-
Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine 2009Ultrasound guidance has become popular for performance of regional anesthesia and analgesia. This systematic review summarizes existing evidence for superior risk to... (Review)
Review
Ultrasound guidance has become popular for performance of regional anesthesia and analgesia. This systematic review summarizes existing evidence for superior risk to benefit profiles for ultrasound versus other techniques. Medline was systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ultrasound to another technique, and for large (n > 100) prospective case series describing experience with ultrasound-guided blocks. Fourteen RCTs and 2 case series were identified for peripheral nerve blocks. No RCTs or case series were identified for perineural catheters. Six RCTs and 1 case series were identified for epidural anesthesia. Overall, the RCTs and case series reported that use of ultrasound significantly reduced time or number of attempts to perform blocks and in some cases significantly improved the quality of sensory block. The included studies reported high incidence of efficacy of blocks with ultrasound (95%-100%) that was not significantly different than most other techniques. No serious complications were reported in included studies. Current evidence does not suggest that use of ultrasound improves success of regional anesthesia versus most other techniques. However, ultrasound was not inferior for efficacy, did not increase risk, and offers other potential patient-oriented benefits. All RCTs are rather small, thus completion of large RCTs and case series are encouraged to confirm findings.
Topics: Analgesia; Anesthesia, Conduction; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Nerve Block; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Assessment; Trauma, Nervous System; Treatment Outcome; Ultrasonography, Interventional
PubMed: 19258988
DOI: 10.1097/AAP.0b013e3181933ec3 -
International Journal of Surgery... Jul 2022To compare the analgesic efficacy and feasibility of erector spinae plane block (ESPB) with non-block care or other blocks in patients undergoing liver surgery. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block for postoperative analgesia in patients after liver surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis on randomized comparative studies.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the analgesic efficacy and feasibility of erector spinae plane block (ESPB) with non-block care or other blocks in patients undergoing liver surgery.
METHOD
A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared ESPB to non-block care or local infiltration analgesia (LIA), intrathecal morphine (ITM) and quadratus lumborum block (QLB) for postoperative analgesia in liver surgery patients.
RESULTS
Six RCTs containing 392 patients were included. This meta-analysis found that ESPB did not significantly reduce postoperative 8 h [mean standard (MD) 0.20; 95% (confidence interval) CI: -1.62, 2.01; P = 0.83; I = 99%] and 24 h [MD 0.10; 95% CI: -0.91, 1.11; P = 0.84; I = 97%] resting pain scores in patients undergoing liver surgery compared to control groups. Furthermore, ESPB had no effect on postoperative 24 h cumulative opioid consumption [MD 1.74; 95% CI: 3.43, 6.91; P = 0.51; I = 95%] or sleep quality [OR 1.00; 95% CI: 0.43, 2.35; P 0.99; I = 0%]. In contrast, ESPB reduced postoperative 48 h resting pain score [MD -0.77; 95% CI -1.56, 0.02; P = 0.05; I = 96%], the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) [OR 0.29; 95% CI 0.18, 0.48; P = 0.001; I = 0%]. Interestingly, in two RCTs, ESPB showed a higher incidence of shoulder pain compared to ITM [OR 2.89; 95%CI 1.03 to 8.09; P = 0.04; I = 0%]. There have been no reports of complications from ESPB or other blocks.
CONCLUSION
Current literature supported that ESPB had no significant difference in analgesic efficacy in liver surgery patients compared to LIA, ITM, and QLB. More evidences, preferably from high quality RCTs are required to confirm these finding.
Topics: Analgesia; Analgesics; Humans; Liver; Morphine; Nerve Block; Pain, Postoperative; Ultrasonography, Interventional
PubMed: 35662584
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2022.106689 -
European Journal of Pain (London,... Apr 2024The magnitude of placebo effects from physical and psychological 'sham' is unknown but could impact efficacy trials and treatment understanding. To quantify placebo... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The magnitude of placebo effects from physical and psychological 'sham' is unknown but could impact efficacy trials and treatment understanding. To quantify placebo effects, this systematic review of three-armed randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of physical and psychological interventions for pain compared outcomes in 'sham' control intervention and non-exposure arms.
