-
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery (Hong... 2023Duloxetine is a serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) with clinical efficacy in chronic pain conditions. In this study, we aim to evaluate the... (Review)
Review
Duloxetine is a serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) with clinical efficacy in chronic pain conditions. In this study, we aim to evaluate the analgesic effect and safety of duloxetine in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). A systematic search was completed on MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Embase from inception to December 2022 to find relevant articles. We used Cochrane methodology to evaluate the bias of included studies. Investigated outcomes included postoperative pain, opioid consumption, adverse events (AEs), range of motion (ROM), emotional and physical function, patient satisfaction, patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), knee-specific outcomes, wound complications, skin temperature, inflammatory markers, length of stay, and incidence of manipulations. Nine articles involving 942 participants were included in our systematic review. Out of nine papers, eight were randomized clinical trials and one was a retrospective study. The results of these studies indicated the analgesic effect of duloxetine on postoperative pain, which was measured using numeric rating scale and visual analogue scale. Deluxetine was also effective in reducing the morphine requirement and wound complications and enhancing patient satisfaction after surgery. However, the results on ROM, PCA, and knee-specific outcomes were contraventional. Deluxetine was generally safe without serious AEs. The most common AEs included headache, nausea, vomiting, dry mouth, and constipation. Duloxetine may be an effective treatment option for postoperative pain following TKA, but further rigorously designed and well-controlled randomized trials are required.
Topics: Humans; Duloxetine Hydrochloride; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Retrospective Studies; Pain, Postoperative; Analgesics, Opioid; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37279647
DOI: 10.1177/10225536231177482 -
Cureus Nov 2023Opioid-related fatalities are a leading cause of accidental death in the United States. Appendicitis is a common cause of abdominal pain in children and adolescents. The... (Review)
Review
Opioid-related fatalities are a leading cause of accidental death in the United States. Appendicitis is a common cause of abdominal pain in children and adolescents. The management of pain throughout the laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in the pediatric population is a critical concern. This study aimed to evaluate trends in analgesic use and patient satisfaction following LA, with a focus on reducing the reliance on opioids for pain management. From 2003 to 2023, 18258 articles were filtered for all types of analgesic use with LA. The publications were screened using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, and 19 studies were included for analysis and review. The study included peer-reviewed experimental and observational studies involving individuals under 18 years. Pain management strategies varied across studies, involving a combination of analgesics, nerve blocks, and wound infiltrations. Analgesics such as acetaminophen, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and opioids were administered before and after surgery. Some studies implemented patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) pumps. Other studies explored non-pharmacological interventions like magnetic acupuncture. The results showed a reduction in the need for postoperative analgesics in patients treated with LA, particularly when using non-opioid medications and novel analgesic techniques. Pediatric patients who received gabapentin reported lower opioid use, shorter hospital stays, and high satisfaction rates. However, the reliance on opioids remained significant in some cases, particularly among patients with peritonitis who required more morphine. Pain management in pediatric patients is multifaceted, involving preoperative and postoperative analgesics, nerve blocks, and PCA pumps. Efforts to improve pain management following pediatric LA while reducing opioid reliance are essential in the context of the ongoing opioid epidemic. The findings from this study highlight the potential benefits of non-opioid analgesics, nerve blocks, and alternative methods for managing postoperative pain in <18 appendectomy patients. Further research and standardization of pain management protocols are needed to ensure optimal patient outcomes and minimize the risk of opioid-related complications.
PubMed: 38156159
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.49581 -
OTO Open 2023To determine whether intracapsular tonsillectomy, using plasma ablation, results in differences in postoperative patient outcomes to total tonsillectomy. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To determine whether intracapsular tonsillectomy, using plasma ablation, results in differences in postoperative patient outcomes to total tonsillectomy.
DATA SOURCES
A systematic review of two databases (Embase and PubMed) was conducted in March 2022 to identify published English-language randomized controlled trials and observational studies which provided a comparison between intracapsular tonsillectomy, using plasma ablation, and total tonsillectomy.
REVIEW METHODS
Qualitative synthesis and meta-analysis were used to compare outcomes between techniques.
