-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2024Dexmedetomidine is a selective alpha-2 agonist with minimal impact on the haemodynamic profile. It is thought to be safer than morphine or stronger opioids, which are... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Dexmedetomidine is a selective alpha-2 agonist with minimal impact on the haemodynamic profile. It is thought to be safer than morphine or stronger opioids, which are drugs currently used for analgesia and sedation in newborn infants. Dexmedetomidine is increasingly being used in children and infants despite not being licenced for analgesia in this group.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the overall effectiveness and safety of dexmedetomidine for sedation and analgesia in newborn infants receiving mechanical ventilation compared with other non-opioids, opioids, or placebo.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and two trial registries in September 2023.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We planned to include randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs evaluating the effectiveness of dexmedetomidine compared with other non-opioids, opioids, or placebo for sedation and analgesia in neonates (aged under four weeks) requiring mechanical ventilation.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were level of sedation and level of analgesia. Our secondary outcomes included days on mechanical ventilation, number of infants requiring additional medication for sedation or analgesia (or both), hypotension, neonatal mortality, and neurodevelopmental outcomes. We planned to use GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified no eligible studies for inclusion. We identified four ongoing studies, two of which appear to be eligible for inclusion; they will compare dexmedetomidine with fentanyl in newborn infants requiring surgery. We listed the other two studies as awaiting classification pending assessment of full reports. One study will compare dexmedetomidine with morphine in asphyxiated newborns undergoing hypothermia, and the other (mixed population, age up to three years) will evaluate dexmedetomidine versus ketamine plus dexmedetomidine for echocardiography. The planned sample size of the four studies ranges from 40 to 200 neonates. Data from these studies may provide some evidence for dexmedetomidine efficacy and safety.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Despite the increasing use of dexmedetomidine, there is insufficient evidence supporting its routine use for analgesia and sedation in newborn infants on mechanical ventilation. Furthermore, data on dexmedetomidine safety are scarce, and there are no data available on its long-term effects. Future studies should address the efficacy, safety, and long-term effects of dexmedetomidine as a single drug therapy for sedation and analgesia in newborn infants.
Topics: Humans; Dexmedetomidine; Infant, Newborn; Respiration, Artificial; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Analgesics, Opioid; Morphine; Analgesia; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic
PubMed: 38695625
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012361.pub2 -
Perioperative Medicine (London, England) Nov 2023Lumbar spine disorders have become an increasingly common health problem in recent years. Modern clinical studies have shown that perioperative analgesia at certain... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Lumbar spine disorders have become an increasingly common health problem in recent years. Modern clinical studies have shown that perioperative analgesia at certain doses can reduce postoperative pain by inhibiting the process of peripheral sensitization and central sensitization, which is also known as "preemptive analgesia," Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are a class of drugs that achieve antipyretic and analgesic effects by inhibiting cyclooxygenase (COX) and affecting the production of prostaglandins. Our meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of perioperative preemptive analgesia with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in patients with lumbar spine surgery.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, ScienceDirect, the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that met the inclusion criteria. A total of 12 clinical studies were included to assess the efficacy and safety of perioperative NSAIDs preemptive analgesia for lumbar spine surgery.
RESULT
Twelve studies, including 845 patients, met the inclusion criteria. The results showed that perioperative receipt of NSAIDs for preemptive analgesia was effective and safe. Patient's postoperative morphine consumption (P < 0.05), visual analog scale (P < 0.05), and numerical rating scale (P < 0.05) were not statistically associated with postoperative complications (P > 0.05).
CONCLUSION
Our findings suggest that NSAIDs are effective and safe for preemptive analgesia in the perioperative period of lumbar spine surgery and that more and better quality RCTs and more in-depth studies of pain mechanics are still needed.
