-
Neuromodulation : Journal of the... Aug 2023Despite increased attention paid to assessment and management, pain continues to be a prevalent and undertreated symptom in patients with cancer. Intrathecal drug... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Despite increased attention paid to assessment and management, pain continues to be a prevalent and undertreated symptom in patients with cancer. Intrathecal drug delivery (IDD) is a therapeutic option that allows targeted delivery of analgesics to the intrathecal space.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this review was to examine the efficacy of managing cancer-related pain with IDD. Secondary objectives included the effects of IDD on systemic opioid use and infection rates.
EVIDENCE REVIEW
A systematic search of the literature published between 1990 and 2019 was performed to identify studies evaluating the efficacy and/or safety of IDD with external or implanted pumps in patients with cancer-related pain. Data were extracted and meta-analyses performed to determine the mean changes in pain levels at short-, mid-, and long-term intervals; changes in opioid (oral morphine equivalent [OME]) daily dose; and infection rates. Changes were assessed compared with baseline.
FINDINGS
Pain levels were decreased from baseline: On a 0 to 10 scale, mean differences were -4.34 (95% CI [-4.93 to -3.75], p < 0.001) at 4 to 5 weeks; -4.34 (95% CI [-5.07 to -3.62], p < 0.001) at 6 to 12 weeks; and -3.32 (95% CI [-4.60 to -2.04], p < 0.001) at >6 months. Weighted mean OME consumption was reduced by 308.24 (SE = 22.72) mg/d. Weighted mean infection rates were ∼3% for external and implanted pumps.
CONCLUSIONS
Meta-analyses show a statistically significant and sustained decrease in cancer pain with IDD, compared with baseline. Systemic opioid consumption was reduced on average by >50% after IDD. Infection rates were comparable with other indications.
Topics: Humans; Cancer Pain; Analgesics, Opioid; Injections, Spinal; Pain; Analgesics; Morphine; Neoplasms
PubMed: 35088743
DOI: 10.1016/j.neurom.2021.12.004 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2024Children often require pain management following surgery to avoid suffering. Effective pain management has consequences for healing time and quality of life. Ibuprofen,...
BACKGROUND
Children often require pain management following surgery to avoid suffering. Effective pain management has consequences for healing time and quality of life. Ibuprofen, a frequently used non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) administered to children, is used to treat pain and inflammation in the postoperative period.
OBJECTIVES
1) To assess the efficacy and safety of ibuprofen (any dose) for acute postoperative pain management in children compared with placebo or other active comparators. 2) To compare ibuprofen administered at different doses, routes (e.g. oral, intravenous, etc.), or strategies (e.g. as needed versus as scheduled).
SEARCH METHODS
We used standard Cochrane search methods. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and trials registries in August 2023.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in children aged 17 years and younger, treated for acute postoperative or postprocedural pain, that compared ibuprofen to placebo or any active comparator. We included RCTs that compared different administration routes, doses of ibuprofen and schedules.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We adhered to standard Cochrane methods for data collection and analysis. Our primary outcomes were pain relief reported by the child, pain intensity reported by the child, adverse events, and serious adverse events. We present results using risk ratios (RR) and standardised mean differences (SMD), with the associated confidence intervals (CI). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 43 RCTs that enroled 4265 children (3935 children included in this review). We rated the overall risk of bias at the study level as high or unclear for 37 studies that had one or several unclear or high risk of bias judgements across the domains. We judged six studies as having a low risk of bias across all domains. Ibuprofen versus placebo (35 RCTs) No studies reported pain relief reported by the child or a third party, or serious adverse events. Ibuprofen probably reduces child-reported pain intensity less than two hours postintervention compared to placebo (SMD -1.12, 95% CI -1.39 to -0.86; 3 studies, 259 children; moderate-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen may reduce child-reported pain intensity, two hours to less than 24 hours postintervention (SMD -1.01, 95% CI -1.24 to -0.78; 5 studies, 345 children; low-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen may result in little to no difference in adverse