RESULTS
Seventeen studies were identified for inclusion. Across these, 1996 and 4565 patients underwent intracapsular and total tonsillectomy, respectively. Studies included 8 randomized controlled trials, 1 prospective cohort study, and 8 retrospective cohort studies. Time to pain free, time on analgesia, time to normal diet, and time to normal activity were significantly shorter with intracapsular tonsillectomy by on average 4.2 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.5-5.9; < .0001), 4.1 (95% CI 2.7-5.4; < .0001), 3.5 (95% CI 1.7-5.4; = .0002) and 2.8 (95% CI 1.6-4; < .0001) days, respectively. Risk of posttonsillectomy hemorrhage was significantly lower following intracapsular tonsillectomy (relative risk [RR] 0.36; 95% CI 0.16-0.81; = .0131); risk of posttonsillectomy hemorrhage requiring surgical management was lower but failed to reach significance (RR 0.52; 95% CI 0.19-1.39; = .19).
CONCLUSION
Intracapsular tonsillectomy using plasma ablation has similar efficacy in managing indications for tonsil surgery to total tonsillectomy while significantly reducing the postoperative morbidity and likelihood of posttonsillectomy hemorrhage experienced by patients, allowing them to return to their normal life faster.
PubMed: 36998549
DOI: 10.1002/oto2.22 -
International Journal of Emergency... Mar 2024The ideal pain control approach is typically viewed as titration of analgesia for pain reduction and periodic pain evaluation. However, this method takes time and is not... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The ideal pain control approach is typically viewed as titration of analgesia for pain reduction and periodic pain evaluation. However, this method takes time and is not always possible in the crowded Emergency Department. Therefore, an alternative way to improve pain care in the Emergency Department is needed to avoid this unpleasant sensation in the patients. The best solution to tackle this situation is using Patient Controlled Analgesia (PCA), in the form of a PCA pump.
STUDY OBJECTIVES
This systematic review and meta-analysis was designated to evaluate the efficacy of PCA morphine in treating acute pain at Emergency Department.
METHODS
We searched databases Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Medline, and Google Scholar up to February 2022 and identified randomized controlled trials with English language only that compare PCA morphine to IV morphine in treating patients presenting with acute pain at Emergency Department.
RESULTS
Eight trials were included in our review, comprising 1490 participants. We compared PCA morphine vs. IV morphine. There were no differences in the pain score between PCA and IV morphine (standard mean difference [SMD] = -0.20, p = 0.25). Further subgroup analyses (origin of the pain, time of assessment and the durations) showed no difference except for the dosages as the PCA morphine reduced the pain compared to IV morphine in low and high dosages but only two studies were involved. However, the analysis showed PCA morphine increased patient satisfaction and reduced the number of patients who required additional analgesia compared to IV morphine (MD 0.12, P < 0.001), (MD 0.47, P < 0.001) respectively. Data obtained in this review pertaining to adverse effects such as nausea, vomiting, pruritus, and drowsiness is limited since not all the trials reported the events.
CONCLUSIONS
PCA morphine do appear to have a beneficial effect on the outcome of patient satisfaction and the number of patients who required additional analgesia. However, further studies targeting a larger sample size is required to increase the certainty of the evidence.
PubMed: 38454338
DOI: 10.1186/s12245-024-00615-3 -
Anaesthesia Apr 2021Phrenic-sparing analgesic techniques for shoulder surgery are desirable. Intra-articular infiltration analgesia is one promising phrenic-sparing modality, but its role... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Phrenic-sparing analgesic techniques for shoulder surgery are desirable. Intra-articular infiltration analgesia is one promising phrenic-sparing modality, but its role remains unclear because of conflicting evidence of analgesic efficacy and theoretical concerns regarding chondrotoxicity. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the benefits and risks of intra-articular infiltration in arthroscopic shoulder surgery compared with systemic analgesia or interscalene brachial plexus block. We sought randomised controlled trials comparing intra-articular infiltration with interscalene brachial plexus block or systemic analgesia (control). Cumulative 24-h postoperative oral morphine equivalent consumption was designated as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included visual analogue scale pain scores during the first 24 h postoperatively; time-to-first analgesic request; patient satisfaction; opioid-related side-effects; block-related adverse events; and any indicators of chondrotoxicity. Fifteen trials (863 patients) were included. Compared with control, intra-articular infiltration reduced 24-h postoperative analgesic consumption by a weighted mean difference (95%CI) of -30.9 ([-38.9 to -22.9]; p < 0.001). Intra-articular infiltration also reduced the weighted mean difference (95%CI) pain scores up to 12 h postoperatively, with the greatest reduction at 4 h (-2.2 cm [(-4.4 to -0.04]); p < 0.05). Compared with interscalene brachial plexus block, there was no difference in opioid consumption, but patients receiving interscalene brachial plexus block had better pain scores at 2, 4 and 24 h postoperatively. There was no difference in opioid- or block-related adverse events, and none of the trials reported chondrotoxic effects. Compared with systemic analgesia, intra-articular infiltration provides superior pain control, reduces opioid consumption and enhances patient satisfaction, but it may be inferior to interscalene brachial plexus block patients having arthroscopic shoulder surgery.
