-
Journal of Comparative Effectiveness... May 2024In the absence of head-to-head comparative data from randomized controlled trials, indirect treatment comparisons (ITCs) may be used to compare the relative effects of... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
Gastrointestinal adverse effects associated with the use of intravenous oliceridine compared with intravenous hydromorphone or fentanyl in acute pain management utilizing adjusted indirect treatment comparison methods.
In the absence of head-to-head comparative data from randomized controlled trials, indirect treatment comparisons (ITCs) may be used to compare the relative effects of treatments versus a common comparator (either placebo or active treatment). For acute pain management, the effects of oliceridine have been compared in clinical trials to morphine but not to fentanyl or hydromorphone. To assess the comparative safety (specifically differences in the incidence of nausea, vomiting and opioid-induced respiratory depression [OIRD]) between oliceridine and relevant comparators (fentanyl and hydromorphone) through ITC analysis. A systematic literature review identified randomized clinical trials with oliceridine versus morphine and morphine versus fentanyl or hydromorphone. The ITC utilized the common active comparator, morphine, for the analysis. A total of six randomized controlled trials (oliceridine - 2; hydromorphone - 3; fentanyl - 1) were identified for data to be used in the ITC analyses. The oliceridine data were reported in two studies (plastic surgery and orthopedic surgery) and were also reported in a pooled analysis. The ITC focused on nausea and vomiting due to limited data for OIRD. When oliceridine was compared with hydromorphone in the ITC analysis, oliceridine significantly reduced the incidence of nausea and/or vomiting requiring antiemetics compared with hydromorphone (both orthopedic surgery and pooled data), while results in plastic surgery were not statistically significant. When oliceridine was compared with hydromorphone utilizing data from Hong, the ITC only showed a trend toward reduced risk of nausea and vomiting with oliceridine that was not statistically significant across all three comparisons (orthopedic surgery, plastic surgery and combined). An ITC comparing oliceridine with a study of fentanyl utilizing the oliceridine orthopedic surgery data and combined orthopedic and plastic surgery data showed a trend toward reduced risk that was not statistically significant. In ITC analyses, oliceridine significantly reduced the incidence of nausea and/or vomiting or the need for antiemetics in orthopedic surgery compared with hydromorphone and a non-significant trend toward reduced risk versus fentanyl.
Topics: Humans; Hydromorphone; Fentanyl; Analgesics, Opioid; Acute Pain; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vomiting; Nausea; Administration, Intravenous; Respiratory Insufficiency; Pain Management; Quinuclidines; Spiro Compounds; Thiophenes
PubMed: 38497192
DOI: 10.57264/cer-2023-0041 -
Journal of Clinical Anesthesia May 2024Glucocorticoids as a component of multimodal analgesia have been studied for many years and their post-operative analgesic effects appear to be dose-dependent. We... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
STUDY OBJECTIVE
Glucocorticoids as a component of multimodal analgesia have been studied for many years and their post-operative analgesic effects appear to be dose-dependent. We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the evidence of peri-operative high dose corticosteroid therapy in comparison to placebo (placebo drug) or control group (no treatment) for improving the quality of post-operative analgesia as indicated by a reduction of 10 mm in 100 mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) or reduction of 1 point in a 0-10 point VAS scale, or a reduction of 1 point in an 11-point Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) score, or reduction of rescue opioid analgesia, in patients undergoing all types of surgery.
DESIGN
Systematic review of RCTs with meta-analysis.
SETTING
Acute postoperative pain treatment in non-obese adult population.
INTERVENTIONS
Perioperative administration of high dose of Dexamethasone (≥ 0,2 mg/Kg or ≥ 15 mg), or a corresponding dose of a systemic glucocorticoid.
MEASUREMENTS
Primary outcomes were postoperative pain measured in 0-100 mm VAS score at 24 h after surgery upon rest and movement. Secondary outcomes were postoperative pain 0-100 mm VAS score 48 h after surgery, postoperative rescue analgesic requirement, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), relevant adverse events.
MAIN RESULTS
47 RCT's were included (3943 patients). The Mean Difference (MD) of 100 mm VAS scores for pain at rest 24 h after surgery was -6.18 mm 95% CI [-8.53, -3.83], at motion -8.86 mm 95% CI [-11.82, -5.89]. Opioid analgesic requirements evaluated in Oral Morphine Equivalents (OME) was -10.00 mg 95% CI [-13.65, -6.34]. PONV events Odds Ratio of 0.29 95%CI [0.24, 0.36]. Major adverse events OR was 0.88 95% CI [0.65, 1.19]. Minor adverse events OR 1.29 95% CI [0.86, 1.92].