METHODS
RCTs with treatment, 'sham' control intervention, and non-exposure groups were included, enrolling adults with any pain. A protocol was pre-registered (PROSPERO: CRD42023413324), and twelve databases searched from 2008 to July 2023. Trial methods and blinding were analysed descriptively and risk of bias assessed. Meta-analysis of pain measures at short-, medium- and long-term was performed with random-effects models of standardised mean differences (SMD).Studies were sub-grouped according to control intervention type.
RESULTS
Seventeen RCTs were included. The average short-term placebo effect was small (0.21 SMD, 0.1-0.33 95% CI, p = 0.0002, 1440 participants). It showed no heterogeneity (Tau = 0.1, I = 11%, p = 0.3), preventing meta-regression analyses of effect modifiers. However, sub-group analyses revealed larger placebo effects in manual control interventions compared to disabled devices and miscellaneous control interventions. Overall, placebo analgesia accounted for 39% of treatments' short-term effectiveness. No placebo effects were found at medium-term (7 RCTs, 381 participants) or long-term follow-up (3 RCTs, 173 participants).
CONCLUSIONS
The observed placebo analgesia has mechanistic and methodological implications, though its clinical importance may be limited. Control intervention design affects placebo effects, highlighting the importance of considering methodology in RCT interpretation. Review limitations include a small number of long-term studies and sample heterogeneity.
SIGNIFICANCE
This systematic review directly quantifies placebo effects from physical and psychological 'sham' control interventions and compares them to treatments' overall effectiveness. By doing so, the review enhances our understanding of placebo effects, their relative contribution in clinical trials, and their susceptibly to trial design. It poses further questions regarding the influence of blinding, participant expectations, and features of the therapeutic context. Overall, the insights provided by this review carry methodological significance and are important for the interpretation and synthesis of efficacy trials in this field.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Analgesia; Pain
PubMed: 37985188
DOI: 10.1002/ejp.2205 -
World Neurosurgery Jul 2022Multimodal analgesia is a strategy that can be used to improve pain management in the perioperative period for patients undergoing surgery of the spine. However, no... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Multimodal analgesia is a strategy that can be used to improve pain management in the perioperative period for patients undergoing surgery of the spine. However, no review evidence is available on the quantitative models of multimodal analgesia within this clinical setting. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the effects of maximal (≥3 analgesic agents) multimodal analgesic medication for patients undergoing surgery of the spine.
METHODS
We included randomized controlled trials that had evaluated the use of ≥3 multimodal analgesia components (maximal multimodal analgesia) in patients undergoing spinal surgery. We excluded patients who had received neuraxial or regional analgesia. The control group consisted of placebo, standard care (any therapeutic modality including ≤2 analgesic components). The primary outcomes were the postoperative pain scores at rest evaluated at 24 and 48 hours. We searched MEDLINE via OvidSP, EMBASE via OvidSP, and the Cochrane Library (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and CENTRAL). We used the Cochrane standard methods.
RESULTS
We identified consistently improved analgesic endpoints across all predetermined primary and secondary outcomes. A total of 11 eligible studies had evaluated the primary outcome of pain at rest at 24 hours. The patients who had received maximal multimodal analgesia were identified to have had lower pain scores with an average mean difference of -1.03 (P < 0.00001). The length of hospital stay was shorter for the patients who had received multimodal analgesia (mean difference, -0.55; P < 0.00001).
CONCLUSIONS
Perioperative maximal multimodal analgesia consistently improved the visual analog scale scores for an adult population in the immediate postoperative period, with a moderate quality of evidence. We found a significant decrease in the hospital length of stay for patients who had received maximal multimodal analgesia with a high level of evidence and no statistical heterogeneity.
Topics: Adult; Analgesia; Analgesics; Humans; Pain Management; Pain Measurement; Pain, Postoperative
PubMed: 35346882
DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2022.03.098 -
Clinical Drug Investigation Apr 2017Several clinical trials have examined and indicated the usefulness of epidural dexmedetomidine therapy. However, there has been no systematic analysis of the findings of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
Several clinical trials have examined and indicated the usefulness of epidural dexmedetomidine therapy. However, there has been no systematic analysis of the findings of these trials to date. We undertook this systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of epidural dexmedetomidine adjunctive therapy in different surgical procedures.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We searched EMBASE, PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and the Clinical Trials.gov database to identify randomized controlled trials investigating the effects of epidural dexmedetomidine adjunctive therapy. The article search was conducted without language or date restrictions. The date of the last search was 27 July 2016. The mean differences (MD) or standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for continuous variables, and risk ratios (RRs) were presented for dichotomous outcomes. Heterogeneity was assessed using τ , χ and I analyses.