Topics: Analgesia; Analgesics, Opioid; Arthroscopy; Brachial Plexus Block; Humans; Injections, Intra-Articular; Morphine; Pain, Postoperative; Shoulder
PubMed: 32596840
DOI: 10.1111/anae.15172 -
Journal of Affective Disorders Apr 2024Ketamine and esketamine has been suggested to have potential efficacy in preventing postpartum depression (PPD) recent years. The aim of this meta-analysis was to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Ketamine and esketamine has been suggested to have potential efficacy in preventing postpartum depression (PPD) recent years. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness of ketamine and esketamine on PPD after cesarean delivery.
METHODS
We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for studies investigating the efficacy of ketamine and esketamine in preventing PPD. The primary outcomes of this study were risk ratios (RRs) and EPDS scores (Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale) in relation to PPD after ketamine and esketamine. The second outcomes were the postoperative adverse events.
RESULTS
Thirteen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and one retrospective study including 2916 patients were analyzed, including six on the use of ketamine and eight on the use of esketamine. The risk ratios and EPDS scores of PPD were significantly decreased in the ketamine/esketamine group compared to those in the control group in one week and four weeks postoperative periods. Subgroup analyses showed that high dosage, administrated in patient controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) method and only esketamine exhibited a significant reduction in the incidence and EPDS scores of PPD in one week and four week postoperative. However, the incidences of postoperative adverse events, such as dizziness, diplopia, hallucination, and headache were significantly higher in the ketamine/esketamine group than that in the control group.
CONCLUSION
Ketamine and esketamine appear to be effective in preventing PPD in the one week and four week postoperative periods after cesarean delivery with moderate certainty of evidence. But they can also lead to some short-term complications too. Future high-quality studies are needed to confirm the efficacy of ketamine and esketamine in different countries.
Topics: Female; Pregnancy; Humans; Ketamine; Depression, Postpartum; Cesarean Section; Headache; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38286233
DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2024.01.202 -
Arab Journal of Urology 2021: To conduct a systematic review of the literature to assess whether music reduces the use of analgesics and anxiolytics during flexible cystoscopy. : The systematic... (Review)
Review
: To conduct a systematic review of the literature to assess whether music reduces the use of analgesics and anxiolytics during flexible cystoscopy. : The systematic review was performed in line with the Cochrane guidelines and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) checklist. The databases searched included the Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Scopus, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Clinicaltrials.gov, the Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), Cochrane library, Google Scholar, and Web of Science from inception of the databases to February 2020. The primary outcome measure was the effect of music on pain and anxiety, and secondary outcome measures were patient heart rate and blood pressure. : The initial search yielded 234 articles and after going through titles and abstracts, four studies (399 patients, 199 in the music group and 200 in no music group) were included for the final review. There were three randomised controlled trials and one prospective study published between 2014 and 2017. These studies were done in China, the USA and Italy, with the study duration between 9 and 24 months. All patients had 2% topical lignocaine jelly given per-urethra before the procedure. The choice of music was classical in three studies and a mixture of different music types in one study. Three of the four studies showed significantly reduced pain and anxiety with the use of music for flexible cystoscopy procedures. Heart rate was noted to be higher for the no music group, reflecting a higher pain perceived by these patients. : The present review showed that listening to music was associated with reduced anxiety and pain during flexible cystoscopy. Listening to music is therefore likely to increase procedural satisfaction and willingness to undergo the procedure again, considering repeated flexible cystoscopy is often needed for surveillance. As music is simple, inexpensive and easily accessible, it should be routinely offered to patients for outpatient and office-based urological procedures. : IQR: interquartile range; NRS: numerical rating scale; PTSD: post-traumatic stress disorder; RCT: randomised control trial; STAI: State-trait Anxiety Inventory; VAS: visual analogue scale.