CONCLUSION
High doses of glucocorticoids are one of the many possible tools available in multimodal postoperative analgesia, possibly reducing opioids consumption and recurrence of PONV but with no relevant effects in terms of reduction of postoperative VAS score. Available data show a safe therapeutic profile, without increase adverse events.
PROTOCOL REGISTRATION
CRD42020137119.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Analgesics; Analgesics, Opioid; Glucocorticoids; Pain, Postoperative; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting
PubMed: 38091865
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2023.111352 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2023To systematically assess and rank the efficacy of opioid medications for traumatic pain in the emergency department in terms of pain relief, adverse events and rescue...
To systematically assess and rank the efficacy of opioid medications for traumatic pain in the emergency department in terms of pain relief, adverse events and rescue analgesia. Four databases were systematically searched until 26 September 2022: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Outcomes were pain relief, adverse events (dizziness, hypotension, pruritus, sedation), and rescue analgesia. For each outcome, network plots were drawn to exhibit direct and indirect comparisons, and rank probabilities were utilized to rank the efficacy of different opioids. Twenty studies of 3,040 patients were eligible for this network meta-analysis. According to the rank probabilities, the top three analgesic medications for pain relief may be sufentanil (78.29% probability of ranking first), buprenorphine (48.54% probability of ranking second) and fentanyl (53.25% probability of ranking third); buprenorphine (31.20%), fentanyl (20.14%) and sufentanil (21.55%) were least likely to cause dizziness; the top three analgesic medications which were least likely to cause hypotension were buprenorphine (81.64%), morphine (45.02%) and sufentanil (17.27%); butorphanol (40.56%), morphine (41.11%) and fentanyl (14.63%) were least likely to cause pruritus; the top three medications which were least likely to cause sedation were hydrocodone + acetaminophen (97.92%), morphine (61.85%) and butorphanol (55.24%); patients who received oxycodone (83.64%), butorphanol (38.31%) and fentanyl (25.91%) were least likely to need rescue analgesia in sequence. Sufentanil, buprenorphine and fentanyl may be superior to other opioid medications in terms of pain relief and the incidence of dizziness, hypotension and pruritus, which might be selected as opioid analgesics for traumatic pain in the emergency setting.
PubMed: 37576822
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1209131 -
Journal of Anesthesia, Analgesia and... Jan 2024Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) and serratus anterior plane block (SAPB) are regional anesthesia techniques that have shown favorable results in pain management... (Review)
Review
Analgesic efficacy and safety of erector spinae versus serratus anterior plane block in thoracic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
BACKGROUND
Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) and serratus anterior plane block (SAPB) are regional anesthesia techniques that have shown favorable results in pain management following thoracic surgeries; however, their relative superiority is unclear. This review (PROSPERO: CRD42023443018) aims to compare the analgesic efficacy of ESPB and SAPB in patients undergoing thoracic surgeries through the pooled analysis of co-primary outcomes: postoperative oral-morphine-equivalent (mg) consumption in 24 h and pain scores (static) at 24 h.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted across PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from inception to May 2023, comparing ESPB and SAPB in thoracic surgeries. Statistical pooling was done using Review Manager 5.4.1. Bias assessment employed the Cochrane Collaboration Risk-of-Bias 2.0 tool. The strength of evidence was assessed using the guidelines from the GRADE working group.
RESULTS
Nine RCTs (485 patients) were included in the study. Postoperative pain scores (static) at 24 h (mean difference (MD) = - 0.31 [- 0.57, 0.05], p = 0.02) and postoperative oral-morphine-equivalent (mg) consumption in 24 h (MD = - 19.73 [- 25.65, - 13.80], p < 0.00001) were significantly lower in the ESBP group. However, the MDs did not exceed the set threshold for clinical importance. No significant differences were observed in the opioid-related adverse effects and block-related complications.
CONCLUSION
Our statistically significant results imply that ESPB has superior analgesic efficacy compared to SAPB; however, this difference is clinically unimportant. The safety profile of the two blocks is comparable; hence, current evidence cannot define the relative superiority of one block over the other. Our findings warrant further research with standardized methodologies and a longer duration of analgesic efficacy assessment to yield robust evidence for better clinical applications.
PubMed: 38217050
DOI: 10.1186/s44158-023-00138-y -
The Clinical Journal of Pain May 2024Ultrasound-guided pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block is an emerging regional anesthesia technique that may provide analgesia for patients undergoing total hip... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Ultrasound-guided pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block is an emerging regional anesthesia technique that may provide analgesia for patients undergoing total hip arthroplasties (THA). There are clinical studies comparing this fascial plane block to other established methods; however, evidence on the actual efficacy of this block for THA continues to evolve.
