-
Orthopaedic Surgery May 2024To compare the analgesic efficacy and adverse events of proximal versus distal ACB for adults undergoing knee arthroplasty, we searched PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Does Proximal Adductor Canal Block Provide Better Analgesic Efficacy than Distal Adductor Canal Block in Patients Undergoing Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
To compare the analgesic efficacy and adverse events of proximal versus distal ACB for adults undergoing knee arthroplasty, we searched PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Embase to identify all eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The study quality of the RCTs was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool. Heterogeneity among studies was examined by Cochrane Q test. Our primary outcomes were pain intensity at rest/during movement and morphine consumption. Statistical analyses were conducted by RevMan Software. Seven eligible studies involving 400 subjects were included in this meta-analysis with 202 participants in the proximal ACB group and 198 participants in the distal ACB group. The results demonstrated that proximal ACB provided significantly better pain relief at rest at 2 h (SMD -0.27, 95% CI -0.54 to -0.01, four trials, 222 participants, I = 0, p = 0.04) and 24 h (SMD -0.28, 95% CI -0.48 to -0.08, seven trials, 400 participants, I = 0, p = 0.006) following the surgery. We found no evidence of a difference in postoperative pain intensity at other timepoints. Furthermore, we noted no evidence of a difference in cumulative morphine consumption and occurrence of adverse events. Proximal ACB provides better pain relief and comparable adverse effects profile compared with distal ACB. The analgesic benefit offered by proximal ACB, however, did not appear to extend beyond the first 24 h. The overall evidence level was mostly low or very low, which requires more well-organized multicenter randomized trials in the future.
Topics: Humans; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Nerve Block; Pain, Postoperative; Pain Measurement
PubMed: 38506184
DOI: 10.1111/os.14027 -
Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979) Jun 2024Renal denervation is a recognized adjunct therapy for hypertension with clinically significant blood pressure (BP)-lowering effects. Long-term follow-up data are... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Renal denervation is a recognized adjunct therapy for hypertension with clinically significant blood pressure (BP)-lowering effects. Long-term follow-up data are critical to ascertain durability of the effect and safety. Aside from the 36-month follow-up data available from randomized control trials, recent cohort analyses extended follow-up out to 10 years. We sought to analyze study-level data and quantify the ambulatory BP reduction of renal denervation across contemporary randomized sham-controlled trials and available long-term follow-up data up to 10 years from observational studies.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed with data from 4 observational studies with follow-up out to 10 years and 2 randomized controlled trials meeting search and inclusion criteria with follow-up data out to 36 months. Study-level data were extracted and compared statistically.
RESULTS
In 2 contemporary randomized controlled trials with 36-month follow-up, an average sham-adjusted ambulatory systolic BP reduction of -12.7±4.5 mm Hg from baseline was observed (=0.05). Likewise, a -14.8±3.4 mm Hg ambulatory systolic BP reduction was found across observational studies with a mean long-term follow-up of 7.7±2.8 years (range, 3.5-9.4 years; =0.0051). The observed reduction in estimated glomerular filtration rate across the long-term follow-up was in line with the predicted age-related decline. Antihypertensive drug burden was similar at baseline and follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS
Renal denervation is associated with a significant and clinically meaningful reduction in ambulatory systolic BP in both contemporary randomized sham-controlled trials up to 36 months and observational cohort studies up to 10 years without adverse consequences on renal function.
Topics: Humans; Hypertension; Blood Pressure; Kidney; Sympathectomy; Catheter Ablation; Treatment Outcome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory
PubMed: 38506059
DOI: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.123.22314 -
Foot and Ankle Surgery : Official... Jul 2024Peripheral nerve blocks may be essential elements in a multimodal pain management regime following foot and ankle surgery. We assessed the effects of ankle blocks... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Peripheral nerve blocks may be essential elements in a multimodal pain management regime following foot and ankle surgery. We assessed the effects of ankle blocks compared with no intervention/sham block or a sciatic nerve block in patients undergoing surgery of the foot or ankle.
METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, Medline, and Embase for randomised clinical trials comparing ankle block with no intervention/sham block or a sciatic nerve block for patients undergoing surgery of the foot or ankle. Our primary outcomes were duration of analgesia and cumulative 24-hour opioid consumption. We followed the recommendations of the Cochrane Handbook, and performed meta-analysis, Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA), and assessed the risk of bias and certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.
RESULTS
We included five trials (362 participants) comparing ankle block with no intervention/sham block and three trials (247 participants) comparing ankle block with a sciatic nerve block. Ankle block may increase the duration of analgesia when compared with no intervention/sham block (MD 431 min; 96.7% CI 208 to 654), but the evidence was very uncertain. Duration was decreased when compared with a sciatic nerve block (MD -410 min; 96.7% CI -462 to -358). The ankle block duration was probably important in both comparisons. The effects on cumulative 24-hour opioid consumption were very uncertain in both comparisons.