PubMed: 34881066
DOI: 10.1080/2090598X.2021.1894814 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2018Intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IVPCA) with opioids and epidural analgesia (EA) using either continuous epidural administration (CEA) or patient-controlled... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IVPCA) with opioids and epidural analgesia (EA) using either continuous epidural administration (CEA) or patient-controlled (PCEA) techniques are popular approaches for analgesia following intra-abdominal surgery. Despite several attempts to compare the risks and benefits, the optimal form of analgesia for these procedures remains the subject of debate.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this review was to update and expand a previously published Cochrane Review on IVPCA versus CEA for pain after intra-abdominal surgery with the addition of the comparator PCEA. We have compared both forms of EA to IVPCA. Where appropriate we have performed subgroup analysis for CEA versus PCEA.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following electronic databases for relevant studies: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2017; Issue 8), MEDLINE (OvidSP) (1966 to September 2017), and Embase (OvidSP) (1988 to September 2017) using a combination of MeSH and text words. We searched the following trial registries: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the EU Clinical Trials Register in September 2017, together with reference checking and citation searching to identify additional studies.We included only randomized controlled trials and used no language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all parallel and cross-over randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CEA or PCEA (or both) with IVPCA for postoperative pain relief in adults following intra-abdominal surgery.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors (JS and EY) independently identified studies for eligibility and performed data extraction using a data extraction form. In cases of disagreement (three occasions) a third review author (MB) was consulted. We appraised each included study to assess the risk of bias as outlined in Section 8.5 of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 32 studies (1716 participants) in our review. There are 10 studies awaiting classification and one ongoing study. A total of 869 participants (51%) received EA and 847 (49%) received IVPCA. The EA trials included 16 trials with CEA (418 participants) and 16 trials with PCEA (451 participants). The studies included a broad range of surgical procedures (including hysterectomies, radical prostatectomies, Caesarean sections, colorectal and upper gastrointestinal procedures), a wide range of adult ages, and were performed in several different countries.Our pooled analyses suggested a benefit with regard to pain scores (using a visual analogue scale between 0 and 100) in favour of EA techniques at rest. The mean pain reduction at rest from waking to six hours after operation was 5.7 points (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.9 to 9.5; 7 trials, 384 participants; moderate-quality evidence). From seven to 24 hours, the mean pain reduction was 9.0 points (95% CI 4.6 to 13.4; 11 trials, 558 participants; moderate-quality evidence). From 24 hours the mean pain reduction was 5.1 points (95% CI 0.9 to 9.4; 7 trials, 393 participants; moderate-quality evidence). Due to high statistical heterogeneity, no pooled analysis was possible for the estimation of pain on movement at any time. Two single studies (one using CEA and one PCEA) reported lower pain scores with EA compared to IVPCA at 0 to 6 hours and 7 to 24 hours. At > 24 hours the results from 2 studies (both CEA) were conflicting.We found no difference in mortality between EA and IVPCA, although the only deaths reported were in the EA group (5/287, 1.7%). The risk ratio (RR) of death with EA compared to using IVPCA was 3.37 (95% CI 0.72 to 15.88; 9 trials, 560 participants; low-quality evidence).A single study suggested that the use of EA may result in fewer episodes of respiratory depression, with an RR of 0.47 (95% CI 0.04 to 5.69; 1 trial; low-quality evidence). The successful placement of an epidural catheter can be technically challenging. The improvements in pain scores above were accompanied by an increase in the risk of failure of the analgesic technique with EA (RR 2.48, 95% CI 1.13 to 5.45; 10 trials, 678 participants; moderate-quality evidence); the occurrence of pruritus (RR 2.36, 95% CI 1.67 to 3.35; 8 trials, 492 participants; moderate-quality evidence); and episodes of hypotension requiring intervention (RR 7.13, 95% CI 2.87 to 17.75; 6 trials, 479 participants; moderate-quality evidence). There was no clear evidence of an advantage of one technique over another for other adverse effects considered in this review (Venous thromboembolism with EA (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.03 to 2.95; 2 trials, 101 participants; low-quality evidence); nausea and vomiting (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.27; 10 trials, 645 participants; moderate-quality evidence); sedation requiring intervention (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.87; 4 trials, 223 participants; moderate-quality evidence); or episodes of desaturation to less than 90% (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.71 to 2.37; 5 trials, 328 participants; moderate-quality evidence)).