PubMed: 37996936
DOI: 10.1186/s13741-023-00347-7 -
AANA Journal Dec 2023Effective control of labor pain is critical to the birthing experience. Dexmedetomidine is an alternative adjunct to labor analgesia without the risk of opioid-related... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Effective control of labor pain is critical to the birthing experience. Dexmedetomidine is an alternative adjunct to labor analgesia without the risk of opioid-related adverse effects. The purpose of this study was to examine the efficacy and safety of neuraxial dexmedetomidine versus neuraxial opioids in labor analgesia. PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, Google Scholar, and grey literature were searched for evidence. Risk ratio and mean difference (MD) were used to estimate outcomes. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Risk of Bias and GRADE system. Sixteen studies including 1,669 patients were analyzed. Compared with opioids, dexmedetomidine prolonged the duration of analgesia (MD, 47.58 minutes; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.57 to 93.58; = .04), reduced pain score (MD, -0.71; 95% CI, -1.17 to -0.24; = .003), and shortened the onset of analgesia (MD, -1.14 minutes; 95% CI, -1.93 to -0.35; = .005). Dexmedetomidine did not affect the duration of first and second stages of labor, number of spontaneous, assisted, and cesarean delivery. Additionally, dexmedetomidine had little to no effects on maternal and neonatal outcomes. Neuraxial dexmedetomidine is more favorable than neuraxial opioids for labor analgesia. Extrapolation of the findings to clinical practice should take into considerations the review limitations.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Infant, Newborn; Humans; Analgesics, Opioid; Dexmedetomidine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Analgesics; Analgesia
PubMed: 37987724
DOI: No ID Found -
Pediatric Emergency Care Apr 2024Intranasal fentanyl (INF) has gained popularity in pediatric emergency departments (EDs) as an effective alternative to intravenous morphine for treating acute moderate...
BACKGROUND
Intranasal fentanyl (INF) has gained popularity in pediatric emergency departments (EDs) as an effective alternative to intravenous morphine for treating acute moderate to severe pain. Intranasal fentanyl eliminates the need for invasive access, making it advantageous for patients with minor injuries. Our study aims to provide a comprehensive evaluation of the available evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of INF administration in pediatric emergency wards, particularly compared with other treatment options described in the literature.
METHODS
A thorough search strategy identified randomized controlled trials assessing INF in the pediatric emergency ward. Eligible studies were independently screened, and relevant data were extracted. The analysis used pooled risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and the standardized mean difference (SMD) for continuous ones. Randomized controlled trials' quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool 2.
RESULTS
In our study, 8 randomized controlled trials involving 806 patients, INF demonstrated superior effectiveness in reducing pain compared with other comparators at the 15- to 20-minute mark (SMD, -0.23; 95% confidence interval, -0.37 to -0.08; P = 0.002). However, no significant differences were found at the 30- and 60-minute time points (SMDs, -0.16; 95% CI, -0.50, 0.19; P = 0.37; and -0.16; 95% CI, -0.50 to 0.19; P = 0.78) except when excluding one study to resolve heterogeneity at the 30-minute mark (RR, -0.02; 95% CI, -0.24 to 0.20; P = 0.87). Intranasal fentanyl also exhibited a better adverse outcome profile, with a lower risk of total adverse events and nausea/vomiting (RR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.48-0.91; P = 0.01; and RR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.30-0.63; P > 0.001) compared with other analgesics. However, no significant differences were observed for dizziness and hallucination (RR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.30-0.63; P = 0.68; and RR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.30-0.63; P = 0.35).
CONCLUSIONS
Our study assessed the effectiveness of INF compared with other analgesics in pain reduction. Intranasal fentanyl demonstrated superior pain reduction at the 15- to 20-minute point but showed no significant differences at 30 and 60 minutes. Intranasal fentanyl also had a more favorable adverse event profile, with a lower risk of nausea and vomiting than other analgesics. However, no significant differences were observed in dizziness and hallucination between the groups.
