-
Cureus Nov 2023The interscalene block (ISB) is the standard regional anesthesia for shoulder arthroscopy. However, the superior trunk block (STB) is an alternative with a potentially... (Review)
Review
The interscalene block (ISB) is the standard regional anesthesia for shoulder arthroscopy. However, the superior trunk block (STB) is an alternative with a potentially safer profile. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the incidence and degree of hemidiaphragmatic paralysis and block efficacy of these techniques. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The main outcome was total hemidiaphragmatic paralysis. We used the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework to assess the certainty of evidence. Four RCTs and 359 patients were included. The STB group showed lower total hemidiaphragmatic paralysis (RR 0.07; 95% CI 0.04 to 0.14; <0.0001). The incidence of subjective dyspnea ( = 0.002) and Horner's syndrome (<0.001) was significantly lower with STB relative to ISB. There was no significant difference between groups in block duration (p = 0.67). There was a high certainty of evidence in the main outcome as per the GRADE framework. Our findings suggest that STB has a better safety profile than ISB, resulting in lower rates of hemidiaphragmatic paralysis and dyspnea while providing a similar block. Therefore, STB could be preferred to ISB, especially in patients susceptible to phrenic nerve paralysis complications.
PubMed: 38050517
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.48217 -
Journal of Anesthesia Feb 2022This systematic review aimed to compare the analgesic effectiveness and complications rates for anterior suprascapular nerve blocks (ASSB) compared to interscalene... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Anterior suprascapular nerve block versus interscalene brachial plexus block for arthroscopic shoulder surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
This systematic review aimed to compare the analgesic effectiveness and complications rates for anterior suprascapular nerve blocks (ASSB) compared to interscalene brachial plexus blocks (ISB) for arthroscopic and outpatient shoulder surgery. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the ASSB versus ISB in the context of arthroscopic shoulder surgery were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcomes included pain scores (Numeric Rating Scale of 0 to 10) up to 24 h postoperatively and analgesic consumption. Secondary outcomes included block complications. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effects modeling and result certainty was determined using the GRADEpro tool. Six RCTs (709 patients) were included for analysis. ISB displayed a statistically significant reduction in pain scores by 0.40 (95%CI = 0.36 to 0.45; p < 0.00001) but not morphine equivalent consumption (mean difference = 0.74 mg; 95%CI = - 0.18 to 1.66 mg; I = 60%; p = 0.11; moderate certainty) immediately in the postoperative care unit. Opioid consumption and pain scores at 6 to 24 h were not significantly different. There was no difference in respiratory events postblock. ASSB demonstrated a significantly lower incidence of Horner's syndrome (relative risk (RR) = 0.17; 95%CI = 0.08 to 0.39; p < 0.00001; high certainty), voice hoarseness (RR = 0.24; 95%CI = 0.10 to 0.57; p < 0.00001; high certainty) and impaired respiratory function (p < 0.00001). The ASSB could be considered an appropriate analgesic option for arthroscopic shoulder surgery with potentially fewer complications than the ISB.
Topics: Anesthetics, Local; Arthroscopy; Brachial Plexus Block; Humans; Pain, Postoperative; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Shoulder
PubMed: 34533639
DOI: 10.1007/s00540-021-03000-z -
Frontiers in Medicine 2022To quantitatively assess and compare the efficacy and adverse effects of six different peripheral nerve block techniques after arthroscopic shoulder surgery (ASS).
STUDY OBJECTIVE
To quantitatively assess and compare the efficacy and adverse effects of six different peripheral nerve block techniques after arthroscopic shoulder surgery (ASS).
DESIGN
Bayesian network meta-analysis.
METHODS
The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, China National Knowledge Infrastructure database, Chinese Scientific Journal database, Wan Fang databases were searched to retrieve randomized clinical trials comparing interscalene brachial plexus block, continuous interscalene brachial plexus block, supraclavicular brachial plexus block, suprascapular nerve block, combined suprascapular and axillary nerve block and local infiltration analgesia on postoperative pain, opioid consumption, and adverse effects (defined as Horner's syndrome, dyspnea, hoarseness, vomiting, and nausea) after ASS under general anesthesia (GA). Two reviewers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias in the included studies.
RESULTS
A total of 1,348 articles were retrieved initially and 36 randomized clinical trials involving 3,124 patients were included in the final analysis. The network meta-analysis showed that interscalene brachial plexus block was superior in reducing pain and opioid consumption compared to the five other interventions. However, adverse effects were reduced using suprascapular nerve block and combined suprascapular and axillary nerve block compared to interscalene brachial plexus block.
CONCLUSION
Interscalene brachial plexus block was superior in reducing pain and opioid consumption compared to other peripheral nerve blocks but had a higher frequency of adverse events.
