-
Pain Practice : the Official Journal of... Sep 2023Duloxetine has been used as an adjunct in multimodal analgesia for acute postoperative pain in clinical studies. This meta-analysis aims to conclude whether oral... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Duloxetine has been used as an adjunct in multimodal analgesia for acute postoperative pain in clinical studies. This meta-analysis aims to conclude whether oral duloxetine, when given perioperatively, is any better than a placebo in managing postoperative pain. Effects of duloxetine on postoperative pain scores, time to first rescue analgesia, postoperative rescue analgesia consumption, side effects attributable to duloxetine, and patient satisfaction profile were assessed.
METHOD
MEDLINE, Web of Science, EMBASE, Scholar Google, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched with keywords including "Duloxetine" AND "postoperative pain", "Duloxetine" AND "acute pain" and with "Duloxetine" till October 2022. This meta-analysis included randomized clinical trials in which perioperative duloxetine 60 mg per oral was administered not more than 7 days before surgery and for at least 24 after surgery but not more than 14 days after surgery. All RCTs in which the comparator is placebo and outcomes related to analgesic efficacy like pain scores, opioid consumption, and side effects of duloxetine until 48 h postoperatively were included. Data were extracted from the studies and a risk of bias summary was formed using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. Effect sizes were given as standardized mean differences for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RR) by the Mantel-Haenszel test for the categorical outcome. Confirmation of publication bias was done by Egger's regression test (p < 0.05). If publication bias or heterogeneity was detected, the trim-and-fill method was used to calculate the adjusted effect size. Sensitivity analysis was done by leaving one out method after excluding the study with a high risk of bias. Subgroup analysis was done based on the type of surgery and gender. The study was prospectively registered in the PROSPERO under the registration number CRD42019139559.
FINDINGS
29 studies with 2043 patients met the inclusion criteria and were reviewed for this meta-analysis. Postoperative pain scores at 24 h [Std. Mean Difference (95% CI); -0.69 (-1.07, -0.32)] and at 48 h [-1.13 (-1.68, -0.58)] are significantly less with duloxetine (p-value < 0.05). Time to first rescue analgesia was significantly more in patients where duloxetine was administered [1.27 (1.10, 1.45); p-value > 0.05]. Opioid consumption up to 24 h [-1.82 (-2.46, -1.18)] and 48 h [-2.48 (-3.46, -1.50)] was significantly less (p-value < 0.05) in patients who received duloxetine. Complications and recovery profiles were similar in patients receiving either duloxetine or a placebo.
INTERPRETATION
Based on GRADE findings, we conclude that there is low to moderate evidence to advocate the use of duloxetine for managing postoperative pain. Further trials are needed to replicate or refute these results based on robust methodology.
Topics: Humans; Analgesics, Opioid; Pain Management; Duloxetine Hydrochloride; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Pain, Postoperative
PubMed: 37246352
DOI: 10.1111/papr.13253 -
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 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Apr 2023The advantages of PCEA over CEA have been demonstrated in obstetric patients. Whether a similar benefit applies to surgical patients is unclear. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The advantages of PCEA over CEA have been demonstrated in obstetric patients. Whether a similar benefit applies to surgical patients is unclear.
METHODS
Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Library were searched, enabling a systematic review of studies comparing PCEA and CEA in adult surgical patients (PROSPERO: CRD42018106644). The study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB2). The primary outcome was pain scores on postoperative day one (POD1). Secondary outcomes were 24 or 48 h epidural or intravenous total analgesic dose, systemic analgesics, manual top-ups, side effects, and patient satisfaction.
RESULTS
Six randomized controlled trials with high heterogeneity of study characteristics were identified with a moderate risk of bias. Two studies showed significantly reduced resting pain scores on POD1 in PCEA compared with CEA patients (36-44%, < 0.05). Four studies found comparable pain scores between these groups. PCEA use reduced epidural medication (28% to 40% reduction, < 0.01) in four studies. One study found a 23% reduction ( < 0.001) of top-ups in PCEA; intravenous morphine use by PCEA patients was reduced (0.16 vs. 3.45 mg per patient, < 0.05) in one study. PCEA patients were more satisfied with analgesia ( < 0.001) in two studies. Nausea and vomiting were reduced in PCEA ( = 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS
Regarding the reduction in pain scores, the effects of PCEA were not significant or clinically not relevant. However, regarding the amount of epidural drug use, the amount of required rescue systemic analgesics, patient satisfaction, and the number of required top-ups, PCEA had advantages over CEA in surgical patients.