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The additional pain reduction at rest associated with the use of EA rather than IVPCA is modest and unlikely to be clinically important. Single-trial estimates provide low-quality evidence that there may be an additional reduction in pain on movement, which is clinically important. Any improvement needs to be interpreted with the understanding that the use of EA is also associated with an increased chance of failure to successfully institute analgesia, and an increased likelihood of episodes of hypotension requiring intervention and pruritus. We have rated the evidence as of moderate quality given study limitations in most of the contributing studies. Further large RCTs are required to determine the ideal analgesic technique. The 10 studies awaiting classification may alter the conclusions of the review once assessed.
Topics: Adult; Analgesia, Epidural; Analgesia, Patient-Controlled; Analgesics, Opioid; Humans; Pain Measurement; Pain, Postoperative; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 30161292
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010434.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2021Hysteroscopy done in an outpatient setting is the 'gold standard' method for evaluating the uterine cavity. Media used to distend the uterine cavity include gas as... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Hysteroscopy done in an outpatient setting is the 'gold standard' method for evaluating the uterine cavity. Media used to distend the uterine cavity include gas as carbon dioxide and liquid as saline that can be used at room temperature or warmed to body temperature. Both media offer advantages as well as disadvantages.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this review is to compare the effectiveness, tolerability, and safety of gas (carbon dioxide) and liquid (normal saline) used for uterine distension during outpatient hysteroscopy.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility (CGF) Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO on 28 April 2021. We checked references of relevant trials and contacted study authors and experts in the field to identify additional studies. CINAHL records and ongoing trials from the trial registries were included in the CENTRAL search.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing saline with carbon dioxide, as well as RCTs comparing saline at different temperatures, for uterine distension in outpatient hysteroscopy done for any indication.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. Primary review outcomes were patient tolerability and adverse events or complications related to the distending medium. Secondary outcomes were quality of the hysteroscopic view and duration of the procedure.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 12 RCTs (1946 women). The quality of evidence ranged from very low to high: the main limitations were risk of bias due to absence of blinding due to the nature of the procedure, imprecision, and inconsistency. Saline versus carbon dioxide Analysis ruled out a clinically relevant difference in pain scores during the procedure between saline and carbon dioxide, but the quality of evidence was low (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.17 to 0.02; 9 RCTs, N = 1705; I² = 86%). This translates to differences of 0.39 cm (lower) and 0.05 cm (higher) on a 10-cm visual analogue scale (VAS). Evidence was insufficient to show differences between groups in the proportion of procedures abandoned due to intense pain (Peto odds ratio (OR) 0.48, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.42; 1 RCT, N = 189; very low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether saline decreases the need for analgesia compared to carbon dioxide (Peto OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.99; 1 RCT, N = 189; very low-quality evidence). Saline compared to carbon dioxide is probably associated with fewer vasovagal reaction events (Peto OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.86; 6 RCTs, N = 1076; I² = 0%; moderate-quality evidence) and fewer shoulder-tip pain events (Peto OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.54; 4 RCTs, N = 623; I² = 0%, moderate-quality evidence). Evidence suggests that if 10% of women undergoing outpatient hysteroscopy experience a vasovagal reaction event with the use of carbon