events compared to placebo (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.23; 5 studies, 384 children; low-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen versus paracetamol (21 RCTs) No studies reported pain relief reported by the child or a third party, or serious adverse events. Ibuprofen likely reduces child-reported pain intensity less than two hours postintervention compared to paracetamol (SMD -0.42, 95% CI -0.82 to -0.02; 2 studies, 100 children; moderate-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen may slightly reduce child-reported pain intensity two hours to 24 hours postintervention (SMD -0.21, 95% CI -0.40 to -0.02; 6 studies, 422 children; low-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen may result in little to no difference in adverse events (0 events in each group; 1 study, 44 children; low-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen versus morphine (1 RCT) No studies reported pain relief or pain intensity reported by the child or a third party, or serious adverse events. Ibuprofen likely results in a reduction in adverse events compared to morphine (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.83; risk difference (RD) -0.25, 95% CI -0.40 to -0.09; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 4; 1 study, 154 children; moderate-certainty evidence). Ibuprofen versus ketorolac (1 RCT) No studies reported pain relief or pain intensity reported by the child, or serious adverse events. Ibuprofen may result in a reduction in adverse events compared to ketorolac (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.96; RD -0.29, 95% CI -0.53 to -0.04; NNTB 4; 1 study, 59 children; low-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Despite identifying 43 RCTs, we remain uncertain about the effect of ibuprofen compared to placebo or active comparators for some critical outcomes and in the comparisons between different doses, schedules and routes for ibuprofen administration. This is largely due to poor reporting on important outcomes such as serious adverse events, and poor study conduct or reporting that reduced our confidence in the results, along with small underpowered studies. Compared to placebo, ibuprofen likely results in pain reduction less than two hours postintervention, however, the efficacy might be lower at two hours to 24 hours. Compared to paracetamol, ibuprofen likely results in pain reduction up to 24 hours postintervention. We could not explore if there was a different effect in different kinds of surgeries or procedures. Ibuprofen likely results in a reduction in adverse events compared to morphine, and in little to no difference in bleeding when compared to paracetamol. We remain mostly uncertain about the safety of ibuprofen compared to other drugs.
Topics: Humans; Acetaminophen; Ibuprofen; Ketorolac; Morphine; Pain, Postoperative; Child
PubMed: 38180091
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD015432.pub2 -
Journal of Pain and Symptom Management Mar 2024Ketamine is a well-characterized anesthetic agent, and subanesthetic ketamine possesses analgesic effects in both acute and chronic pain. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
CONTEXT
Ketamine is a well-characterized anesthetic agent, and subanesthetic ketamine possesses analgesic effects in both acute and chronic pain.
OBJECTIVES
A systematic review was performed to ascertain the efficacy and safety of ketamine in treating pain for cancer patients.
METHODS
Eight databases were searched from the inception to March 20th, 2023 to obtain randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on ketamine for treating pain in cancer patients. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies; then, meta-analysis was performed by using Revman 5.3 software and Stata 14.0 software.
RESULTS
Thirty-five studies were included, involving 2279 patients with cancer pain. The results of meta-analysis showed that ketamine could significantly reduce pain intensity. Subgroup analysis revealed that, when compared with control group, ketamine decreased markedly visual analogue scale (VAS) scores in two days after the end of treatment with ketamine, and ketamine administrated by patient controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) was effective. Meanwhile, ketamine could significantly reduce the number of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) compressions within 24 hours and morphine dosage. Ketamine could not decrease Ramsay sedation score. Additionally, the adverse events significantly decreased in the ketamine group, including nausea and vomiting, constipation, pruritus, lethargy, uroschesis, hallucination, and respiratory depression. In addition, compared with the control group, ketamine could reduce Hamilton depression scale (HAMD) score and relieve depressive symptoms.
