-
Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology... 2023Anesthesiologists and hospitals are increasingly confronted with costs associated with the complications of Peripheral Nerve Blocks (PNB) procedures. The objective of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
Anesthesiologists and hospitals are increasingly confronted with costs associated with the complications of Peripheral Nerve Blocks (PNB) procedures. The objective of our study was to identify the incidence of the main adverse events associated with regional anesthesia, particularly during anesthetic PNB, and to evaluate the associated healthcare and social costs.
METHODS
According to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we conducted a systematic search on EMBASE and PubMed with the following search strategy: ("regional anesthesia" OR "nerve block") AND ("complications" OR "nerve lesion" OR "nerve damage" OR "nerve injury"). Studies on patients undergoing a regional anesthesia procedure other than spinal or epidural were included. Targeted data of the selected studies were extracted and further analyzed.
RESULTS
Literature search revealed 487 articles, 21 of which met the criteria to be included in our analysis. Ten of them were included in the qualitative and 11 articles in the quantitative synthesis. The analysis of costs included data from four studies and 2,034 claims over 51,242 cases. The median claim consisted in 39,524 dollars in the United States and 22,750 pounds in the United Kingdom. The analysis of incidence included data from seven studies involving 424,169 patients with an overall estimated incidence of 137/10,000.
CONCLUSIONS
Despite limitations, we proposed a simple model of cost calculation. We found that, despite the relatively low incidence of adverse events following PNB, their associated costs were relevant and should be carefully considered by healthcare managers and decision makers.
Topics: Humans; United States; Financial Stress; Anesthesia, Conduction; Nerve Block
PubMed: 33823209
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjane.2021.02.043 -
Morphologie : Bulletin de L'Association... Mar 2023The cross-section area is a crucial parameter to assess peripheral neuropathy. The ultrasonographic evaluation of cross-section area of median nerve is a low-cost and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
UNLABELLED
The cross-section area is a crucial parameter to assess peripheral neuropathy. The ultrasonographic evaluation of cross-section area of median nerve is a low-cost and readily available tool for diagnosis and assessment. However, the intra-nerve dimensional variability and its normative reference value in a healthy subject are missing. The current meta-analysis aims to capture the median nerve cross-section area for healthy subjects and generate a comprehensive ultrasonographic reference data set for each population.
METHODS
The full text of manuscripts were collected after short-listing the abstracts collected from search strategy. A quality assurance tool was used to capture the risk of bias of each study after reviewing the included manuscripts. The pooled estimate of cross-section area was stratified according to anatomical landmarks, sex, and ancestry.
RESULTS
A total of 97 observational studies dealt with 6679 wrists of healthy subjects were included. The pooled estimate of the cross-section area of median nerve at carpal tunnel inlet was 8.54mm [95% CI: 8.34-8.74mm]. The same pooled estimate at carpal tunnel outlet was 8.03mm [95% CI: 7.46-8.60mm]. Both these pooled estimates have significant correlation with mean age of population. Age and sex were two primary predictors of the cross-section of median nerve. The flattening ratio, circularity, and wrist-forearm ratio of median nerve were also computed.
CONCLUSION
These normative data could serve as a reference for assessing median nerve pathologies, including carpal tunnel syndrome. The ethnic variation of pooled estimate and heterogeneity will guide clinician set up the reference value for diagnostic criteria.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Median Nerve; Carpal Tunnel Syndrome; Wrist; Cross-Sectional Studies; Ultrasonography
PubMed: 35697557
DOI: 10.1016/j.morpho.2022.05.005 -
Journal of Craniovertebral Junction &... 2020Extradural spinal nerve root hemangioblastoma is a rare entity with very few cases reported in the literature. A comprehensive picture of the treatments and outcomes of... (Review)
Review
Extradural spinal nerve root hemangioblastoma is a rare entity with very few cases reported in the literature. A comprehensive picture of the treatments and outcomes of the same is thus not available. A systematic search was done according to PRISMA guidelines. Search criteria included terms: spinal extradural hemangioblastoma, extradural hemangioblastoma, and spinal root hemangioblastoma. The parameters considered were treatment, motor, and sensory outcome, association with von-Hippel-Lindau (VHL) syndrome. Twenty-two studies (19 full text articles) were available for the review. A total of 39 cases of extradural spinal nerve root hemangioblastoma have been reported. These cases had a median age of 44 years with male predominance (2:1) and up to 48% occur in the thoracic level, similar to our case. Thirty-six percent of patients were associated with VHL syndrome. Surgical resection was the primary modality of treatment with embolization used in selected cases (20%). They had mean follow-up of 23 (±11) months. The prognosis was better than the intradural counterpart with no motor deficit and sensory deficit in only 9%. Preoperative identification of the extradural nature of this pathology and complete excision at the first surgery offers excellent outcomes compared to intradural lesion. Targeted embolization may be used in cases anticipated with high blood loss.