PubMed: 38713846
DOI: 10.1097/PEC.0000000000003187 -
BMC Anesthesiology Apr 2024An increasing number of individuals undergo total knee arthroplasty (TKA), which can result in pain, limited motor function and adverse complications such as infection,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
An increasing number of individuals undergo total knee arthroplasty (TKA), which can result in pain, limited motor function and adverse complications such as infection, nausea and vomiting. Glucocorticoids have been shown anti-inflammatory and antiemetic effects, but can also elevate blood glucose levels and increase the risk of wound infection. Thus, it is essential to investigate the efficacy and safety of glucocorticoid usage in TKA.
METHOD
A comprehensive systematic search of PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane databases, to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of glucocorticoid application in TKA. The primary outcomes assessed were the postoperative pain assessment. Secondary outcomes included the range of motion in knee joint, levels of inflammatory cytokines, adverse complications, and the length of hospital stay.
RESULTS
Thirty-six randomized controlled trials were included in the final analysis. The glucocorticoid group exhibited significant reduction in the resting VAS scores on postoperative days 1, 2 (POD1, 2)and postoperative 3 months (POM3), as well as decreased morphine consumption on POD1 and increased range of motion (ROM) in knee joint on POD1, 3. Additionally, the glucocorticoid group exhibited decreased levels of postoperative inflammatory cytokines and the incidence of PONV along with a shorter length of hospital stay. The blood glucose concentration was significantly increased in the glucocorticoid group on POD1 compared with the control group. While the blood glucose on POD2 and occurrence of postoperative adverse complications were similar between two groups including wound infection and venous thrombosis. The periarticular injection analgesia (PIA) group demonstrated lower VAS scores on POD2 comparing to the systemic administration (SA) group according to two studies. However, there was no significant difference of the resting VAS on POD1 and POD2 between PIA and SA group across all studies.
CONCLUSION
Perioperative glucocorticoids treatment in TKA significantly reduced short-term pain score and opioid-use which was probably not patient relevant. The application of glucocorticoids in TKA implied a beneficial trend in analgesic, anti-inflammatory, and antiemetic effects, as well as improved range of motion and shortened hospital stay. While it will not increase the risk of continued high glucose, postoperative wound infection and venous thrombosis.
Topics: Humans; Glucocorticoids; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Antiemetics; Blood Glucose; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Pain, Postoperative; Wound Infection; Cytokines; Venous Thrombosis
PubMed: 38622510
DOI: 10.1186/s12871-024-02530-9 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine May 2024: Our understanding of dexmedetomidine, as an adjuvant to nerve blocks in cancer surgery, is characterized by a current lack of compelling evidence, and it remains... (Review)
Review
: Our understanding of dexmedetomidine, as an adjuvant to nerve blocks in cancer surgery, is characterized by a current lack of compelling evidence, and it remains unknown whether the potential benefits of use outweigh the risks. The aim of the study was to evaluate the benefit and safety profiles of dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to nerve blocks in cancer surgery. : Systematic searches were conducted in MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, Springer, medRxiv, and Scopus up to 17 May 2024. Risk ratios (RR) for binary outcomes and standardized mean differences (SMDs) for continuous outcomes were quantified. : Twenty studies were identified. In breast cancer surgery, the use of dexmedetomidine reduced 24 h total morphine consumption (SMD = -1.99 [95% CI -3.01 to -0.98], = 0.0001, I2 = 91%, random effects) and prolonged the requirement for morphine rescue analgesia (SMD = 2.98 [95% CI 0.01 to 5.95], = 0.05, I2 = 98%, random effects). In abdominal cancer surgery, the dexmedetomidine group had lower total sufentanil consumption (SMD = -1.34 [95% CI -2.29 to -0.40], = 0.005, I2 = 84%, random effects). Dexmedetomidine reduced the VAS score and decreased postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). No studies using dexmedetomidine reported serious adverse events. : Using dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to nerve blocks in cancer surgery could lower the VAS pain score and prolong the regional anesthesia duration, which would lead to a decrease in total opioid consumption and possibly contribute to fewer PONV events. Furthermore, the reports of no serious adverse events indicate its good safety profile.