PubMed: 37176605
DOI: 10.3390/jcm12093164 -
Neuro-Chirurgie Jul 2023Postoperative complications after craniotomy for brain tumors include pain, nausea/vomiting, and infection. A standardized enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS)... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Postoperative complications after craniotomy for brain tumors include pain, nausea/vomiting, and infection. A standardized enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol is not widely accepted for this common neurosurgical procedure. Few studies have explored its application.
METHODS
A literature search of PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases was performed between January 1992 and March 2023. Original studies that implemented an ERAS protocol for patients that underwent craniotomy for brain tumors were included. The following variables were evaluated: hospital length of stay (LOS), postoperative pain, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) prophylaxis, non-opioid analgesia, and quality of life (QOL).
RESULTS
Twelve studies with a total of 1309 patients met inclusion criteria, including ten randomized controlled trials, one nonrandomized controlled trial, and one quality control study. Most frequently assessed metrics included hospital LOS, PONV prophylaxis, and non-opioid analgesia. A significant reduction in postoperative LOS was observed in 7 studies with ERAS or ERAS components. ERAS was significantly associated with pain reduction on the visual analog scale and verbal numerical rating scale (n=8). Non-opioid analgesia in ERAS improved postoperative pain control (n=4) and decreased the duration of pain (n=1). Three of six studies found no difference in PONV in ERAS vs. control. No studies reported an increase in postoperative complications using ERAS vs. control. One study showed greater patient satisfaction at 30-day follow-up with improved QOL.
CONCLUSION
Implementing ERAS protocol may enhance outcomes and quality of life in patients with moderate evidence for improved recovery in those undergoing craniotomy for brain tumors.
Topics: Humans; Brain Neoplasms; Craniotomy; Enhanced Recovery After Surgery; Length of Stay; Pain, Postoperative; Postoperative Complications; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37062467
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuchi.2023.101442 -
Pain and Therapy Jun 2023This critical review assessed the advantages of invasive procedures that were recently included in systematic reviews, to evaluate whether the definition of refractory... (Review)
Review
This critical review assessed the advantages of invasive procedures that were recently included in systematic reviews, to evaluate whether the definition of refractory pain condition was correctly followed to select patients for invasive interventions and to analyze how data were positively interpreted. A total of 21 studies were selected for the purpose of this review. Three were randomized controlled studies, ten were prospective studies, and eight were retrospective studies. Analysis of these studies showed evident lack of proper assessment before implantation for different reasons. These included an optimistic interpretation regarding the outcomes, poor consideration of complications, and inclusion of patients with short survival. Moreover, the indication of intrathecal therapy as a condition in which a patient has failed to respond to multiple therapies provided by a pain or palliative care physician or at sufficient doses for adequate durations, as suggested by a recent research group, has been disregarded. Regretfully, this can discourage the use of intrathecal therapy in patients who are unresponsive to multiple opioid strategies subtrahend a potent means to be used in a very selective population.