PubMed: 33824554
DOI: 10.4103/jcvjs.JCVJS_112_20 -
Neurosurgical Review Apr 2022Restoring shoulder abduction is one of the main priorities in the surgical treatment of brachial plexus injuries. Double nerve transfer to the axillary nerve and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Possible donor nerves for axillary nerve reconstruction in dual neurotization for restoring shoulder abduction in brachial plexus injuries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Restoring shoulder abduction is one of the main priorities in the surgical treatment of brachial plexus injuries. Double nerve transfer to the axillary nerve and suprascapular nerve is widely used and considered the best option. The most common donor nerve for the suprascapular nerve is the spinal accessory nerve. However, donor nerves for axillary nerve reconstructions vary and it is still unclear which donor nerve has the best outcome. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review on reconstructions of suprascapular and axillary nerves and to perform a meta-analysis investigating the outcomes of different donor nerves on axillary nerve reconstructions. We conducted a systematic search of English literature from March 2001 to December 2020 following PRISMA guidelines. Two outcomes were assessed, abduction strength using the Medical Research Council (MRC) scale and range of motion (ROM). Twenty-two studies describing the use of donor nerves met the inclusion criteria for the systematic review. Donor nerves investigated included the radial nerve, intercostal nerves, medial pectoral nerve, ulnar nerve fascicle, median nerve fascicle and the lower subscapular nerve. Fifteen studies that investigated the radial and intercostal nerves met the inclusion criteria for a meta-analysis. We found no statistically significant difference between either of these nerves in the abduction strength according to MRC score (radial nerve 3.66 ± 1.02 vs intercostal nerves 3.48 ± 0.64, p = 0.086). However, the difference in ROM was statistically significant (radial nerve 106.33 ± 39.01 vs. intercostal nerve 80.42 ± 24.9, p < 0.001). Our findings support using a branch of the radial nerve for the triceps muscle as a donor for axillary nerve reconstruction when possible. Intercostal nerves can be used in cases of total brachial plexus injury or involvement of the C7 root or posterior fascicle. Other promising methods need to be studied more thoroughly in order to validate and compare their results with the more commonly used methods.
