High dose glucocorticoids for treatment of postoperative pain: A systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Glucocorticoids as a component of multimodal analgesia have been studied for many years and their post-operative analgesic effects appear to be dose-dependent. We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the evidence of peri-operative high dose corticosteroid therapy in comparison to placebo (placebo drug) or control group (no treatment) for improving the quality of post-operative analgesia as indicated by a reduction of 10 mm in 100 mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) or reduction of 1 point in a 0-10 point VAS scale, or a reduction of 1 point in an 11-point Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) score, or reduction of rescue opioid analgesia, in patients undergoing all types of surgery.

DESIGN

Systematic review of RCTs with meta-analysis.

SETTING

Acute postoperative pain treatment in non-obese adult population.

INTERVENTIONS

Perioperative administration of high dose of Dexamethasone (≥ 0,2 mg/Kg or ≥ 15 mg), or a corresponding dose of a systemic glucocorticoid.

MEASUREMENTS

Primary outcomes were postoperative pain measured in 0-100 mm VAS score at 24 h after surgery upon rest and movement. Secondary outcomes were postoperative pain 0-100 mm VAS score 48 h after surgery, postoperative rescue analgesic requirement, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), relevant adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

47 RCT's were included (3943 patients). The Mean Difference (MD) of 100 mm VAS scores for pain at rest 24 h after surgery was -6.18 mm 95% CI [-8.53, -3.83], at motion -8.86 mm 95% CI [-11.82, -5.89]. Opioid analgesic requirements evaluated in Oral Morphine Equivalents (OME) was -10.00 mg 95% CI [-13.65, -6.34]. PONV events Odds Ratio of 0.29 95%CI [0.24, 0.36]. Major adverse events OR was 0.88 95% CI [0.65, 1.19]. Minor adverse events OR 1.29 95% CI [0.86, 1.92].

CONCLUSION

High doses of glucocorticoids are one of the many possible tools available in multimodal postoperative analgesia, possibly reducing opioids consumption and recurrence of PONV but with no relevant effects in terms of reduction of postoperative VAS score. Available data show a safe therapeutic profile, without increase adverse events.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

CRD42020137119.

High-volume patient-controlled epidural vs. programmed intermittent epidural bolus for labour analgesia: a randomised controlled study

The aim of neuraxial analgesia is to achieve excellent pain relief with the fewest adverse effects. The most recently introduced technique for epidural analgesia maintenance is the programmed intermittent epidural bolus. In a recent study, we compared this with patient-controlled epidural analgesia without a background infusion and found that a programmed intermittent epidural bolus was associated with less breakthrough pain, lower pain scores, higher local anaesthetic consumption and comparable motor block. However, we had compared 10 ml programmed intermittent epidural boluses with 5 ml patient-controlled epidural analgesia boluses. To overcome this potential limitation, we designed a randomised, multicentre non-inferiority trial using 10 ml boluses in each group. The primary outcome was the incidence of breakthrough pain and total analgesic intake. Secondary outcomes included motor block; pain scores; patient satisfaction; and obstetric and neonatal outcomes. The trial was considered positive if two endpoints were met: non-inferiority of patient-controlled epidural analgesia with respect to breakthrough pain; and superiority of patient-controlled epidural analgesia with respect to local anaesthetic consumption. A total of 360 nulliparous women were allocated randomly to patient-controlled epidural analgesia-only or programmed intermittent epidural bolus groups. The patient-controlled group received 10 ml boluses of ropivacaine 0.12% with sufentanil 0.75 μg.ml^-1 ; the programmed intermittent group received 10 ml boluses supplemented by 5 ml patient-controlled boluses. The lockout period was 30 min in each group and the maximum allowed hourly local anaesthetic/opioid consumption was identical between the groups. Breakthrough pain was similar between groups (11.2% patient controlled vs. 10.8% programmed intermittent, p = 0.003 for non-inferiority). Total ropivacaine consumption was lower in the PCEA-group (mean difference 15.3 mg, p < 0.001). Motor block, patient satisfaction scores and maternal and neonatal outcomes were similar across both groups. In conclusion, patient-controlled epidural analgesia is non-inferior to programmed intermittent epidural bolus if equal volumes of patient-controlled epidural analgesia are used to maintain labour analgesia and superior with respect to local anaesthetic consumption.