CONCLUSIONS
Ankle block may increase the duration of analgesia when compared with no intervention/sham block, but the evidence was very uncertain, and decrease the duration of analgesia when compared with a sciatic nerve block. The ankle block duration was probably clinically important in both comparisons. The effects on cumulative 24-hour opioid consumption were very uncertain.
Topics: Humans; Nerve Block; Ankle; Pain, Postoperative; Foot; Orthopedic Procedures; Sciatic Nerve; Pain Management
PubMed: 38492998
DOI: 10.1016/j.fas.2024.02.015 -
Journal of Clinical Anesthesia Aug 2024Regional analgesia following visceral cancer surgery might provide an advantage but evidence for best treatment options related to risk-benefit is unclear. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
STUDY OBJECTIVE
Regional analgesia following visceral cancer surgery might provide an advantage but evidence for best treatment options related to risk-benefit is unclear.
DESIGN
Systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCT) with meta-analysis and GRADE assessment.
SETTING
Postoperative pain treatment.
PATIENTS
Adult patients undergoing visceral cancer surgery.
INTERVENTIONS
Any kind of peripheral (PRA) or epidural analgesia (EA) with/without systemic analgesia (SA) was compared to SA with or without placebo treatment or any other regional anaesthetic techniques.
MEASUREMENTS
Primary outcome measures were postoperative acute pain intensity at rest and during activity 24 h after surgery, the number of patients with block-related adverse events and postoperative paralytic ileus.
MAIN RESULTS
59 RCTs (4345 participants) were included. EA may reduce pain intensity at rest (mean difference (MD) -1.05; 95% confidence interval (CI): -1.35 to -0.75, low certainty evidence) and during activity 24 h after surgery (MD -1.83; 95% CI: -2.34 to -1.33, very low certainty evidence). PRA likely results in little difference in pain intensity at rest (MD -0.75; 95% CI: -1.20 to -0.31, moderate certainty evidence) and pain during activity (MD -0.93; 95% CI: -1.34 to -0.53, moderate certainty evidence) 24 h after surgery compared to SA. There may be no difference in block-related adverse events (very low certainty evidence) and development of paralytic ileus (very low certainty of evidence) between EA, respectively PRA and SA.
CONCLUSIONS
Following visceral cancer surgery EA may reduce pain intensity. In contrast, PRA had only limited effects on pain intensity at rest and during activity. However, we are uncertain regarding the effect of both techniques on block-related adverse events and paralytic ileus. Further research is required focusing on regional analgesia techniques especially following laparoscopic visceral cancer surgery.
Topics: Humans; Pain, Postoperative; Pain Management; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Analgesia, Epidural; Nerve Block; Pain Measurement; Perioperative Care; Anesthesia, Conduction
PubMed: 38484505
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2024.111438 -
Current Pain and Headache Reports May 2024To evaluate the effectiveness of radiofrequency neurotomy in managing sacroiliac joint pain utilizing a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
To evaluate the effectiveness of radiofrequency neurotomy in managing sacroiliac joint pain utilizing a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies.
RECENT FINDINGS
The prevalence of sacroiliac joint pain is estimated at around 25% of low back pain cases, and its diagnosis lacks a gold standard. Treatments include exercise therapy, injections, ablation, and fusion, with variable effectiveness. COVID-19 altered utilization patterns of interventions, including sacroiliac joint procedures, and the evidence for these interventions remains inconclusive. Recently, Medicare has issued its local coverage determinations (LCDs) in the United States, which provides noncoverage of sacroiliac joint radiofrequency neurotomy. Additionally, a recent systematic review of sacroiliac joint injections showed Level III or fair evidence. The sacroiliac joint, a critical axial joint linking the spine and pelvis, contributes to low back pain. Its complex innervation pattern varies among individuals. Sacroiliac joint dysfunction, causing pain and stiffness, arises from diverse factors.The present systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate radiofrequency neurotomy's effectiveness for sacroiliac joint pain management by applying rigorous methodology, considering both RCTs and observational studies. Despite methodological disparities, the evidence from this review, supported by changes in pain scores and functional improvement, suggests Level III evidence with fair recommendation for radiofrequency neurotomy as a treatment option. The review's strengths include its comprehensive approach and quality assessment. However, limitations persist, including variations in criteria and technical factors, underscoring the need for further high-quality studies in real-world scenarios.
Topics: Sacroiliac Joint; Humans; Low Back Pain; Radiofrequency Ablation; Treatment Outcome; COVID-19; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Denervation
PubMed: 38472618
DOI: 10.1007/s11916-024-01226-6 -
Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular... May 2024Pediatric patients undergoing cardiac surgery usually experience significant surgical pain. Additionally, the effect of poor surgical analgesia creates a pain continuum... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Transversus Thoracic Muscle Plane Block For Postoperative Pain in Pediatric Cardiac Surgery: A Systematic Review And Meta-Analysis of Randomized And Observational Studies.