PubMed: 36438028
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2022.1032253 -
Archives of Disease in Childhood Oct 2019Horner's syndrome (HS) is characterised by a triad of ocular miosis, ptosis and anhidrosis. HS may be a subtle sign of occult pathology in otherwise asymptomatic...
OBJECTIVE
Horner's syndrome (HS) is characterised by a triad of ocular miosis, ptosis and anhidrosis. HS may be a subtle sign of occult pathology in otherwise asymptomatic children, neuroblastoma (NBL) being the the most common associated malignant tumour. Despite such knowledge, the incidence of underlying malignancy in children with HS remains unclear and robust evidence to guide best clinical practice is sparse. We performed a systematic review of the literature with the aim of identifying the incidence of NBL in children with HS of unknown aetiology, and establishing if screening for NBL should be routinely performed in this patient population.
METHODS
Systematic review of the literature (PubMed and Ovid/Medline database, 1961-2018).
RESULTS
The initial search identified 334 manuscripts, of which 8 studies were included in the final analysis. All reports were single-centre retrospective studies without control groups and included a total of 152 patients (age range 0-20 years). All studies investigated patients with HS but without previously established diagnosis. In the studies included, 17 out of a total of 152 patients were diagnosed with a space-occupying lesion. 12 out of the 152 patients were subsequently detected with NBL.
CONCLUSION
HS in children may be the first sign of occult malignancy. We report the first systematic review that comprehensively investigates the incidence of malignancy in this unique patient cohort. We show that HS of unknown aetiology in children warrants further investigation(s) to exclude an underlying space-occupying lesion. This should include cross-sectional imaging of the brain, neck and thorax, plus urinary catecholamines for prompt diagnosis and treatment.
Topics: Algorithms; Brain Neoplasms; Catecholamines; Child; Horner Syndrome; Humans; Neoplasms; Neuroblastoma
PubMed: 31186293
DOI: 10.1136/archdischild-2019-317007 -
Minerva Anestesiologica Jun 2024This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of interscalene brachial plexus block (ISB) techniques in upper limb and shoulder... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study
INTRODUCTION
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of interscalene brachial plexus block (ISB) techniques in upper limb and shoulder surgeries.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
We conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, Medline, and Scopus databases up to May 14, 2023. We employed a search strategy involving keywords such as "brachial plexus block," "interscalene brachial plexus block," "ISB," "extrafascial," and "intrafascial," without applying search restrictions or filters. Eligible studies consisted of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared extrafascial and intrafascial ISB techniques in adult patients undergoing upper limb and shoulder surgeries.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Our analysis included six RCTs encompassing 485 participants. Extrafascial injection demonstrated superiority over intrafascial injection in reducing the incidence of hemidiaphragmatic paresis (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.124 to 0.47, P<0.00001) and preserving respiratory function (MS 0.31, 95% CI 0.1 to 0. 52, P=0.003 FEV
1 in liters). Additionally, extrafascial ISB exhibited a lower risk of block-related complications (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.50, P<0.00001). However, the intrafascial technique offered a faster sensory and motor block onset. The duration of sensory block did not significantly differ. The incidence of Horner syndrome showed no statistically significant difference.CONCLUSIONS
Our findings favor extrafascial ISB techniques because they reduce hemidiaphragmatic paresis, preserve respiratory function, and lower block-related complications. However, further research is necessary to establish their safety and efficacy in specific patient populations.
Topics: Humans; Brachial Plexus Block; Injections; Anesthetics, Local; Treatment Outcome; Brachial Plexus
PubMed: 38305015
DOI: 10.23736/S0375-9393.23.17807-2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2021Breast cancer is one of the most common cancers among women. Surgical removal of the cancer is the mainstay of treatment; however, tumour handling during surgery can... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Breast cancer is one of the most common cancers among women. Surgical removal of the cancer is the mainstay of treatment; however, tumour handling during surgery can cause microscopic dissemination of tumour cells and disease recurrence. The body's hormonal response to surgery (stress response) and general anaesthesia may suppress immunity, promoting tumour dissemination. Paravertebral anaesthesia numbs the site of surgery, provides good analgesia, and blunts the stress response, minimising the need for general anaesthesia.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of paravertebral anaesthesia with or without sedation compared to general anaesthesia in women undergoing breast cancer surgery, with important outcomes of quality of recovery, postoperative pain at rest, and mortality.