PubMed: 38892876
DOI: 10.3390/jcm13113166 -
The American Journal of Emergency... Aug 2023Pain is commonly encountered in the Emergency Department (ED) and pre-hospital setting and often requires opioid analgesia. We sought to synthesize the available...
BACKGROUND
Pain is commonly encountered in the Emergency Department (ED) and pre-hospital setting and often requires opioid analgesia. We sought to synthesize the available evidence on the effectiveness of sufentanil for acute pain relief for adult patients in the pre-hospital or ED setting.
METHODS
This systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and CINAHL were searched from inception to February 1, 2022. The grey literature was also searched. We included randomized controlled trials of adult patients with acute pain who were treated with sufentanil. Two reviewers independently completed screening, full text review, and data extraction. Primary outcome was reduction in pain. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, need for rescue analgesia, and patient and provider satisfaction. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. A meta-analysis was not performed due to heterogeneity.
RESULTS
Of 1120 unique citations, four studies (3 ED and 1 pre-hospital) met full inclusion criteria (n = 467 participants). The overall quality of the included studies was high. Intranasal (IN) sufentanil was superior to placebo for pain relief at 30 min (difference 20.8%, 95% CI 4.0-36.2%, p = 0.01). Both IN (two studies) and IV sufentanil (one study) were comparable to IV morphine. Mild adverse events were common and there was a higher propensity for minor sedation in patients receiving sufentanil. There were no serious adverse events requiring advanced interventions.
CONCLUSION
Sufentanil was comparable to IV morphine and was superior to placebo for rapid relief of acute pain in the ED setting. The safety profile of sufentanil is similar to IV morphine in this setting, with minimal concern for serious adverse events. The intranasal formulation may provide an alternative, rapid, non-parenteral route that could benefit our unique emergency department and pre-hospital patient population. Due to the overall small sample size of this review, larger studies are required to confirm safety.
Topics: Humans; Adult; Sufentanil; Acute Pain; Analgesics, Opioid; Morphine; Emergency Service, Hospital; Hospitals
PubMed: 37186978
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2023.04.020 -
Advances in Wound Care Aug 2023This study sought to quantify the pooled effects of lidocaine patch (LP) on postoperative pain and side effects through a comprehensive review and meta-analysis. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Efficacy and Safety of Lidocaine Patch in the Management of Acute Postoperative Wound Pain: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
This study sought to quantify the pooled effects of lidocaine patch (LP) on postoperative pain and side effects through a comprehensive review and meta-analysis. The study followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), AMSTAR, and the Cochrane Collaboration. Randomized controlled trials comparing LP with placebo were retrieved from five electronic databases. Primary outcome in the study was cumulative intravenous morphine equivalent consumption (mg) within 24 h postoperatively. Twelve trials comprising 617 patients were included in the final analysis. Primary result indicated that the analgesic effects LP were only statistical but not clinically significant of postoperative intravenous morphine consumption within 24 h (mean difference, -4.61 mg; 95% confidence interval, -8.09 to -1.14). Interestingly, the results of subgroup and meta-regression analysis indicated that preoperative administration of LP had potential advantages in postoperative wound pain management. It is also worthwhile to mention that LP provided a clinically important benefit in rest pain scores within 24-h postoperatively. Apart from these, other secondary outcome analysis did not uncover any particularly significant analgesic or safety advantages to LP. Finally, LP also does not increase the risk of any local anesthetic-related side effects. This systematic review and meta-analysis provides moderate-to-high quality evidence undermining the role of LP for management of acute postoperative wound pain after surgical procedures and the justification for the associated extra costs. Taken together, the current evidence does not support LP as part of a routine multimodal analgesia strategy to alleviate early postoperative acute pain. However, further studies should explore the clinical value of preoperative administration and the long-term effect of LP.
