcotic requirements, including intraoperative strategies.

Methods:

Consecutive patients who underwent abdominal wall reconstruction were reviewed. Preoperative factors (chronic preoperative narcotic usage, indication for abdominal wall reconstruction, administration of neuraxial analgesia), intraoperative factors (intraoperative narcotics administered, method of mesh fixation), and postoperative factors (multimodal analgesia, complications) were collected. The main outcomes were daily amount of opioids used and length of hospital stay.

Results:

Ninety-three patients were included in the study. Patients who had an epidural required lower doses of opioids postoperatively, while those on chronic preoperative opioids, those whose mesh was fixated using transfascial sutures, and those who received large doses of opioids intraoperatively required higher doses of postoperative opioids. Hospital length of stay was longer in patients who received transfascially sutured mesh and those on chronic opioids preoperatively.

Conclusions:

This study provides potential strategies to improve pain control and minimize narcotic consumption postoperatively in patients undergoing abdominal wall reconstruction. Intraoperative administration of opioids should be minimized to avoid the development of tolerance. Epidural analgesia reduces postoperative narcotic requirement and may be especially beneficial in patients at highest risk for postoperative pain, including those on chronic opioids, and those in whom transfascial sutures are used for mesh fixation.

Epidural pain relief versus systemic opioid-based pain relief for abdominal aortic surgery

BACKGROUND

Epidural analgesia offers greater pain relief compared to systemic opioid-based medications, but its effect on morbidity and mortality is unclear. This review was originally published in 2006 and was updated in 2012 and again in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of postoperative epidural analgesia in comparison with postoperative systemic opioid-based analgesia for adults undergoing elective abdominal aortic surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

In the updated review, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and five trial registers in November 2014, together with reference checking to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized controlled trials comparing postoperative epidural analgesia and postoperative systemic opioid-based analgesia for adults who underwent elective open abdominal aortic surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information and data when required. We assessed the level of evidence according to the scale provided by the GRADE working group.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 trials published from 1987 to 2009 with 1498 participants in this updated review. Participants had a mean age between 60.5 and 71.3 years. The percentage of women in the included studies varied from 0% to 28.1%. Adding an epidural to general anaesthesia for people undergoing abdominal aortic repair reduced myocardial infarction (risk ratio (RR) 0.54 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.30 to 0.97); I(2) statistic = 0%; number needed to treat for one additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 28 (95% CI 19 to 1423), visual or verbal analogical scale (VAS) scores up to three days after the surgery (mean difference (MD) -1.78 (95% CI -2.32 to -1.25); I(2) statistic = 0% for VAS scores on movement at postoperative day one), time to tracheal extubation (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.42 (95% CI -0.70 to -0.15); I(2) statistic = 83%; equivalent to a mean reduction of 36 hours), postoperative respiratory failure (RR 0.69 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.85); I(2) statistic = 0%; NNTB 8 (95% CI 6 to 16)), gastrointestinal bleeding (OR 0.20 (95% CI 0.06 to 0.65); I(2) statistic = 0%; NNTB 32 (95% CI 27 to 74)) and time spent in the intensive care unit (SMD -0.23 (95% CI -0.41 to -0.06); I(2) statistic = 0%; equivalent to a mean reduction of six hours). We did not demonstrate a reduction in the mortality rate up to 30 days (RR 1.06 (95% CI 0.60 to 1.86); I(2) statistic = 0%). The level of evidence was low for mortality and time before tracheal extubation; moderate for myocardial infarction, respiratory failure and intensive care unit length of stay; and high for gastrointestinal bleeding and VAS scores.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Epidural analgesia provided better pain management, reduced myocardial infarction, time to tracheal extubation, postoperative respiratory failure, gastrointestinal bleeding, and intensive care unit length of stay compared with systemic opioid-based drugs. For mortality, we did not find a difference at 30 days.