SEARCH METHODS
On 6 April 2020, we searched the Specialised Register of the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group (CBCG); CENTRAL (latest issue), in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE (via OvidSP); Embase (via OvidSP); the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) search portal; and ClinicalTrials.gov for all prospectively registered and ongoing trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in adult women undergoing breast cancer surgery in which paravertebral anaesthesia with or without sedation was compared to general anaesthesia. We did not include studies in which paravertebral anaesthesia was given as an adjunct to general anaesthesia and then this was compared to use of general anaesthesia.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted details of trial methods and outcome data from eligible trials. When data could be pooled, analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis, and the random-effects model was used if there was heterogeneity. When data could not be pooled, the synthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM) approach was applied. The GRADE approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
Nine studies (614 participants) were included in the review. All were RCTs of parallel design, wherein female patients aged > 18 years underwent breast cancer surgery under paravertebral anaesthesia or general anaesthesia. None of the studies assessed quality of recovery in the first three postoperative days using a validated questionnaire; most assessed factors affecting quality of recovery such as postoperative analgesic use, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), hospital stay, ambulation, and patient satisfaction. Paravertebral anaesthesia may reduce the 24-hour postoperative analgesic requirement (odds ratio (OR) 0.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.01 to 0.34; 5 studies, 305 participants; low-certainty evidence) compared to general anaesthesia. Heterogeneity (I² = 70%) was attributed to the fixed dose of opioids and non-steroidal analgesics administered postoperatively in one study (70 participants), masking a difference in analgesic requirements between groups. Paravertebral anaesthesia probably reduces the incidence of PONV (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.30; 6 studies, 324 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), probably results in a shorter hospital stay (mean difference (MD) -79.39 minutes, 95% CI -107.38 to -51.40; 3 studies, 174 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and probably reduces time to ambulation compared to general anaesthesia (SWiM analysis): percentages indicate vote counting based on direction of effect (100%, 95% CI 51.01% to 100%; P = 0.125; 4 studies, 375 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Paravertebral anaesthesia probably results in higher patient satisfaction (MD 5.52 points, 95% CI 1.30 to 9.75; 3 studies, 129 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) on a 0 to 100 scale 24 hours postoperatively compared to general anaesthesia. Postoperative pain at rest and on movement was assessed at 2, 6, and 24 postoperative hours on a 0 to 10 visual analogue scale (VAS). Four studies (224 participants) found that paravertebral anaesthesia as compared to general anaesthesia probably reduced pain at 2 postoperative hours (MD -2.95, 95% CI -3.37 to -2.54; moderate-certainty evidence). Five studies (324 participants) found that paravertebral anaesthesia may reduce pain at rest at 6 hours postoperatively (MD -1.54, 95% CI -3.20 to 0.11; low-certainty evidence). Five studies (278 participants) found that paravertebral anaesthesia may reduce pain at rest at 24 hours postoperatively (MD -1.19, 95% CI -2.27 to -0.10; low-certainty evidence). Differences in the methods of two studies (119 participants) and addition of clonidine to the local anaesthetic in two studies (109 participants), respectively, contributed to the heterogeneity (I² = 96%) observed for these two outcomes. Two studies (130 participants) found that paravertebral anaesthesia may reduce pain on movement at 6 hours (MD-2.57, 95% CI -3.97 to -1.17) and at 24 hours (MD -2.12, 95% CI -4.80 to 0.55; low-certainty evidence). Heterogeneity (I² = 96%) was observed for both outcomes and could be due to methodological differences between studies. None of the studies reported mortality related to the anaesthetic technique. Eight studies (574 participants) evaluated adverse outcomes with paravertebral anaesthesia: epidural spread (0.7%), minor bleeding (1.4%), pleural puncture not associated with pneumothorax (0.3%), and Horner's syndrome (7.1%). These complications were self-limiting and resolved without treatment. No data are available on disease-free survival, chronic pain, and quality of life. Blinding of personnel or participants was not possible in any study, as a regional anaesthetic technique was compared to general anaesthesia. Risk of bias was judged to be serious, as seven studies had concerns of selection bias and three of detection bias.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Moderate-certainty evidence shows that paravertebral anaesthesia probably reduces PONV, hospital stay, postoperative pain (at 2 hours), and time to ambulation and results in greater patient satisfaction on the first postoperative day compared to general anaesthesia. Paravertebral anaesthesia may also reduce postoperative analgesic use and postoperative pain at 6 and 24 hours at rest and on movement based on low-certainty evidence. However, RCTs using validated questionnaires are needed to confirm these results. Adverse events observed with paravertebral anaesthesia are rare.