PubMed: 37055698
DOI: 10.1007/s40122-023-00507-z -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2023Neonates are an extremely vulnerable patient population, with 6% to 9% admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) following birth. Neonates admitted to the NICU... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Neonates are an extremely vulnerable patient population, with 6% to 9% admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) following birth. Neonates admitted to the NICU will undergo multiple painful procedures per day throughout their stay. There is increasing evidence that frequent and repetitive exposure to painful stimuli is associated with poorer outcomes later in life. To date, a wide variety of pain control mechanisms have been developed and implemented to address procedural pain in neonates. This review focused on non-opioid analgesics, specifically non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists, which alleviate pain through inhibiting cellular pathways to achieve analgesia. The analgesics considered in this review show potential for pain relief in clinical practice; however, an evidence summation compiling the individual drugs they comprise and outlining the benefits and harms of their administration is lacking. We therefore sought to summarize the evidence on the level of pain experienced by neonates both during and following procedures; relevant drug-related adverse events, namely episodes of apnea, desaturation, bradycardia, and hypotension; and the effects of combinations of drugs. As the field of neonatal procedural pain management is constantly evolving, this review aimed to ascertain the scope of non-opioid analgesics for neonatal procedural pain to provide an overview of the options available to better inform evidence-based clinical practice. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of non-opioid analgesics in neonates (term or preterm) exposed to procedural pain compared to placebo or no drug, non-pharmacological intervention, other analgesics, or different routes of administration.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Library (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, and two trial registries in June 2022. We screened the reference lists of included studies for studies not identified by the database searches.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, and cluster-RCTs in neonates (term or preterm) undergoing painful procedures comparing NSAIDs and NMDA receptor antagonists to placebo or no drug, non-pharmacological intervention, other analgesics, or different routes of administration. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our main outcomes were pain assessed during the procedure and up to 10 minutes after the procedure with a validated scale; episodes of bradycardia; episodes of apnea; and hypotension requiring medical therapy.
MAIN RESULTS
We included two RCTs involving a total of 269 neonates conducted in Nigeria and India. NMDA receptor antagonists versus no treatment, placebo, oral sweet solution, or non-pharmacological intervention One RCT evaluated using oral ketamine (10 mg/kg body weight) versus sugar syrup (66.7% w/w at 1 mL/kg body weight) for neonatal circumcision. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of ketamine on pain score during the procedure, assessed with the Neonatal Infant Pain Scale (NIPS), compared with placebo (mean difference (MD) -0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.32 to -0.58; 1 RCT; 145 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No other outcomes of interest were reported on. Head-to-head comparison of different analgesics One RCT evaluated using intravenous fentanyl versus intravenous ketamine during laser photocoagulation for retinopathy of prematurity. Neonates receiving ketamine followed an initial regimen (0.5 mg/kg bolus 1 minute before procedure) or a revised regimen (additional intermittent bolus doses of 0.5 mg/kg every 10 minutes up to a maximum of 2 mg/kg), while those receiving fentanyl followed either an initial regimen (2 μg/kg over 5 minutes, 15 minutes before the procedure, followed by 1 μg/kg/hour as a continuous infusion) or a revised regimen (titration of 0.5 μg/kg/hour every 15 minutes to a maximum of 3 μg/kg/hour). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of ketamine compared with fentanyl on pain score assessed with the Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revised (PIPP-R) scores during the procedure (MD 0.98, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.20; 1 RCT; 124 participants; very low-certainty evidence); on episodes of apnea occurring during the procedure (risk ratio (RR) 0.31, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.18; risk difference (RD) -0.09, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.00; 1 study; 124 infants; very low-certainty evidence); and on hypotension requiring medical therapy occurring during the procedure (RR 5.53, 95% CI 0.27 to 112.30; RD 0.03, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.10; 1 study; 124 infants; very low-certainty evidence). The included study did not report pain score assessed up to 10 minutes after the procedure or episodes of bradycardia occurring during the procedure. We did not identify any studies comparing NSAIDs versus no treatment, placebo, oral sweet solution, or non-pharmacological intervention or different routes of administration of the same analgesics. We identified three studies awaiting classification. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The two small included studies comparing ketamine versus either placebo or fentanyl, with very low-certainty evidence, rendered us unable to draw meaningful conclusions. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of ketamine on pain score during the procedure compared with placebo or fentanyl. We found no evidence on NSAIDs or studies comparing different routes of administration. Future research should prioritize large studies evaluating non-opioid analgesics in this population. As the studies included in this review suggest potential positive effects of ketamine administration, studies evaluating ketamine are of interest. Furthermore, as we identified no studies on NSAIDs, which are widely used in older infants, or comparing different routes of administration, such studies should be a priority going forward.