CONCLUSION
Ketamine may be used as an effective therapy to relieve cancer pain. However, more rigorously designed RCTs with larger sample sizes are required to verify the above conclusions.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Ketamine; Cancer Pain; Analgesics, Opioid; Morphine; Analgesia, Patient-Controlled; Pain; Pain, Postoperative; Neoplasms
PubMed: 37972720
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2023.11.004 -
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 -
International Journal of Surgery... Aug 2023The role of transversus thoracic muscle plane blocks (TTMPBs) during cardiac surgery is controversial. We conducted a systematic review to establish the effectiveness of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
STUDY OBJECTIVE
The role of transversus thoracic muscle plane blocks (TTMPBs) during cardiac surgery is controversial. We conducted a systematic review to establish the effectiveness of this procedure.
DESIGN
Systematic review. We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CENTRAL, WanFang Data, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure to June 2022, and followed the GRADE approach to evaluate the certainty of evidence.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Eligible studies enrolled adult patients scheduled to undergo cardiac surgery and randomized them to receive a TTMPB or no block/sham block.
MAIN RESULTS
Nine trials that enrolled 454 participants were included. Compared to no block/sham block, moderate certainty evidence found that TTMPB probably reduces postoperative pain at rest at 12 h [weighted mean difference (WMD) -1.51 cm on a 10 cm visual analogue scale for pain, 95% CI -2.02 to -1.00; risk difference (RD) for achieving mild pain or less (≤3 cm), 41%, 95% CI 17-65) and 24 h (WMD -1.07 cm, 95% CI -1.83 to -0.32; RD 26%, 95% CI 9-37). Moderate certainty evidence also supported that TTMPB probably reduces pain during movement at 12 h (WMD -3.42 cm, 95% CI -4.47 to -2.37; RD 46%, 95% CI 12-80) and at 24 h (WMD -1.73 cm, 95% CI -3.24 to -0.21; RD 32%, 95% CI 5-59), intraoperative opioid use [WMD -28 milligram morphine equivalent (MME), 95% CI -42 to -15], postoperative opioid consumption (WMD -17 MME, 95% CI -29 to -5), postoperative nausea and vomiting (absolute risk difference 255 less per 1000 persons, 95% CI 140-314), and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (WMD -13 h, 95% CI -21 to -6).
CONCLUSION
Moderate certainty evidence showed TTMPB during cardiac surgery probably reduces postoperative pain at rest and with movement, opioid consumption, ICU length of stay, and the incidence of nausea and vomiting.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Analgesics, Opioid; Pain, Postoperative; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting; Cardiac Surgical Procedures; Muscles
PubMed: 37246971
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000470 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2024Acute and chronic postoperative pain are important healthcare problems, which can be treated with a combination of opioids and regional anaesthesia. The erector spinae... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Acute and chronic postoperative pain are important healthcare problems, which can be treated with a combination of opioids and regional anaesthesia. The erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is a new regional anaesthesia technique, which might be able to reduce opioid consumption and related side effects.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the analgesic effects and side effect profile of ESPB against no block, placebo block or other regional anaesthetic techniques.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science on 4 January 2021 and updated the search on 3 January 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating adults undergoing surgery with general anaesthesia were included. We included ESPB in comparison with no block, placebo blocks or other regional anaesthesia techniques irrespective of language, publication year, publication status or technique of regional anaesthesia used (ultrasound, landmarks or peripheral nerve stimulator). Quasi-RCTs, cluster-RCTs, cross-over trials and studies investigating co-interventions in either arm were excluded.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed all trials for inclusion and exclusion criteria, and risk of bias (RoB), and extracted data. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool, and we used GRADE to rate the certainty of evidence for the primary outcomes. The primary outcomes were postoperative pain at rest at 24 hours and block-related adverse events. Secondary outcomes were postoperative pain at rest (2, 48 hours) and during activity (2, 24 and 48 hours after surgery), chronic pain after three and six months, as well as cumulative oral morphine requirements at 2, 24 and 48 hours after surgery and rates of opioid-related side effects.