Current status of the combined spinal-epidural technique in obstetrics and surgery

Epidural and spinal blocks are well-accepted neuraxial techniques but both have several disadvantages. Combined spinal-epidural (CSE) can combine the best features of both techniques and reduce or eliminate these disadvantages. It provides the rapidity, density, and reliability of subarachnoid block with the flexibility of catheter epidural technique to extend the duration of anesthesia/analgesia (and to improve spinal block). It is an excellent technique for determining minimum intrathecal drug doses. Although most commonly employed in obstetric practice, CSE is also used in a wide variety of non-obstetric surgical procedures including orthopedic, vascular, gynecological, urological, and general surgical procedures. The needle-through-needle technique remains the most commonly used method to perform CSE. Several technical variations including Sequential CSE and Epidural Volume Extention (EVE) are commonly used particularly in obstetric and high-risk patients such as those with cardiac disease where a slower onset of sympathetic block is desirable. The risks of complications such as epidural catheter migration through the dural hole, neurological complications, and subarachnoid spread of epidurally administered drugs are possible but have not been a clinically relevant problem in the 40+ years of their existence. In obstetrics, CSE is used for labor pain because it produces rapid-onset analgesia with reduced local anesthetic consumption and less motor block. The epidural catheter placed as part of a CSE is more reliable than a catheter placed as part of a conventional epidural. Less breakthrough pain throughout labor is noted and fewer catheters require replacing. Side effects of CSE include greater potential for hypotension and more fetal heart rate abnormalities. CSE is also used for cesarean delivery. The main purpose is to decrease the spinal dose so that spinal-induced hypotension can be reduced. However, reducing the spinal dose requires an epidural catheter to avoid intra-operative pain when surgery is prolonged.

Neuraxial labor analgesia: is there a place for neuraxial adjuvants beyond opioids

Neuraxial labor analgesia is considered the gold standard technique for analgesia. Ideally, a good neuraxial technique uses dilute local anesthetic solutions to produce effective pain relief with no or minimal motor impairment. Adjuvant drugs that are co-administered with the local anesthetic either epidurally or intrathecally are useful in achieving this goal. The current review focuses on the effectivity and side-effect profile of various commonly used or tested adjuvants.

Maternal sepsis

Maternal sepsis is a life-threatening condition defined as organ dysfunction resulting from infection that can arise during pregnancy, childbirth, postabortion, or in the postpartum period. Validated diagnostic criteria of maternal sepsis and septic shock may reduce the impact of this condition on maternal health worldwide, but the lack of consensus on adequate tools due to the overlap between physiological adaptations that occur during pregnancy and signs and symptoms of infection and sepsis can delay both diagnosis and treatment. In the absence of evidence-based guidelines for obstetric populations, the WHO recommends the use of the "Surviving Sepsis Campaign" sepsis protocols for maternal care adapted to the local obstetric population. Interventions within the first hour from diagnosis have been proposed in 2021 to emphasize the state of emergency of a maternal sepsis. This review will highlight the utility of standardized diagnostic criteria, the implemented approaches for the prevention and treatment of maternal infections, and the strategies for early management of critically ill parturients.

Postoperative pain after cesarean section: an audit of practice after implementation of the PROSPECT recommendations

Cesarean section (CS) is the most frequently performed surgical intervention worldwide. Post- cesarean pain is often underestimated and undertreated and can impair rapid maternal recovery, mother and child bonding and breastfeeding. Recently, PROSPECT recommendations on postoperative pain for CS were published and they include systematic paracetamol and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), intravenous dexamethasone, neuraxial morphine/dia- morphine or an abdominal wall block or wound infiltration, abdominal wall binders, non-closure of the peritoneum and a Joel-Cohen incision. Opioids are administered as rescue. In UZ Leuven, these PROSPECT recommendations were implemented at the end of 2020. To evaluate the efficacy of these PROSPECT recommendations, a prospective audit was performed from January 1 st , 2021 till April 30 th , 2021. All patients with a CS were prospectively followed for correct implementation of the pain protocol and for pain scores in rest and at mobilization. Rescue opioid consumption as well as patient satisfaction were recorded. 185 consecutive patients that had undergone a CS were included in the audit. In 55 patients the pain protocol was not followed mostly due to no or reduced administration of NSAIDs. Patient satisfaction was high, especially in patients in which the protocol was followed. Pain scores at rest and at mobilization were low and the percentage of patients having pain scores above 30 mm VAS remained low. Rescue opioid consumption was low. We conclude that the implementation of the PROSPECT based pain protocol after CS was effective in controlling pain, reducing opioid consumption and resulted in high patient satisfaction especially if the protocol was correctly followed. Omission of NSAIDs is occurring relatively frequent, but mostly because of valid medical reasons to omit NSAIDs.