OBJECTIVES
Pediatric patients undergoing cardiac surgery usually experience significant surgical pain. Additionally, the effect of poor surgical analgesia creates a pain continuum that extends to the postoperative period. Transversus thoracic muscle plane block (TTMPB) is a novel plane block technique that can provide analgesia to the anterior chest wall. The analgesic role of TTMPB in pediatric cardiac surgery is still uncertain. A meta-analysis was conducted to determine the analgesic efficacy of this procedure.
DESIGN AND SETTING
Systematic review and meta-analysis. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CENTRAL, WanFang Data, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure were searched to November 2023, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach was followed to evaluate the certainty of evidence.
PARTICIPANTS
Eligible studies enrolled pediatric patients from 2 months to 12 years old scheduled to undergo cardiac surgery, and randomized them to receive a TTMPB or no block/sham block.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS
Six studies that enrolled 601 pediatric patients were included. Low-certainty evidence from randomized trials showed that, compared with no block or sham block, TTMPB in pediatric patients undergoing cardiac surgery may reduce postoperative modified objective pain score at 12 hours (weighted mean difference [WMD] -2.20, 95% CI -2.73 to -1.68) and 24 hours (WMD -1.76, 95% CI -2.09 to -1.42), intraoperative opioid consumption (WMD -3.83, 95% CI -5.90 to -1.76 μg/kg), postoperative opioid consumption (WMD -2.51, 95% CI -2.84 to -2.18 μg/kg), length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay (WMD -5.56, 95% CI -8.30 to -2.83 hours), and extubation time (WMD -2.13, 95% CI -4.21 to -0.05 hours). Retrospective studies provided very low certainty that the results were consistent with the randomized trials.
CONCLUSION
Very low- to low-certainty evidence showed that TTMPB in pediatric patients undergoing cardiac surgery may reduce postoperative pain, opioid consumption, ICU length of stay, and extubation time.
Topics: Humans; Child; Analgesics, Opioid; Retrospective Studies; Thoracic Wall; Nerve Block; Pain, Postoperative; Analgesics; Cardiac Surgical Procedures; Muscles
PubMed: 38453555
DOI: 10.1053/j.jvca.2024.02.016 -
World Neurosurgery May 2024Surgery can effectively treat Trigeminal neuralgia (TN), but postoperative pain recurrence or nonresponse are common. Repeat surgery is frequently offered but limited... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Surgery can effectively treat Trigeminal neuralgia (TN), but postoperative pain recurrence or nonresponse are common. Repeat surgery is frequently offered but limited data exist to guide the selection of salvage surgical procedures. We aimed to compare pain relief outcomes after repeat microvascular decompression (MVD), percutaneous rhizotomy (PR), or stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) to determine which modality was most efficacious for surgically refractory TN.
METHODS
A PRISMA systematic review and meta-analysis was performed, including studies of adults with classical or idiopathic TN undergoing repeat surgery. Primary outcomes included complete (CPR) and adequate (APR) pain relief at last follow-up, analyzed in a multivariate mixed-effect meta-regression of proportions. Secondary outcomes were initial pain relief and facial numbness.
RESULTS
Of 1299 records screened, 61 studies with 68 treatment arms (29 MVD, 14 PR, and 25 SRS) comprising 2165 patients were included. Combining MVD, PR, and SRS study data, 68.8% achieved initial CPR after a repeat TN procedure. On average, 49.6% of the combined sample of MVD, PR, and SRS had CPR at final follow-up, which was on average 2.99 years postoperatively. The proportion (with 95% CI) achieving CPR at final follow-up was 0.57 (0.51-0.62) for MVD, 0.60 (0.52-0.68) for PR, and 0.35 (0.30-0.41) for SRS, with a significantly lower proportion of pain relief with SRS. Estimates of initial CPR for MVD were 0.82 (0.78-0.85), 0.68 for PR (0.6-0.76), and 0.41 for SRS (0.35-0.48).
CONCLUSIONS
Across MVD, PR, and SRS, about half of TN patients maintain complete CPR at an average follow-up time of 3 years after repeat surgery. In treating refractory or recurrent TN, MVD and PR were superior to SRS in both initial pain relief and long-term pain relief at final follow-up. These findings can inform surgical decision-making in this challenging population.
Topics: Trigeminal Neuralgia; Humans; Microvascular Decompression Surgery; Reoperation; Rhizotomy; Radiosurgery; Recurrence; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38403014
DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2024.02.097 -
Annals of Emergency Medicine Jun 2024We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to evaluate the comparative efficacy of peripheral nerve block types for preoperative pain management of hip... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
STUDY OBJECTIVE
We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to evaluate the comparative efficacy of peripheral nerve block types for preoperative pain management of hip fractures.