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 69 RCTs in the first search and included these in the systematic review. We included 64 RCTs (3973 participants) in the meta-analysis. The outcome postoperative pain was reported in 38 out of 64 studies; block-related adverse events were reported in 40 out of 64 studies. We assessed RoB as low in 44 (56%), some concerns in 24 (31%) and high in 10 (13%) of the study results. Overall, 57 studies reported one or both primary outcomes. Only one study reported results on chronic pain after surgery. In the updated literature search on 3 January 2022 we found 37 new studies and categorised these as awaiting classification. ESPB compared to no block There is probably a slight but not clinically relevant reduction in pain intensity at rest 24 hours after surgery in patients treated with ESPB compared to no block (visual analogue scale (VAS), 0 to 10 points) (mean difference (MD) -0.77 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.08 to -0.46; 17 trials, 958 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be no difference in block-related adverse events between the groups treated with ESPB and those receiving no block (no events in 18 trials reported, 1045 participants, low-certainty evidence). ESPB compared to placebo block ESPB probably has no effect on postoperative pain intensity at rest 24 hours after surgery compared to placebo block (MD -0.14 points, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.00; 8 trials, 499 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be no difference in block-related adverse events between ESPB and placebo blocks (no events in 10 trials reported; 592 participants; low-certainty evidence). ESPB compared to other regional anaesthetic techniques Paravertebral block (PVB) ESPB may not have any additional effect on postoperative pain intensity at rest 24 hours after surgery compared to PVB (MD 0.23 points, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.52; 7 trials, 478 participants; low-certainty evidence). There is probably no difference in block-related adverse events (risk ratio (RR) 0.27, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.95; 7 trials, 522 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Transversus abdominis plane block (TAPB) ESPB may not have any additional effect on postoperative pain intensity at rest 24 hours after surgery compared to TAPB (MD -0.16 points, 95% CI -0.46 to 0.14; 3 trials, 160 participants; low-certainty evidence). There may be no difference in block-related adverse events (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.21 to 4.83; 4 trials, 202 participants; low-certainty evidence). Serratus anterior plane block (SAPB) The effect on postoperative pain could not be assessed because no studies reported this outcome. There may be no difference in block-related adverse events (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.06 to 15.59; 2 trials, 110 participants; low-certainty evidence). Pectoralis plane block (PECSB) ESPB may not have any additional effect on postoperative pain intensity at rest 24 hours after surgery compared to PECSB (MD 0.24 points, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.58; 2 trials, 98 participants; low-certainty evidence). The effect on block-related adverse events could not be assessed. Quadratus lumborum block (QLB) Only one study reported on each of the primary outcomes. Intercostal nerve block (ICNB) ESPB may not have any additional effect on postoperative pain intensity at rest 24 hours after surgery compared to ICNB, but this is uncertain (MD -0.33 points, 95% CI -3.02 to 2.35; 2 trials, 131 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There may be no difference in block-related adverse events, but this is uncertain (RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.28; 3 trials, 181 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Epidural analgesia (EA) We are uncertain whether ESPB has an effect on postoperative pain intensity at rest 24 hours after surgery compared to EA (MD 1.20 points, 95% CI -2.52 to 4.93; 2 trials, 81 participants; very low-certainty evidence). A risk ratio for block-related adverse events was not estimable because only one study reported this outcome.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
ESPB in addition to standard care probably does not improve postoperative pain intensity 24 hours after surgery compared to no block. The number of block-related adverse events following ESPB was low. Further research is required to study the possibility of extending the duration of analgesia. We identified 37 new studies in the updated search and there are three ongoing studies, suggesting possible changes to the effect estimates and the certainty of the evidence in the future.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Analgesics, Opioid; Chronic Pain; Pain, Postoperative; Analgesia, Epidural; Nerve Block; Anesthetics; Benzamidines
PubMed: 38345071
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013763.pub3 -
Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology... 2023This study compares Fascia Iliaca compartment (FI) block and Pericapsular Nerve Group (PENG) block for hip surgery. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
This study compares Fascia Iliaca compartment (FI) block and Pericapsular Nerve Group (PENG) block for hip surgery.