PROSPECT guideline for elective caesarean section: updated systematic review and procedure-specific postoperative pain management recommendations

Caesarean section is associated with moderate‐to‐severe postoperative pain, which can influence postoperative recovery and patient satisfaction as well as breastfeeding success and mother‐child bonding. The aim of this systematic review was to update the available literature and develop recommendations for optimal pain management after elective caesarean section under neuraxial anaesthesia. A systematic review utilising procedure‐specific postoperative pain management (PROSPECT) methodology was undertaken. Randomised controlled trials published in the English language between 1 May 2014 and 22 October 2020 evaluating the effects of analgesic, anaesthetic and surgical interventions were retrieved from MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases. Studies evaluating pain management for emergency or unplanned operative deliveries or caesarean section performed under general anaesthesia were excluded. A total of 145 studies met the inclusion criteria. For patients undergoing elective caesarean section performed under neuraxial anaesthesia, recommendations include intrathecal morphine 50–100 µg or diamorphine 300 µg administered pre‐operatively; paracetamol; non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs; and intravenous dexamethasone administered after delivery. If intrathecal opioid was not administered, single‐injection local anaesthetic wound infiltration; continuous wound local anaesthetic infusion; and/or fascial plane blocks such as transversus abdominis plane or quadratus lumborum blocks are recommended. The postoperative regimen should include regular paracetamol and non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs with opioids used for rescue. The surgical technique should include a Joel‐Cohen incision; non‐closure of the peritoneum; and abdominal binders. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation could be used as analgesic adjunct. Some of the interventions, although effective, carry risks, and consequentially were omitted from the recommendations. Some interventions were not recommended due to insufficient, inconsistent or lack of evidence. Of note, these recommendations may not be applicable to unplanned deliveries or caesarean section performed under general anaesthesia.

Management practices for postdural puncture headache in obstetrics: a prospective, international, cohort study

BACKGROUND

Accidental dural puncture is an uncommon complication of epidural analgesia and can cause postdural puncture headache (PDPH). We aimed to describe management practices and outcomes after PDPH treated by epidural blood patch (EBP) or no EBP.

METHODS

Following ethics committee approval, patients who developed PDPH after accidental dural puncture were recruited from participating countries and divided into two groups, those receiving EBP or no EBP. Data registered included patient and procedure characteristics, headache symptoms and intensity, management practices, and complications. Follow-up was at 3 months.

RESULTS

A total of 1001 patients from 24 countries were included, of which 647 (64.6%) received an EBP and 354 (35.4%) did not receive an EBP (no-EBP). Higher initial headache intensity was associated with greater use of EBP, odds ratio 1.29 (95% confidence interval 1.19-1.41) per pain intensity unit increase. Headache intensity declined sharply at 4 h after EBP and 127 (19.3%) patients received a second EBP. On average, no or mild headache (numeric rating score≤3) was observed 7 days after diagnosis. Intracranial bleeding was diagnosed in three patients (0.46%), and backache, headache, and analgesic use were more common at 3 months in the EBP group.

CONCLUSIONS

Management practices vary between countries, but EBP was more often used in patients with greater initial headache intensity. EBP reduced headache intensity quickly, but about 20% of patients needed a second EBP. After 7 days, most patients had no or mild headache. Backache, headache, and analgesic use were more common at 3 months in patients receiving an EBP.

Programmed intermittent epidural bolus vs. patient-controlled epidural analgesia for maintenance of labour analgesia: a two-centre, double-blind, randomised study†

The programmed intermittent epidural bolus technique has shown superiority to continuous epidural infusion techniques, with or without patient-controlled epidural analgesia for pain relief, reduced motor block and patient satisfaction. Many institutions still use patient-controlled epidural analgesia without a background infusion, and a comparative study between programmed intermittent epidural bolus and patient-controlled epidural analgesia without a background infusion has not yet been performed. We performed a randomised, two-centre, double-blind, controlled trial of these two techniques. The primary outcome was the incidence of breakthrough pain requiring a top-up dose by an anaesthetist. Secondary outcomes included: motor block; pain scores; patient satisfaction; local anaesthetic consumption; and obstetric and neonatal outcomes. We recruited 130 nulliparous women who received initial spinal analgesia, and then epidural analgesia was initiated and maintained with either programmed intermittent epidural bolus or patient-controlled epidural analgesia using ropivacaine 0.12% with sufentanil 0.75 µg·ml^-1 . The programmed intermittent epidural bolus group had a programmed bolus of 10 ml every hour, with on-demand patient-controlled epidural analgesia boluses of 5 ml with a 20 min lockout, and the patient-controlled epidural analgesia group had a 5 ml bolus with a 12 min lockout interval; the potential maximum volume per hour was the same in both groups. The patients in the programmed intermittent epidural bolus group had less frequent breakthrough pain compared with the patient-controlled epidural analgesia group, 7 (10.9%) vs. 38 (62.3%; p < 0.0001), respectively. There was a significant difference in motor block (modified Bromage score ≤ 4) frequency between groups, programmed intermittent epidural bolus group 1 (1.6%) vs. patient-controlled epidural analgesia group 8 (13.1%); p = 0.015. The programmed intermittent epidural bolus group had greater local anaesthetic consumption with fewer patient-controlled epidural analgesia boluses. Patient satisfaction scores and obstetric or neonatal outcomes were not different between groups. In conclusion, we found that a programmed intermittent epidural bolus technique using 10 ml programmed boluses and 5 ml patient-controlled epidural analgesia boluses was superior to a patient-controlled epidural analgesia technique using 5 ml boluses and no background infusion.