OBJECTIVE
Available clinical studies conducted over the past 4 years were reviewed to evaluate the analgesic efficacy and effectiveness of PENG block in patients undergoing THAs.
METHODS
A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in patients undergoing THA, where PENG block was compared to no block, placebo/sham block (injection with saline), or other analgesic techniques including suprainguinal fascia iliaca block (FIB), or periarticular infiltration (PAI) was performed. Our primary outcome was opioid consumption during the first 24 hours. Secondary outcomes were postoperative rest and dynamic pain scores at 6-12, 24 and 48 hours, block performance time, sensory-motor assessment, quadriceps weakness, the incidence of postoperative falls, first analgesic request, block and opioid-related complications, surgical complications, patient satisfaction scores, postanesthesia care unit length of stay, hospital length of stay, and functional and quality of life outcomes.
RESULTS
We included 12 RCTs with a total of 705 patients. Data showed that PENG block decreased 24-hour oral morphine milligram equivalent consumption by a mean difference (MD) of 3.75 mg (95% CI: -5.96,-1.54; P =0.0009). No statistically significant differences in rest or dynamic pain were found, except for a modest MD reduction in dynamic pain score of 0.55 points (95% CI: -0.98, -0.12; P =0.01), measured 24 hours after surgery in favor of PENG block.
CONCLUSIONS
Our systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that PENG block provides better analgesia, measured as MME use, in the first 24 hours after THA, with no real impact on postoperative VAS scores. Despite statistical significance, the high heterogeneity across RCTs implies that PENG's benefits may not surpass the minimal clinically important difference threshold for us to recommend PENG as best practice in THA.
Topics: Humans; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Analgesics, Opioid; Pain, Postoperative; Nerve Block; Analgesics
PubMed: 38268183
DOI: 10.1097/AJP.0000000000001196 -
Journal of Clinical Anesthesia Aug 2024Following robot assisted abdominal surgery, the pain can be moderate in severity. Neuraxial analgesia may decrease the activity of the detrusor muscle, reduce the... (Review)
Review
STUDY OBJECTIVE
Following robot assisted abdominal surgery, the pain can be moderate in severity. Neuraxial analgesia may decrease the activity of the detrusor muscle, reduce the incidence of bladder spasm and provide effective somatic and visceral analgesia. In this systematic review, we assessed the role of neuraxial analgesia in robot assisted abdominal surgery.
DESIGN
Systematic review.
SETTINGS
Robot assisted abdominal surgery.
PATIENTS
Adults.
INTERVENTIONS
Subsequent to a search of the electronic databases, observational studies and randomized controlled trials that assessed the effect of neuraxial analgesia instituted at induction of anesthesia or intraoperatively in adult and robot assisted abdominal surgery were considered for inclusion. The outcomes of observational studies as well as randomized controlled trials which were not subjected to meta-analysis were presented in descriptive terms. Meta-analysis was conducted if an outcome of interest was reported by two or more randomized controlled trials.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 19 and 11 studies that investigated spinal and epidural analgesia in adults, respectively. The coprimary outcomes were the pain score at rest at 24 h and the cumulative intravenous morphine consumption at 24 h. Spinal analgesia with long acting neuraxial opioid did not decrease the pain score at rest at 24 h although it reduced the cumulative intravenous morphine consumption at 24 h by a mean difference (95%CI) of 14.88 mg (-22.13--7.63; p < 0.0001, I = 50%) with a low and moderate quality of evidence, respectively, on meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Spinal analgesia with long acting neuraxial opioid had a beneficial effect on analgesic indices till the second postoperative day and a positive influence on opioid consumption up to and including the 72 h time point. The majority of studies demonstrated the use of spinal analgesia with long acting neuraxial opioid to lead to no difference in the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, and the occurrence of pruritus was found to be increased with spinal analgesia with long acting neuraxial opioid in recovery but not at later time points. No difference was revealed in the incidence of urinary retention. The evidence in regard to the quality of recovery-15 score at 24 h and hospital length of stay was not fully consistent, although most studies indicated no difference between spinal analgesia and control for these outcomes. Epidural analgesia in robot assisted abdominal surgery was shown to decrease the pain on movement at 12 h but it had not been studied with respect to its influence on the pain score at rest at 24 h or the cumulative intravenous morphine consumption at 24 h. It did not reduce the pain on movement at later time points and the evidence related to the hospital length of stay was inconsistent.