Topics: Aged; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Male; Analgesics; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Apnea; Body Weight; Bradycardia; Fentanyl; Ketamine; Pain; Pain, Procedural; Receptors, N-Methyl-D-Aspartate
PubMed: 37014033
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD015179.pub2 -
OTO Open 2023To determine whether intracapsular tonsillectomy, using plasma ablation, results in differences in postoperative patient outcomes to total tonsillectomy. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To determine whether intracapsular tonsillectomy, using plasma ablation, results in differences in postoperative patient outcomes to total tonsillectomy.
DATA SOURCES
A systematic review of two databases (Embase and PubMed) was conducted in March 2022 to identify published English-language randomized controlled trials and observational studies which provided a comparison between intracapsular tonsillectomy, using plasma ablation, and total tonsillectomy.
REVIEW METHODS
Qualitative synthesis and meta-analysis were used to compare outcomes between techniques.
RESULTS
Seventeen studies were identified for inclusion. Across these, 1996 and 4565 patients underwent intracapsular and total tonsillectomy, respectively. Studies included 8 randomized controlled trials, 1 prospective cohort study, and 8 retrospective cohort studies. Time to pain free, time on analgesia, time to normal diet, and time to normal activity were significantly shorter with intracapsular tonsillectomy by on average 4.2 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.5-5.9; < .0001), 4.1 (95% CI 2.7-5.4; < .0001), 3.5 (95% CI 1.7-5.4; = .0002) and 2.8 (95% CI 1.6-4; < .0001) days, respectively. Risk of posttonsillectomy hemorrhage was significantly lower following intracapsular tonsillectomy (relative risk [RR] 0.36; 95% CI 0.16-0.81; = .0131); risk of posttonsillectomy hemorrhage requiring surgical management was lower but failed to reach significance (RR 0.52; 95% CI 0.19-1.39; = .19).
CONCLUSION
Intracapsular tonsillectomy using plasma ablation has similar efficacy in managing indications for tonsil surgery to total tonsillectomy while significantly reducing the postoperative morbidity and likelihood of posttonsillectomy hemorrhage experienced by patients, allowing them to return to their normal life faster.
PubMed: 36998549
DOI: 10.1002/oto2.22 -
BMJ Open Mar 2023To evaluate the effectiveness of a subanaesthetic single-dose ketamine (SDK) as an adjunct to opioids for acute pain in emergency department (ED) settings. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the effectiveness of a subanaesthetic single-dose ketamine (SDK) as an adjunct to opioids for acute pain in emergency department (ED) settings.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
A systematic search was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science through March 2022. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated SDK as an adjunct to opioids in adult patients for any painful condition in ED settings were selected. Two reviewers screened studies, extracted data and assessed study quality. Data were pooled using random-effects models. The primary outcome was mean pain intensity score measured at baseline, >0-15 min, >15-30 min, >30-45 min, 60 min, 90 min and 120 min. Secondary outcomes included need for rescue analgesia, adverse events and patient satisfaction. Results were reported as mean differences (MDs) and risk ratios. Statistical heterogeneity was calculated using the statistic.
RESULTS
Eight RCTs were included (n=903). Studies were judged to be at moderate to high risk of bias. Mean pain intensity scores were significantly lower 60 min after study drug administration favouring adjuvant SDK (MD -0.76; 95% CI -1.19 to -0.33), compared with opioids alone. There was no evidence of differences in mean pain intensity scores at any other time point. Patients who received adjuvant SDK were less likely to require rescue analgesia, no more likely to experience serious side effects and had higher satisfaction scores, compared with opioids alone.