Topics: Accessory Nerve; Brachial Plexus; Brachial Plexus Neuropathies; Humans; Nerve Transfer; Shoulder; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34978005
DOI: 10.1007/s10143-021-01713-z -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2015This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 12, 2012. That review considered both fibromyalgia and neuropathic pain, but the effects of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 12, 2012. That review considered both fibromyalgia and neuropathic pain, but the effects of amitriptyline for fibromyalgia are now dealt with in a separate review.Amitriptyline is a tricyclic antidepressant that is widely used to treat chronic neuropathic pain (pain due to nerve damage). It is recommended as a first line treatment in many guidelines. Neuropathic pain can be treated with antidepressant drugs in doses below those at which the drugs act as antidepressants.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the analgesic efficacy of amitriptyline for relief of chronic neuropathic pain, and the adverse events associated with its use in clinical trials.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE to March 2015, together with two clinical trial registries, and the reference lists of retrieved papers, previous systematic reviews, and other reviews; we also used our own hand searched database for older studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised, double-blind studies of at least four weeks' duration comparing amitriptyline with placebo or another active treatment in chronic neuropathic pain conditions.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We performed analysis using three tiers of evidence. First tier evidence derived from data meeting current best standards and subject to minimal risk of bias (outcome equivalent to substantial pain intensity reduction, intention-to-treat analysis without imputation for dropouts; at least 200 participants in the comparison, 8 to 12 weeks' duration, parallel design), second tier from data that failed to meet one or more of these criteria and were considered at some risk of bias but with adequate numbers in the comparison, and third tier from data involving small numbers of participants that were considered very likely to be biased or used outcomes of limited clinical utility, or both.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 15 studies from the earlier review and two new studies (17 studies, 1342 participants) in seven neuropathic pain conditions. Eight cross-over studies with 302 participants had a median of 36 participants, and nine parallel group studies with 1040 participants had a median of 84 participants. Study quality was modest, though most studies were at high risk of bias due to small size.There was no first-tier or second-tier evidence for amitriptyline in treating any neuropathic pain condition. Only third-tier evidence was available. For only two of seven studies reporting useful efficacy data was amitriptyline significantly better than placebo (very low quality evidence).More participants experienced at least one adverse event; 55% of participants taking amitriptyline and 36% taking placebo. The risk ratio (RR) was 1.5 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3 to 1.8) and the number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome was 5.2 (3.6 to 9.1) (low quality evidence). Serious adverse events were rare. Adverse event and all-cause withdrawals were not different, but were rarely reported (very low quality evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Amitriptyline has been a first-line treatment for neuropathic pain for many years. The fact that there is no supportive unbiased evidence for a beneficial effect is disappointing, but has to be balanced against decades of successful treatment in many people with neuropathic pain. There is no good evidence of a lack of effect; rather our concern should be of overestimation of treatment effect. Amitriptyline should continue to be used as part of the treatment of neuropathic pain, but only a minority of people will achieve satisfactory pain relief. Limited information suggests that failure with one antidepressant does not mean failure with all.
Topics: Adult; Amitriptyline; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Antidepressive Agents, Tricyclic; Humans; Neuralgia; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 26146793
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008242.pub3 -
Archives of Physical Medicine and... May 2023To compare the short-term effectiveness of corticosteroids, 5% dextrose (D5W), and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections for treating carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Comparison of the Short-Term Clinical Effectiveness of 5% Dextrose Water, Platelet-rich Plasma and Corticosteroid Injections for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the short-term effectiveness of corticosteroids, 5% dextrose (D5W), and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections for treating carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS).
DATA SOURCES
Four databases (MEDLINE [PubMed], Embase, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, and Web of Science [WOS]) were researched from inception to the first of April 2022.
STUDY SELECTION
Two authors independently screened the literature to identify the RCTs meeting the included criteria, which involved comparing corticosteroid, 5% dextrose water (D5W), and PRP injection with each other or placebo-controlled for treating CTS.
DATA EXTRACTION
The 2 reviewers independently conducted information extraction, the utcomes included were the changes in Symptom Severity Scale, Functional Status Scale, and Visual Analog Scale at short-term follow-up after drug injection treatment and any adverse events reported.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Twelve randomized controlled trials with 749 patients (817 hands) were included. The results of this study suggested that PRP injection was the most likely to relieve symptoms, improve functions, and alleviate pain, with the surface under the cumulative ranking curve being 91.5%, 92.7%, and 80.8%, respectively, after D5W injection (74.4%, 72.2%, 72.1%), and corticosteroid injection (33.7%, 31.9%, 46.2%). The injection of 3 drugs was significantly better than that of a placebo.
CONCLUSIONS
From the results of the network meta-analysis, PRP injection is the most recommended treatment among the injection of corticosteroid, D5W, and PRP.
Topics: Humans; Carpal Tunnel Syndrome; Network Meta-Analysis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Platelet-Rich Plasma; Glucose
PubMed: 36529261
DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2022.11.009 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2019Irreversible pulpitis, which is characterised by acute and intense pain, is one of the most frequent reasons that patients attend for emergency dental care. Apart from...