CONCLUSIONS
Spinal analgesia with long acting neuraxial opioid had a favourable effect on analgesic indices and opioid consumption, and is recommended by the authors, but the evidence for spinal analgesia with short acting neuraxial opioid and epidural analgesia was limited.
Topics: Humans; Pain, Postoperative; Analgesia, Epidural; Abdomen; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Analgesics, Opioid; Pain Measurement; Morphine; Treatment Outcome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Anesthesia, Spinal; Adult
PubMed: 38599160
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2024.111468 -
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 -
International Journal of Clinical... Apr 2024To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of publications to evaluate the analgesic efficacy and safety of percutaneous thermal ablation (PTA) plus percutaneous... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of publications to evaluate the analgesic efficacy and safety of percutaneous thermal ablation (PTA) plus percutaneous cementoplasty (PCP) (PTA + PCP) for painful bone metastases.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library and Embase for articles published up to October 2022. Outcomes were a 10-point pain scale, morphine equivalents daily dose (MEDD) and complications. A subgroup confined to spinal bone metastases was analyzed.
RESULTS
Twenty-one articles were selected for the analysis. The 21 selected articles involved a total of 661 cases. The pooled pain scales at pre-PTA + PCP, 1 day, 1 week and 1-, 3-, and 6 months post-PTA + PCP were 7.60 (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.26-7.95, I = 89%), 3.30 (95% CI, 2.25-4.82, I = 98%), 2.58 (95% CI, 1.99-3.35, I = 94%), 2.02 (95% CI, 1.50-2.71, I = 93%), 1.78 (95% CI, 1.26-2.53, I = 95%), and 1.62 (95% CI, 1.14-2.31, I = 88%), and in the subgroup, 7.97 (95% CI, 7.45-8.52, I = 86%), 3.01 (95% CI, 1.43-6.33, I = 98%), 2.95 (95% CI, 1.93-4.51, I = 95%), 2.34 (95% CI, 1.82-3.01, I = 68%), 2.18 (95% CI, 1.57-3.03, I = 78%), and 2.01 (95% CI, 1.16-3.48, I = 86%). Mean MEDD decreased up to 3 months post-PTA + PCP in 4 articles. The overall pooled major complication rate was 4% (95% CI, 2-6%, I = 2%).
CONCLUSIONS
The updated systematic review and meta-analysis indicates that PTA + PCP for painful bone metastases is safe, and can lead to rapid and sustained pain reduction.
Topics: Humans; Treatment Outcome; Pain; Bone Neoplasms; Cementoplasty; Analgesics; Catheter Ablation
PubMed: 38217754
DOI: 10.1007/s10147-023-02458-z -
BMC Anesthesiology Dec 2023Transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block has been utilized to alleviate pain following laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). However, the optimal timing of administration... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Analgesic benefits of pre-operative versus postoperative transversus abdominis plane block for laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a frequentist network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
BACKGROUND
Transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block has been utilized to alleviate pain following laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). However, the optimal timing of administration remains uncertain. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of pre-operative and postoperative TAP blocks as analgesic options after LC.
METHODS
A frequentist network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted. We systematically searched PubMed (via the National Library of Medicine), EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Web of Science up to March 2023. The study included RCTs that enrolled adult patients (≥ 18 years) who underwent LC and received either pre-operative or postoperative TAP blocks. The primary outcome assessed was 24-hour postoperative morphine consumption (mg). Additionally, pain rest scores within 3 hours, 12 hours, and 24 hours, as well as postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), were considered as pre-specified secondary outcomes.
RESULTS
A total of 34 trials with 2317 patients were included in the analysis. Postoperative TAP block demonstrated superiority over the pre-operative TAP block in reducing opioid consumption (MD 2.02, 95% CI 0.87 to 3.18, I2 98.6%, p < 0.001). However, with regards to postoperative pain, neither pre-operative nor postoperative TAP blocks exhibited superiority over each other at any of the assessed time points. The postoperative TAP block consistently ranked as the best intervention using SUCRA analysis. Moreover, the postoperative TAP block led to the most significant reduction in PONV.
CONCLUSIONS
The findings suggest that the postoperative TAP block may be slightly more effective in reducing 24-hour postoperative opioid consumption and PONV when compared to the pre-operative TAP block.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO, CRD42023396880 .
Topics: Adult; Humans; Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic; Analgesics, Opioid; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting; Network Meta-Analysis; Abdominal Muscles; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Analgesics; Pain, Postoperative
PubMed: 38087218
DOI: 10.1186/s12871-023-02369-6 -
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