METHODS
We searched Cochrane, Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, ICTRP, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google Scholar for randomized clinical trials. We included participants aged more than 16 years with hip fractures who received peripheral nerve blocks or analgesics for preoperative pain management. The primary outcomes were defined as absolute pain score 2 hours after block placement, preoperative consumption of morphine equivalents, and length of hospital stay. We used a random-effects network meta-analysis conceptualized in the Bayesian framework. Confidence of evidence was assessed using Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA).
RESULTS
We included 63 randomized controlled studies (4,778 participants), of which only a few had a low risk of bias. The femoral nerve block, 3-in-1 block, fascia iliaca compartment block, and pericapsular nerve group block yielded significantly lowered pain scores at 2 hours after block placement compared with those with no block (standardized mean differences [SMD]: -1.1; 95% credible interval [CrI]: -1.7 to -0.48, [confidence of evidence: low]; SMD: -1.8; 95% CrI: -3.0 to -0.55, [low]; SMD: -1.4; 95% CrI: -2.0 to -0.72, [low]; SMD: -2.3; 95% CrI: -3.2 to -1.4, [moderate], respectively). The pericapsular nerve group block, 3-in-1 block, fascia iliaca compartment block, and femoral nerve block resulted in lower pain scores than the no-block group. Additionally, the pericapsular nerve group block yielded a lower pain score than femoral nerve block or fascia iliaca compartment block (SMD: -1.21; 95% CrI: -2.18 to -0.23, [very low]: SMD: -0.92; 95% CrI: -1.70 to -0.16, [low]). However, both the fascia iliaca compartment block and femoral nerve block did not show a reduction in morphine consumption compared with no block. To our knowledge, no studies have compared the pericapsular nerve group block with other methods regarding morphine consumption. Furthermore, no significant difference was observed between peripheral nerve blocks and no block in terms of the length of hospital stay.
CONCLUSIONS
Compared with no block, preoperative peripheral nerve blocks for hip fractures appear to reduce pain 2 hours after block placement. Comparing different blocks, pericapsular nerve group block might be superior to fascia iliaca compartment block and femoral nerve block for pain relief, though the confidence evidence was low in most comparisons because of the moderate to high risk of bias in many of the included studies and the high heterogeneity of treatment strategies across studies. Therefore, further high-quality research is needed.
Topics: Humans; Hip Fractures; Nerve Block; Pain Management; Preoperative Care; Network Meta-Analysis; Pain Measurement; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Femoral Nerve; Length of Stay
PubMed: 38385910
DOI: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2024.01.024 -
International Wound Journal Feb 2024Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) often involves significant postoperative pain, necessitating effective analgesia. This meta-analysis compares the analgesic efficacy of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Analgesic efficacy of local infiltration anaesthesia versus femoral nerve block in alleviating postoperative wound pain following total knee arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) often involves significant postoperative pain, necessitating effective analgesia. This meta-analysis compares the analgesic efficacy of local infiltration anaesthesia (LIA) and femoral nerve block (FNB) in managing postoperative wound pain following TKA. Adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, this meta-analysis was structured around the PICO framework, assessing studies that directly compared LIA and FNB in TKA patients. A comprehensive search across PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library was conducted without time restrictions. Studies were included based on specific criteria such as participant demographics, study design and outcomes like pain scores and opioid consumption. Quality assessment utilized the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool. The statistical approach was determined based on heterogeneity, with the choice of fixed- or random-effects models guided by the I statistic. Sensitivity analysis and evaluation of publication bias using funnel plots and Egger's linear regression test were also conducted. From an initial pool of 1275 articles, eight studies met the inclusion criteria. These studies conducted in various countries from 2007 to 2016. The meta-analysis showed no significant difference in resting and movement-related Visual Analogue Scale scores post-TKA between the LIA and FNB groups. However, LIA was associated with significantly lower opioid consumption. The quality assessment revealed a low risk of bias in most studies, and the sensitivity analysis confirmed the stability of these findings. There was no significant publication bias detected. Both LIA and FNB are effective in controlling postoperative pain in TKA patients, but LIA offers the advantage of lower opioid consumption. Its simplicity, cost-effectiveness and opioid-sparing nature make LIA the recommended choice for postoperative analgesia in knee replacement surgeries.
Topics: Humans; Anesthesia, Local; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Analgesics, Opioid; Femoral Nerve; Nerve Block; Pain, Postoperative; Analgesics; Anesthetics, Local
PubMed: 38351465
DOI: 10.1111/iwj.14766 -
International Journal of Surgery... May 2024
Meta-Analysis
Topics: Humans; Nerve Block; Cardiac Surgical Procedures; Pain, Postoperative; Pain Management
PubMed: 38348855
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000001170