METHODS
Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane were systematically searched in April 2022. Inclusion criteria were: Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs); comparing PENG block versus FI block for hip surgery; patients over 18 years of age; and reporting outcomes immediately postoperative. We excluded studies with overlapped populations and without a head-to-head comparison of the PENG block vs. FI block. Mean-Difference (MD) with 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) were pooled. Trial Sequential Analyses (TSA) were performed to assess inconsistency. Quality assessment and risk of bias were performed according to Cochrane recommendations.
RESULTS
Eight RCTs comprising 384 patients were included, of whom 196 (51%) underwent PENG block. After hip surgery, PENG block reduced static pain score at 12h post-surgery (MD = 0.61 mm; 95% CI 1.12 to -0.09; p = 0.02) and cumulative postoperative oral morphine consumption in the first 24h (MD = -6.93 mg; 95% CI -13.60 to -0.25; p = 0.04) compared with the FI group. However, no differences were found between the two techniques regarding dynamic and static pain scores at 6 h or 24 h post-surgery, or in the time to the first analgesic rescue after surgery.
CONCLUSION
The findings suggest that PENG block reduced opioid consumption in the first 24 h after surgery and reduced pain scores at rest at 12 h post-surgery. Further research is needed to fully understand the effects of the PENG block and its potential benefits compared to FI block.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION
CRD42022339628 PROSPERO REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=339628.
Topics: Humans; Adolescent; Adult; Femoral Nerve; Pain, Postoperative; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Nerve Block; Fascia
PubMed: 37507071
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjane.2023.07.007 -
Journal of Clinical Anesthesia Aug 2024This systematic review and network meta-analysis aimed to compare the analgesic efficacy of transversus abdominis plane block (TAPB) and quadratus lumborum block (QLB)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study Review
STUDY OBJECTIVE
This systematic review and network meta-analysis aimed to compare the analgesic efficacy of transversus abdominis plane block (TAPB) and quadratus lumborum block (QLB) on nephrectomy.
DESIGN
Systematic review and network meta-analysis.
PATIENTS
Patients undergoing nephrectomy.
INTERVENTIONS
TAPB and QLB for postoperative analgesia.
MEASUREMENTS
The primary outcome was 24 h morphine-equivalent consumptions after surgery. Secondary outcomes included postoperative pain scores, postoperative opioid consumption, postoperative rescue analgesia, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), length of hospital stay after surgery, and patient satisfaction.
MAIN RESULTS
Fourteen studies involving 883 patients were included. Seven studies compared TAPB to control, six studies compared QLB to control, and one study compared TAPB to QLB. For direct meta-analysis of the post-surgical 24 h morphine-equivalent consumption, QLB was lower than control (mean difference [95%CI]: -18.16 [-28.96, -7.37]; I = 88%; p = 0.001), while there was no difference between TAPB and control (mean difference [95%CI]: -8.34 [-17.84, 1.17]; I = 88%; p = 0.09). Network meta-analysis showed similar findings that QLB was ranked as the best anesthetic technique for reducing postoperative 24 h opioid consumption (p-score = 0.854). Moreover, in direct meta-analysis, as compared to control, the time of first postoperative rescue analgesia was prolonged after QLB (mean difference [95%CI]: 165.00 [128.99, 201.01]; p < 0.00001), but not TAPB (mean difference [95%CI]: 296.82 [-91.92, 685.55]; p = 0.13). Meanwhile, QLB can effectively reduce opioid usages at intraoperative period, as well as at postoperative 6 h and 48 h, while TAPB can only reduce opioid consumption at 6 h after surgery. As compared to control, both TAPB and QLB exhibited the reduction in PONV and pain scores at post-surgical some timepoints. Also, QLB (mean difference [95%CI]: -0.29 [-0.49, -0.08]; p = 0.006) but not TAPB (mean difference [95%CI]: 0.60 [-0.25, 1.45]; p = 0.17) exhibited the shorter postoperative length of hospital stay than control.
CONCLUSIONS
QLB is more likely to be effective in reducing postoperative opioid use than TAPB, whereas both of them are superior to control with regard to the reduction in postoperative pain intensity and PONV.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO identifier: CRD42022358464.