RESULTS
Twelve randomized controlled trials were included in the final analysis. Compared with the control treatment, epidural dexmedetomidine administration prolonged the duration of analgesia (P < 0.0001), reduced the time to sensory block (P = 0.002), decreased the requirement for rescue analgesia (P < 0.00001) and achieved a significantly higher sedation score (P < 0.0001). Although dexmedetomidine adjunctive therapy did not affect mean arterial pressure (P = 0.33), systolic blood pressure (P = 0.32) or diastolic blood pressure (P = 0.28), it significantly lowered heart rate (P = 0.0009). Symptoms indicative of hypotension and bradycardia events were more common in the dexmedetomidine group, but the difference in the overall risk of hypotension and bradycardia was statistically insignificant (P > 0.05) in comparison with that reported for the control therapies. Furthermore, dexmedetomidine effectively reduced post-operative pain (P = 0.03), whilst the occurrence of other side effects, such as pruritus, dizziness, dry mouth, nausea and vomiting did not differ significantly from that reported for the control therapies, except the risk of shivering was significantly higher with control therapies (P = 0.03).
CONCLUSION
This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrates that dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant in epidural procedures is generally safe and well tolerated. Furthermore, dexmedetomidine acted synergistically and provided an improved sedation and analgesic profile.
Topics: Analgesia, Epidural; Analgesics; Anesthesia; Dexmedetomidine; Humans; Pain Management; Pain, Postoperative; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 27812971
DOI: 10.1007/s40261-016-0477-9 -
PloS One 2014Neuraxial application of dexmedetomidine (DEX) as adjuvant analgesic has been invetigated in some randomized controlled trials (RCTs) but not been approved because of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Neuraxial application of dexmedetomidine (DEX) as adjuvant analgesic has been invetigated in some randomized controlled trials (RCTs) but not been approved because of the inconsistency of efficacy and safety in these RCTs. We performed this meta-analysis to access the efficacy and safety of neuraxial DEX as local anaesthetic (LA) adjuvant.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases from inception to June 2013 for RCTs that investigated the analgesia efficacy and safety for neuraxial application DEX as LA adjuvant. Effects were summarized using standardized mean differences (SMDs), weighed mean differences (WMDs) or odds ratio (OR) with suitable effect model. The primary outcomes were postoperative pain intensity and analgesic duration, bradycardia and hypotension.
RESULTS
Sixteen RCTs involving 1092 participants were included. Neuraxial DEX significantly decreased postoperative pain intensity (SMD, -1.29; 95% confidence interval (CI), -1.70 to -0.89; P<0.00001), prolonged analgesic duration (WMD, 6.93 hours; 95% CI, 5.23 to 8.62; P<0.00001) and increased the risk of bradycardia (OR, 2.68; 95% CI, 1.18 to 6.10; P = 0.02). No evidence showed that neuraxial DEX increased the risk of other adverse events, such as hypotension (OR, 1.54; 95% CI, 0.83 to 2.85; P = 0.17). Additionally, neuraxial DEX was associated with beneficial alterations in postoperative sedation scores and number of analgesic requirements, sensory and motor block characteristics, and intro-operative hemodynamics.
CONCLUSION
Neuraxial DEX is a favorable LA adjuvant with better and longer analgesia. The greatest concern is bradycardia. Further large sample trials with strict design and focusing on long-term outcomes are needed.
Topics: Analgesia; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Anesthesia; Anesthetics, Local; Bradycardia; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Dexmedetomidine; Humans; Hypotension; Pain Management; Pain, Postoperative; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 24671181
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0093114 -
Medicina Oral, Patologia Oral Y Cirugia... Sep 2021To assess the effectiveness of preemptive analgesia in dental implant surgery in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
To assess the effectiveness of preemptive analgesia in dental implant surgery in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
MATERIAL AND METHODS
The present study was conducted in accordance with the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement and registered in PROSPERO database CRD42020168757. A search without restrictions regarding language or date of publication was conducted in six databases and gray literature. A random effect meta-analysis compared the efficacy of preemptive analgesia compared to placebo through pooled OR and 95%CI. The interpretation of results followed the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach together with the magnitude of the effect according to GRADE guidelines.