BACKGROUND
Irreversible pulpitis, which is characterised by acute and intense pain, is one of the most frequent reasons that patients attend for emergency dental care. Apart from removal of the tooth, the customary way of relieving the pain of irreversible pulpitis is by drilling into the tooth, removing the inflamed pulp (nerve) and cleaning the root canal. However, a significant number of dentists continue to prescribe antibiotics to stop the pain of irreversible pulpitis.This review updates the previous version published in 2016.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of systemic antibiotics for irreversible pulpitis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 18 February 2019); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2019, Issue 1) in the Cochrane Library (searched 18 February 2019); MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 18 February 2019); Embase Ovid (1980 to 18 February 2019); US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register ClinicalTrials.gov (searched 18 February 2019); and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (searched 18 February 2019). There were no language restrictions in the searches of the electronic databases.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials which compared pain relief with systemic antibiotics and analgesics, against placebo and analgesics in the acute preoperative phase of irreversible pulpitis.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three review authors screened studies and extracted data independently. We assessed the certainty of the evidence of included studies using GRADE. Pooling of data was not possible and a descriptive summary is presented.
MAIN RESULTS
No additional trials could be included in this update. One trial at low risk of bias evaluating oral penicillin in combination with analgesics versus placebo with analgesics, involving 40 participants was included in a former update of the review. The certainty of the evidence was rated low for the different outcomes. Our primary outcome was patient-reported pain (intensity/duration) and pain relief. There was a close parallel distribution of the pain ratings in both the intervention (median 6.0, interquartile range (IQR) 10.5), and for placebo (median 6.0, IQR 9.5) over the seven-day study period. There was insufficient evidence to claim or refute a benefit for penicillin for pain intensity. There was no significant difference in the mean total number of ibuprofen tablets over the study period: 9.20 (standard deviation (SD) 6.02) in the penicillin group versus 9.60 (SD 6.34) in the placebo group; mean difference -0.40 (95% confidence interval (CI) -4.23 to 3.43; P = 0.84). This applied equally for the mean total number of Tylenol tablets: 6.90 (SD 6.87) used in the penicillin group versus 4.45 (SD 4.82) in the placebo group; mean difference 2.45 (95% CI -1.23 to 6.13; P = 0.19). Our secondary outcome on reporting of adverse events was not addressed in this study.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This Cochrane Review which was based on one low-powered small sample trial assessed as at low risk of bias, illustrates that there is insufficient evidence to determine whether antibiotics reduce pain or not compared to not having antibiotics. The results of this review confirm the necessity for further larger sample and methodologically sound trials that can provide additional evidence as to whether antibiotics, prescribed in the preoperative phase, can affect treatment outcomes for irreversible pulpitis.
Topics: Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Female; Humans; Male; Pain Measurement; Pulpitis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 31145805
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004969.pub5 -
Neurourology and Urodynamics Jun 2021The aim of this systematic review is to provide an updated report on the efficacy and complications of sacral neuromodulation (SNM) and percutaneous tibial nerve... (Review)
Review
AIM
The aim of this systematic review is to provide an updated report on the efficacy and complications of sacral neuromodulation (SNM) and percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) in the treatment of chronic nonobstructive urinary retention (CNOUR), with a focus on the contemporary technique of SNM utilizing the percutaneous placement of tined leads.
METHODS
This systematic review was conducted with the use of PRISMA guidelines and registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020208052). A systematic literature search was conducted in Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane databases. Inclusion criteria include English language and human participants. Exclusion criteria include SNM studies involving less than 10 CNOUR patients, studies containing data obtained using open, surgical implantation of nontined leads, and studies that only reported the test phase success rate with no long-term efficacy data. The risk of bias assessment was conducted using the National Institutes of Health study quality assessment tool.
RESULTS
A total of 16 papers studies were included (11 SNM and 5 PTNS) in this review. The success rate for SNM ranges between 42.5% and 100% (median = 79.2%) for the test stimulation phase and 65.5%-100% (median = 89.1%) in the long term. Most SNM studies reported revision and explantation rates of lesser than 20%. The success rate was much lower for PTNS, in the 50%-60% range and complications were minimal.