Topics: Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Anesthetics, Local; Pain, Postoperative; Lidocaine; Morphine Derivatives
PubMed: 36047821
DOI: 10.1089/wound.2022.0076 -
Australian Critical Care : Official... Mar 2024This meta-analysis evaluated the effect of opioids on constipation in ICU patients. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
This meta-analysis evaluated the effect of opioids on constipation in ICU patients.
REVIEW METHOD USED
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang DATA databases.
REVIEW METHODS
Random or fixed-effects meta-analyses were used. Subgroup analysis was performed according to the definition of constipation (three vs. six days), opioids (fentanyl vs. morphine), study design (prospective vs. retrospective), adjustment of confounders (No vs. Yes), and patient's age (adults vs. children). We used sensitivity analysis to test the robustness of results with significant statistical heterogeneity.
RESULTS
Seven studies (2264 patients) were included. Opioid use in ICU patients was associated with an increased risk of constipation (relative risk [RR]=1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.05 to 1.24; I2=49.8%). Subgroup analysis further showed that adjustment form, category of opioid, study design, and patient's age significantly influenced the relationship between opioid use and the risk of constipation. Sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of pooled results.
CONCLUSION
Opioids significantly increase the risk of constipation in critically ill patients, especially children. It is worth noting that the adjustment of the constipation definition used for ICU significantly influenced the relationship between opioid use and the risk of constipation. Therefore, It is necessary to clearly define ICU constipation and conduct time-based layered treatment. Additional prospective studies are needed to investigate the consistent definition of ICU constipation.
Topics: Adult; Child; Humans; Analgesics, Opioid; Critical Illness; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Constipation
PubMed: 37586897
DOI: 10.1016/j.aucc.2023.06.006 -
Sleep Medicine Sep 2023Narcolepsy type 1 is a primary sleep disorder caused by deficient hypocretin transmission leading to excessive daytime sleepiness and cataplexy. Opioids have been...
OBJECTIVE
Narcolepsy type 1 is a primary sleep disorder caused by deficient hypocretin transmission leading to excessive daytime sleepiness and cataplexy. Opioids have been suggested to increase the number of hypocretin-producing neurons. We aimed to assess opioid use and its self-reported effect on narcolepsy type 1 symptom severity through a literature review and questionnaire study.
METHODS
We systematically reviewed literature on opioid use in narcolepsy. We also recruited 100 people with narcolepsy type 1 who completed an online questionnaire on opioid use in the previous three years. The main questionnaire topics were the indication for use, and the possible effects on narcolepsy symptom severity. Structured follow-up interviews were conducted when opioid use was reported.
RESULTS
The systematic literature review mainly showed improvements in narcolepsy symptom severity. Recent opioid use was reported by 16/100 questionnaire respondents, who had used 20 opioids (codeine: 7/20, tramadol: 6/20, oxycodone: 6/20, fentanyl: 1/20). Narcolepsy symptom changes were reported in 11/20. Positive effects on disturbed nocturnal sleep (9/20), excessive daytime sleepiness (4/20), hypnagogic hallucinations (3/17), cataplexy (2/18), and sleep paralysis (1/13) were most pronounced for oxycodone (4/6) and codeine (4/7).
CONCLUSIONS
Opioids were relatively frequently used compared to a similarly young general Dutch sample. Oxycodone and, to a lesser extent, codeine were associated with self-reported narcolepsy symptom severity improvements. Positive changes in disturbed nocturnal sleep and daytime sleepiness were most frequently reported, while cataplexy effects were less pronounced. Randomised controlled trials are now needed to verify the potential of opioids as therapeutic agents for narcolepsy.
Topics: Humans; Cataplexy; Analgesics, Opioid; Orexins; Oxycodone; Narcolepsy; Disorders of Excessive Somnolence; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 37437491
DOI: 10.1016/j.sleep.2023.06.008