RESULTS
Four studies were included in the review and three were incorporated into the meta-analysis. All studies demonstrated that preemptive analgesia contributed to a significant improvement in the postoperative pain control. However, the overall pooled standard mean difference (SMD) showed that preemptive analgesia had small effects compared to placebo in reducing pain (SMD: -0.45; IC: -0.83; -0.08) with low certainty of the evidence. Our meta-analysis showed that the magnitude of the effect was bigger six to eight hours after the surgery (large effect), compared to the time of one to two hours after the surgery (small effect).
CONCLUSIONS
Preemptive analgesia may have a positive effect in reducing pain compared to not using preemptive medication, but the evidence is very uncertain.
Topics: Analgesia; Dental Implants; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 34415001
DOI: 10.4317/medoral.24639 -
Anaesthesia Oct 2008The PROSPECT Working Group, a collaboration of anaesthetists and surgeons, conducts systematic reviews of postoperative pain management for different surgical procedures... (Review)
Review
The PROSPECT Working Group, a collaboration of anaesthetists and surgeons, conducts systematic reviews of postoperative pain management for different surgical procedures (http://www.postoppain.org). Evidence-based consensus recommendations for the effective management of postoperative pain are then developed from these systematic reviews, incorporating clinical practice observations, and transferable evidence from other relevant procedures. We present the results of a systematic review of pain and other outcomes following analgesic, anaesthetic and surgical interventions for total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The evidence from this review supports the use of general anaesthesia combined with a femoral nerve block for surgery and postoperative analgesia, or alternatively spinal anaesthesia with local anaesthetic plus spinal morphine. The primary technique, together with cooling and compression techniques, should be supplemented with paracetamol and conventional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or COX-2-selective inhibitors, plus intravenous strong opioids (high-intensity pain) or weak opioids (moderate- to low-intensity pain).
Topics: Analgesia; Analgesics; Anesthesia, Conduction; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Humans; Pain, Postoperative; Physical Therapy Modalities; Postoperative Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 18627367
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2008.05565.x -
Anaesthesia Jan 2015We systematically reviewed the safety and efficacy of perineural dexamethasone as an adjunct for peripheral nerve blockade in 29 controlled trials of 1695 participants.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
We systematically reviewed the safety and efficacy of perineural dexamethasone as an adjunct for peripheral nerve blockade in 29 controlled trials of 1695 participants. We grouped trials by the duration of local anaesthetic action (short- or medium- vs long-term). Dexamethasone increased the mean (95% CI) duration of analgesia by 233 (172-295) min when injected with short- or medium-term action local anaesthetics and by 488 (419-557) min when injected with long-term action local anaesthetics, p < 0.00001 for both. However, these results should be interpreted with caution due to the extreme heterogeneity of results, with I2 exceeding 90% for both analyses. Meta-regression did not show an interaction between dose of perineural dexamethasone (4-10 mg) and duration of analgesia (r2 = 0.02, p = 0.54). There were no differences between 4 and 8 mg dexamethasone on subgroup analysis.
Topics: Adjuvants, Anesthesia; Analgesia; Anesthetics, Local; Dexamethasone; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Humans; Nerve Block; Time Factors
PubMed: 25123271
DOI: 10.1111/anae.12823 -
Journal of the Royal Army Medical Corps Dec 2010The purpose of this systematic review is to investigate current evidence for analgesic use in the prehospital environment using expert military and civilian opinion to... (Review)
Review
The purpose of this systematic review is to investigate current evidence for analgesic use in the prehospital environment using expert military and civilian opinion to determine the important clinical questions. There was a high degree of agreement that pain should be no worse than mild, that pain relief be rapid (within 10 minutes), that patients should respond to verbal stimuli and not require ventilatory support, and that major adverse events should be avoided. Twenty-one studies provided information about 6212 patients; the majority reported most of the outcomes of interest. With opioids 60-70% of patients still had pain levels above 30/100 mm on a Visual Analogue Scale after 10 minutes, falling to about 30% by 30-40 minutes. Fascia iliaca blocks demonstrated some efficacy for femoral fractures. No patient on opioids required ventilatory support; two required naloxone; sedation was rare. Cardiovascular instability was uncommon. Main adverse events were dizziness or giddiness, and pruritus with opioids. There was little evidence regarding the prehospital use ofketamine.
Topics: Adult; Analgesia; Emergency Medical Services; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans
PubMed: 21302646
DOI: 10.1136/jramc-156-04s-05