CONCLUSION
SNM using the contemporary percutaneous tined lead implantation technique appears to be an effective treatment for CNOUR and is durable in the long term. Compared to SNM, PTNS appears less efficacious with less evidence supporting its use in CNOUR. Further prospective studies are required to define the role of PTNS in the treatment of CNOUR.
Topics: Electric Stimulation Therapy; Humans; Lumbosacral Plexus; Sacrococcygeal Region; Sacrum; Tibial Nerve; Treatment Outcome; Urinary Retention
PubMed: 33973670
DOI: 10.1002/nau.24694 -
Medicine Oct 2023Myasthenia Gravis (MG), a chronic neuromuscular junction disorder, emerged as one of the serious side effects of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination. We...
BACKGROUNDS
Myasthenia Gravis (MG), a chronic neuromuscular junction disorder, emerged as one of the serious side effects of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination. We aimed to summarize the findings of studies on the clinical features and outcomes of COVID-19 vaccination-associated MG.
METHODS
We performed a systematic search on 3 databases, Medline, Embase, and Scopus, using the query "COVID-19 vaccine" and "Myasthenia Gravis." Patients' data, including clinical data, MG subtype, vaccine type, and vaccine dose number, were extracted from the eligible studies.
RESULTS
A total of 20 COVID-19 vaccination-related MGs have been reported worldwide. The median (interquartile range) age was 64 (51, 75) years; 85% (17/20) of them were male, and 70% (14/20) of patients had received messenger RNA-based vaccines. The most common symptoms, in order of frequency, were binocular diplopia (8/11) and ptosis (4/11); the median (interquartile range) time from vaccine to MG symptoms was 6 (2, 7.5) days. Repetitive nerve stimulation showed abnormal decrement in 85% (11/13) of patients, and all 4 patients getting single-fiber electromyography showed an abnormal finding. Nine out of twelve patients with data on clinical outcomes experienced partial/complete improvement of symptoms within 1 month.
CONCLUSION
MG cases after the COVID-19 vaccine are more likely to occur among males and adults older than 50 years. Our pooled cohort data suggest MG symptoms appear within 2 weeks after receiving the vaccine. The presenting symptoms in MG cases associated with COVID-19 vaccine are possibly similar to non-vaccination related MGs. Most patients are expected to experience partial/complete improvement within 1 month.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Male; Female; COVID-19 Vaccines; COVID-19; Myasthenia Gravis; Diplopia; Vaccines; Vaccination
PubMed: 37800781
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000034890 -
Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine 2016This systematic review summarizes existing evidence for superior onset, quality, and duration of block for ultrasound guidance versus other techniques for nerve... (Review)
Review
This systematic review summarizes existing evidence for superior onset, quality, and duration of block for ultrasound guidance versus other techniques for nerve localization. MEDLINE was systematically searched from 1966 to June 2013 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ultrasound guidance to another technique for peripheral nerve blocks. Twenty-three RCTs were identified for upper-extremity peripheral nerve blocks and 17 for lower extremity. Jadad scores for quality of RCT ranged from 1 to 5 with a median of 3. For upper-extremity blocks, 11 (48%) of 23 RCTs reported faster onset of block, 9 (39%) of 23 reported better quality of block, and 1 (14%) of 7 reported longer duration of block with ultrasound. One RCT reported that ultrasound was inferior for onset of combined median and ulnar block. For lower-extremity blocks, 8 (80%) of 10 RCTs reported faster onset, 9 (56%) of 16 reported better quality, and 2 (33%) of 6 RCTs reported longer duration of blocks. One RCT reported that ultrasound was inferior for quality and duration for ankle block. There is level 1b evidence to make a grade A recommendation that ultrasound guidance provides a modest improvement in block onset and quality of peripheral nerve blocks, especially for lower extremity. Ultrasound is rarely inferior to other techniques.
Topics: Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Nerve Block; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Time Factors; Ultrasonography, Interventional
PubMed: 26244287
DOI: 10.1097/AAP.0000000000000141