A double-blind randomized controlled trial comparing dexamethasone and clonidine as adjuvants to a ropivacaine sciatic popliteal block for foot surgery

Background and aims

A popliteal block is effective in managing postoperative pain for foot surgery, but since the duration of analgesia is limited following a single-shot popliteal fossa block technique, methods to prolong effective postoperative analgesia are mandatory. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of adjuvants to ropivacaine on the duration of sensory and motor block.

Methods

In this double-blind randomized placebo-controlled study, we evaluated the analgesic effect of clonidine or dexamethasone (DXM) when added to ropivacaine for hallux valgus surgery. After obtaining institutional ethics research board approval and written informed consent, a total of 72 patients were randomly allocated. Fifty-seven of these patients were statistically analyzed. All patients received an ultrasound-guided single-shot popliteal fossa block with 30 mL of ropivacaine 0.75%, supplemented with saline, clonidine 100 µg, or DXM 5 mg. The primary end point was time to first pain sensation. Secondary end points were time to complete sensory and motor block regression.

Results

Compared to saline, duration to first pain sensation was prolonged by 9 hours (mean ± standard deviation: 31±9 hours) (42%) in the DXM group (P=0.024) and by 6 hours (28±10 hours) (27%) in the clonidine group (P=0.024). Compared to saline, DXM prolonged both complete sensory and motor blockade by 12 hours (25±7 hours) (46%) and 13 hours (36±6 hours) (55%), respectively, while clonidine prolonged complete sensory and motor blockade by 7 hours (30±7 hours) (27%) and 2 hours (22±5 hours) (10%), respectively. DXM prolonged sensory block regression time by 6 hours (21±7 hours) (41%) and clonidine by 2 hours (17±6 hours) (13%) compared to the control group (P=0.006). Similarly, DXM prolonged motor block regression by 7 hours (25±7 hours) (46%) and clonidine by 4 hours (21±4 hours) (19%) (P<0.0001).

Conclusion

Addition of DXM and clonidine to ropivacaine significantly prolonged the duration of postoperative sensory and motor block.

Lower incidence of post-dural puncture headache with spinal catheterization after accidental dural puncture in obstetric patients

BACKGROUND

Accidental dural puncture (ADP) and post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) are important complications of obstetric regional anesthesia. Inserting the catheter intrathecally after ADP to prevent PDPH has gained popularity. Nonetheless, data on the effect of an intrathecal catheter on PDPH and epidural blood patch (EBP) rates are mixed. Our primary objective was to examine if spinal catheterization reduces the incidence of PDPH after ADP in obstetric patients.

METHODS

Anesthetic records of 29,749 regional blocks performed between January 1997 and July 2013 were analyzed retrospectively. In all blocks containing an epidural component, 18-gauge epidural needles were used. All patients who experienced a witnessed ADP or PDPH without ADP were identified. Data from patients with or without a prolonged spinal catheter were compared.

RESULTS

There were 128 events of witnessed ADP (0.43%). Following known ADP, 39 women had an epidural catheter placed at a different level and 89 had an intrathecal catheter (20-gauge) for at least 24 h. Sixty-one patients developed PDPH after observed ADP (48%). Prolonged intrathecal catheter placement significantly reduced the incidence of PDPH after ADP to 42% compared with 62% in those who have the catheter re-sited epidurally [odds ratio = 2.3 (95% confidence interval 1.04-4.86); P = 0.04].

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of ADP, PDPH and blood patching is similar with previously published studies. After witnessed ADP, inserting the epidural catheter intrathecally significantly reduced the incidence of PDPH.

Belgian recommendations on perioperative maintenance fluid management of surgical pediatric population

The European recommendations on perioperative maintenance fluids in children have recently been adapted from hypotonic to isotonic electrolyte solutions with lower glucose concentrations. In Belgium, however, the commercially approved solutions do not match with these recommendations and there is neither consensus nor mandate about the composition and volume of perioperative maintenance fluids in children undergoing surgery despite the continuing controversy in literature. This paper highlights the significant challenges and shortcomings while prescribing fluid therapy for pediatric surgical patients in Belgium. It is sensible to the authors to address these issues with national guidance through an organization such as The Belgian Association for Paediatric Anaesthesiology, and to propose Belgian recommendations on perioperative fluid management in surgical children, with the intention of improving the quality of care in this population.