dioxide, this rate would be between 3% and 9% with the use of saline. Similarly, if the rate of shoulder-tip pain with carbon dioxide is 9%, it would be between 1% and 5% with saline. We are uncertain whether saline is similar to carbon dioxide in terms of endometrial bleeding (Peto OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.25 to 2.75; 2 RCTs, N = 349; I² = 0%; very low-quality evidence). Infection was not reported by any study in this comparison. Saline may result in fewer procedures with an unsatisfactory hysteroscopic view than carbon dioxide (Peto OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.82; 5 RCTs, N = 1082; I² = 67%; low-quality evidence). The duration of the procedure was shorter with saline in three of the four studies that reported this outcome, and duration was similar in both arms in the fourth study. Warm saline versus room temperature saline Use of warm saline for uterine distension during office hysteroscopy may reduce pain scores when compared with room temperature saline (mean difference (MD) -1.14, 95% CI -1.55 to -0.73; 3 RCTs, N = 241; I² = 77%; low-quality evidence). Evidence is insufficient to show differences between groups in either the proportion of procedures abandoned due to intense pain (Peto OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.06 to 15.87; 1 RCT, N = 77; very low-quality evidence) or the need for analgesia (Peto OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.14 to 7.32; 1 RCT, N = 100; very low-quality evidence). Analysis ruled out a clinically relevant difference in duration of the procedure between warm and room temperature saline, but the quality of evidence is low (MD 13.17 seconds, 95% CI -12.96 to 39.29; 2 RCTs, N = 141; I² = 21%). No cases of infection were reported in either group (1 RCT, N = 100). No other adverse events and no information on quality of the hysteroscopic view were reported by any study in this comparison.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Evidence was insufficient to show differences between different distension media used for uterine distension in outpatient hysteroscopy in terms of patient tolerability, operator satisfaction, or duration of the procedure. However, saline was superior to carbon dioxide in producing fewer adverse events (shoulder-tip pain and vasovagal reaction).
Topics: Endometrium; Female; Humans; Hysteroscopy; Outpatients; Pain; Pregnancy; Uterus
PubMed: 34826139
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006604.pub2 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2022To investigate the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine (DEX) for postoperative patient controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA). Two investigators independently...
To investigate the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine (DEX) for postoperative patient controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA). Two investigators independently searched Pubmed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library and CBM for randomized controlled trials of DEX for PCIA. Thirty-seven studies with a total of 5,409 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with analgesics alone, DEX for PCIA reduced pain score at 24 h [mean difference (MD) = -0.70; 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.85, -0.54; < 0.00001, = 90%] and 48 h postoperatively (MD = -0.43; 95% CI: -0.52, -0.34; < 0.00001, = 96%). Moreover, DEX reduced analgesics consumption during the first 24 h [standardized mean difference (SMD) = -0.25; 95% CI: -0.34, -0.16; < 0.00001, = 91%] and the number of resuscitation analgesics administered [odds ratio (OR) = 0.54; 95% CI: 0.44, 0.66; < 0.00001, = 72%]. Furthermore, DEX improved patient satisfaction (OR = 3.55; 95% CI: 2.36, 5.35; < 0.00001, = 60%), and reduced incidence of side effects, such as postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) (OR = 0.47; 95% CI: 0.39, 0.57; < 0.00001, = 59%) and pruritus after surgery (OR = 0.45; 95% CI: 0.30, 0.68; = 0.0001, = 0%). Besides, DEX attenuates inflammatory cytokine levels, such as IL-6 (MD = -5.73; 95% CI: -8.34, -3.12; < 0.00001, = 91%) and TNF-α (MD = -0.63; 95% CI: -0.76, -0.50; < 0.00001, = 89%). Finally, DEX increased the risk of bradycardia (OR = 1.66; 95% CI: 1.12, 2.45; = 0.01, = 15%), but the complication of hypotension did not differ between the two groups (OR = 1.30; 95% CI: 0.84, 2.04; = 0.25, = 0%). DEX is used for postoperative PCIA analgesia, which can significantly improve the analgesic effect, effectively control postoperative inflammatory response, reduce the dosage and adverse reactions of analgesics, and improve postoperative patient satisfaction. Of course, the impact of the immunosuppressive effect of DEX on the prognosis of patients needs further study. CRD42022340933, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/.
PubMed: 36578546
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2022.1028704