Topics: Adult; Analgesia; Anesthesia Recovery Period; Anesthesia, General; Anesthesia, Spinal; Bias; Breast Neoplasms; Early Ambulation; Female; Horner Syndrome; Humans; Incidence; Intention to Treat Analysis; Length of Stay; Nerve Block; Pain Measurement; Pain, Postoperative; Patient Satisfaction; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stress, Physiological
PubMed: 33629404
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012968.pub2 -
Headache Jun 2024Hemicrania continua is a primary unilateral headache characterized by ipsilateral parasympathetic and sympathetic autonomic features. A key diagnostic criterion is its... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Hemicrania continua is a primary unilateral headache characterized by ipsilateral parasympathetic and sympathetic autonomic features. A key diagnostic criterion is its dramatic response to indomethacin treatment; however, various vascular or structural abnormalities have been reported to cause secondary hemicrania continua, presenting with clinical features similar to those of the primary headache presentation.
OBJECTIVE
We reviewed the literature to compile secondary hemicrania continua cases, highlighting the importance of imaging during the evaluation. Additionally, we also contributed our three cases to the existing studies.
METHODS
We conducted a review of articles from the PubMed and EMBASE databases that described reported cases of secondary hemicrania continua, covering the period from 1993 to 2021. Our review included detailed patient information, signs, and symptoms of hemicrania continua, as well as information on indomethacin usage and headache resolution (if pertinent).
RESULTS
Secondary hemicrania continua can result from a remarkably diverse range of structural and vascular lesions, yet clinical reports on long-term follow-up are lacking. Notably, cases may exhibit a classical response to indomethacin, emphasizing the importance of neuroimaging in excluding secondary cases. Our search yielded 41 cases meeting our criteria. We excluded six cases that were not treated with indomethacin or were unresponsive to it. Additionally, we present three cases that highlight the necessity of neuroimaging in evaluating hemicrania continua, along with short- and long-term clinical outcomes following indomethacin and lesion-directed treatments. Case 1 presented with daily right-sided headaches and cranial autonomic symptoms. Her pain completely resolved with indomethacin use. Neuroimaging of the brain revealed a laterally directed saccular aneurysm of the right internal carotid artery. Case 2 presented with continuous left-sided unilateral headaches with superimposed exacerbations. She complained of left-sided photophobia with a dull sensation in the left ear. Her symptoms decreased after 2 weeks of indomethacin use. Neuroimaging of the head indicated a benign tumor with mass effect into the left lateral medulla and inferior cerebellar peduncle. Case 3 presented with a right side-locked headache with daily, severe superimposed exacerbations. She had photophobia in the right eye and a right-sided Horner's syndrome, along with tearing during her exacerbations. Neuroimaging of the brain revealed a pituitary tumor and her pain completely resolved with indomethacin.
CONCLUSION
Hemicrania continua is a rare headache disorder that can be either primary or secondary. Importantly, response to indomethacin can still occur in secondary hemicrania continua. Thus, neuroimaging should be considered to rule out underlying structural etiology in all cases, regardless of their clinical responsiveness to indomethacin therapy.
Topics: Female; Humans; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Indomethacin; Neuroimaging
PubMed: 38780233
DOI: 10.1111/head.14728 -
Heart Rhythm Oct 2019Cardiac sympathetic denervation (CSD) is an important adjunctive option for patients with refractory ventricular arrhythmias (VAs). Reports of efficacy of CSD in...
BACKGROUND
Cardiac sympathetic denervation (CSD) is an important adjunctive option for patients with refractory ventricular arrhythmias (VAs). Reports of efficacy of CSD in patients with structural heart disease (SHD) and refractory VA vary widely in literature.
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review of arrhythmic outcomes and complications in patients with SHD who underwent CSD due to recurrent VAs.
METHODS
Electronic databases (Google Scholar and PubMed) were searched to identify reports on CSD in SHD using appropriate medical subject terms. No sample size restriction was applied. All patients with known channelopathies were excluded. Baseline demographic and surgical data, arrhythmic outcomes, and procedural complications were evaluated.
RESULTS
A total of 13 studies and 173 patients were included. Of the 173 patients (121 [70%] male); pooled mean age 54.6 [95% confidence interval 52.6-56.7] years), 48 (28%) had ischemic cardiomyopathy, and 141 (82%) underwent bilateral CSD. Overall freedom from events ranged from 58% to 100%. Complications were reported in 49 patients(28%). Transient hypotension (9%), pneumothorax (5%), neuropathic pain (skin sensitivity) (4%), Horner syndrome (3%), sweating pattern changes (3%), and hemothorax (2%) were the most common complications. No procedure-related deaths were reported.
CONCLUSION
CSD reduced the number of VA events in patients with SHD, and the benefit from the intervention seemed to be independent of the underlying SHD. Although overall rate of postprocedural complications was high, most of the complications were temporary. Major postprocedural complications after CSD were infrequent.
Topics: Aged; Comorbidity; Female; Heart Diseases; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Postoperative Complications; Prognosis; Recurrence; Risk Assessment; Survival Rate; Sympathectomy; Tachycardia, Ventricular; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31252084
DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2019.06.018