CONCLUSIONS
Available evidence suggests adjuvant SDK can have an effect on lowering pain intensity scores. Although reduction of pain scores was not clinically significant, the combination of reduced pain intensity and reduced opioid requirements suggest the results could be clinically important and support the potential utility of SDK as an adjunct to opioids to treat acute pain in adult ED patients. However, current evidence is limited and higher quality RCTs are needed.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42021276708.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Analgesics, Opioid; Pain Management; Ketamine; Acute Pain; Emergency Service, Hospital
PubMed: 36972961
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-066444 -
Pain Aug 2023There is a rapidly growing body of evidence for the application of virtual reality (VR) in pain management, however, with varying effectiveness. Little is known about... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
There is a rapidly growing body of evidence for the application of virtual reality (VR) in pain management, however, with varying effectiveness. Little is known about patient-related and VR-related factors affecting efficacy of VR. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed including 122 randomised controlled trials (9138 patients), reporting on subjectively reported pain scores comparing an immersive VR intervention to a non-VR control group. Virtual reality significantly reduced pain in the pooled analysis (standardized mean difference = -0.65, 95% CI -0.76 to -0.54, P < 0.001). Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences between type of pain, ie, VR effects were similar in acute, chronic, and procedural pain conditions. Univariate and multivariate meta-regression analyses were performed to investigate the effect of intervention, patient, and pain characteristics on VR. Virtual reality effectively reduced pain, especially in patients reporting moderate to severe pain and in younger subjects. Studies comparing VR with a control group receiving no distraction methods were associated with higher effect sizes. The effect of VR was not related to a specific frequency or duration of use. Type of software and interaction level were related to VR effects in the univariable, but not in the multivariable, meta-regression analysis. Heterogeneity was considerable for all meta-analyses, and risk of bias was moderate to high in most included studies. Studies on mechanisms behind VR analgesia in younger patients and patients reporting moderate to severe pain are recommended to confirm our hypotheses while taking into account risk of bias and the comparator. Optimal application of VR using treatment modules for long-term pain conditions are an important issue for future research.
Topics: Humans; Pain; Pain Management; Virtual Reality; Analgesia; Regression Analysis
PubMed: 36943251
DOI: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002883 -
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine Apr 2023Proximal femoral fractures are characterized as one of the most common and most painful injuries sustained by patients of all ages and are associated with high rates of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Proximal femoral fractures are characterized as one of the most common and most painful injuries sustained by patients of all ages and are associated with high rates of oligoanalgesia in the prehospital setting. Current treatments include oral and parenteral opiates and sedative agents, however regional anesthesia techniques for pain relief may provide superior analgesia with lower risk of side effects during patient transportation. The fascia iliaca compartment block (FICB) is an inexpensive treatment which is performed with minimal additional equipment, ultimately making it suitable in prehospital settings.
PROBLEM
In adult patients sustaining proximal femoral fractures in the prehospital setting, what is the effect of the FICB on non-verbal pain scores (NVPS), patient satisfaction, success rate, and adverse events compared to traditional analgesic techniques?
METHODS
A librarian-assisted literature search was conducted of the Cochrane Database, Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, Ovid EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science indexes. Additionally, reference lists for potential review articles from the , the , the , , and the were reviewed. Databases and journals were searched during the period from January 1, 1980 through July 1, 2022. Each study was scrutinized for quality and validity and was assigned a level of evidence as per Oxford Center for Evidence-Based Medicine guidelines.
RESULTS
Five studies involving 340 patients were included (ie, two randomized control trials [RCTs], two observational studies, and one prospective observational study). Pain scores decreased after prehospital FICB across all included studies by a mean of 6.65 points (5.25 - 7.5) on the NVPS. Out of the total 257 FICBs conducted, there was a success rate of 230 (89.3%). Of these, only two serious adverse events were recorded, both of which related to local analgesia toxicity. Neither resulted in long-term sequelae and only one required treatment.
CONCLUSION
Use of FICBs results in a significant decrease in NVPS in the prehospital setting, and they are ultimately suitable as regional analgesic techniques for proximal femur fractures. It carries a low risk of adverse events and may be performed by health care practitioners of various backgrounds with suitable training. The results suggest that FICBs are more effective for pain management than parenteral or oral opiates and sedative agents alone and can be used as an appropriate adjunct to pain management.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Nerve Block; Femoral Fractures; Proximal Femoral Fractures; Pain; Emergency Medical Services; Fascia; Opiate Alkaloids; Hip Fractures; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Observational Studies as Topic
PubMed: 36912109
DOI: 10.1017/S1049023X23000298