Topics: Humans; Pain, Postoperative; Nerve Block; Nephrectomy; Abdominal Muscles; Analgesics, Opioid; Network Meta-Analysis; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting; Pain Measurement; Treatment Outcome; Length of Stay; Patient Satisfaction
PubMed: 38531283
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2024.111453 -
Neuromodulation : Journal of the... Jan 2024Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been used as a minimally invasive and effective treatment modality for various chronic pain disorders, with the main target being... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been used as a minimally invasive and effective treatment modality for various chronic pain disorders, with the main target being stimulation of the dorsal columns; however, certain neuropathic pain areas involve dermatomes that are suboptimally covered by SCS. Stimulation of the spinal nerve roots has the advantage of targeting one or several dermatomes at the same time. The aim of this systematic review is to investigate the efficacy of spinal nerve root stimulation (SNRS) for chronic pain disorders.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A detailed literature review was performed through the Ovid Embase and MEDLINE data bases in addition to reference searching. Gray literature was included by searching through common search engines using a simplified search strategy. Studies included were focused on adult patients (aged >18 years), diagnosis of chronic pain syndrome (including but not limited to complex regional pain syndrome, persistent spinal pain syndrome, neuropathic pain secondary to trauma or infection, postherpetic pain, and cancer pain). Patients must have undergone SNRS insertion, with ≥six months of documented pain intensity scores on follow-up.
RESULTS
A total of 40 studies underwent full text review, and 13 articles were included in final analysis. Mean preoperative pain intensity was 8.14 ± 0.74 on the visual analog scale, whereas mean postoperative pain intensity at one year was 3.18 ± 1.44. Of 119 patients, 83 (70%) achieved ≥50% reduction in pain intensity after SNRS, whereas 36 (30%) achieved <50% reduction in pain intensity. Only three studies assessed changes in analgesia medication dose and reported morphine equivalent doses varied by case series. Overall, there was a trend toward a reduction in analgesia medications in the postoperative period.
CONCLUSIONS
SNRS led to a mean 44% reduction in pain intensity, with a low level of certainty. In addition, there is some evidence to suggest that using SNRS is associated with reduced use of analgesics, including morphine and gabapentin.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Chronic Pain; Analgesics; Spinal Nerve Roots; Spinal Cord Stimulation; Morphine; Neuralgia
PubMed: 37642627
DOI: 10.1016/j.neurom.2023.07.008 -
European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery... Dec 2023To evaluate the effectiveness of combined Tranexamic acid (TXA) and dexamethasone (DEX) in total hip and knee arthroplasty. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
To evaluate the effectiveness of combined Tranexamic acid (TXA) and dexamethasone (DEX) in total hip and knee arthroplasty.
METHODS
PUBMED, EMBASE, MEDLINE and CENTRAL database were systematically searched for randomized studies that utilized TXA and DEX administration of TXA in THA or TKA.
RESULTS
A total of three randomized studies enrolling 288 patients were eligible for qualitative and quantitative analysis. DEX + TXA group demonstrated statistical significantly lesser usage of oxycodone (OR: 0.34, p < 0.0001), metoclopramide (OR: 0.21, p < 0.00001), lesser incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (OR: 0.27, p < 0.0001), better postoperative range of motion (MD: 2.30, p < 0.00001) and shorter length of hospital stay (MD: 0.31, p = 0.03). Comparable results were seen in total blood loss, transfusion rate and postoperative complications.
CONCLUSION
In this meta-analysis, the combination of TXA and DEX has positive impacts on the usage of oxycodone and metoclopramide, postoperative range of motion, postoperative nausea and vomiting and reduces the length of hospital stay.
Topics: Humans; Tranexamic Acid; Antifibrinolytic Agents; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting; Metoclopramide; Oxycodone; Blood Loss, Surgical; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Dexamethasone; Administration, Intravenous
PubMed: 37329454
DOI: 10.1007/s00590-023-03612-z