-
Cardiovascular and Interventional... May 2024CT-guided percutaneous core biopsy of the lung is usually performed under local anesthesia, but can also be conducted under additional systemic opioid medication. The...
PURPOSE
CT-guided percutaneous core biopsy of the lung is usually performed under local anesthesia, but can also be conducted under additional systemic opioid medication. The purpose of this retrospective study was to assess the effect of intravenous piritramide application on the pneumothorax rate and to identify risk factors for post-biopsy pneumothorax.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
One hundred and seventy-one core biopsies of the lung were included in this retrospective single center study. The incidence of pneumothorax and chest tube placement was evaluated. Patient-, procedure- and target-related variables were analyzed by univariate and multivariable logistic regression analysis.
RESULTS
The overall incidence of pneumothorax was 39.2% (67/171). The pneumothorax rate was 31.5% (29/92) in patients who received intravenous piritramide and 48.1% (38/79) in patients who did not receive piritramide. In multivariable logistic regression analysis periinterventional piritramide application proved to be the only independent factor to reduce the risk of pneumothorax (odds ratio 0.46, 95%-confidence interval 0.24, 0.88; p = 0.018). Two or more pleura passages (odds ratio 3.38, 95%-confidence interval: 1.15, 9.87; p = 0.026) and prone position of the patient (odds ratio 2.27, 95%-confidence interval: 1.04, 4.94; p = 0.039) were independent risk factors for a higher pneumothorax rate.
CONCLUSION
Procedural opioid medication with piritramide proved to be a previously undisclosed factor decreasing the risk of pneumothorax associated with CT-guided percutaneous core biopsy of the lung. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 4: small study cohort.
Topics: Humans; Pneumothorax; Female; Male; Retrospective Studies; Tomography, X-Ray Computed; Middle Aged; Analgesics, Opioid; Radiography, Interventional; Aged; Image-Guided Biopsy; Risk Factors; Lung; Pirinitramide; Adult; Incidence
PubMed: 38639781
DOI: 10.1007/s00270-024-03717-w -
Scientific Reports Dec 2023There is a rising number in complications associated with more cardiac electrical devices implanted (CIED). Infection and lead dysfunction are reasons to perform...
There is a rising number in complications associated with more cardiac electrical devices implanted (CIED). Infection and lead dysfunction are reasons to perform transvenous lead extraction. An ideal anaesthetic approach has not been described yet. Most centres use general anaesthesia, but there is a lack in studies looking into deep sedation (DS) as an anaesthetic approach. We report our retrospective experience for a large number of procedures performed with deep sedation as a primary approach. Extraction procedures performed between 2011 and 2018 in our electrophysiology laboratory have been included retrospectively. We began by applying a bolus injection of piritramide followed by midazolam as primary medication and would add etomidate if necessary. For extraction of leads a stepwise approach with careful traction, locking stylets, dilator sheaths, mechanical rotating sheaths and if needed snares and baskets has been used. A total of 780 leads in 463 patients (age 69.9 ± 12.3, 31.3% female) were extracted. Deep sedation was successful in 97.8% of patients. Piritramide was used as the main analgesic medication (98.5%) and midazolam as the main sedative (94.2%). Additional etomidate was administered in 15.1% of cases. In 2.2% of patients a conversion to general anaesthesia was required as adequate level of DS was not achieved before starting the procedure. Sedation related complications occurred in 1.1% (n = 5) of patients without sequalae. Deep sedation with piritramide, midazolam and if needed additional etomidate is a safe and feasible strategy for transvenous lead extraction.
Topics: Humans; Female; Male; Midazolam; Retrospective Studies; Etomidate; Pirinitramide; Deep Sedation; Anesthetics; Defibrillators, Implantable; Device Removal; Treatment Outcome; Pacemaker, Artificial
PubMed: 38151554
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-50372-1 -
BMC Emergency Medicine Sep 2023BACKGROUND: Treatment of acute pain is an essential element of pre-hospital care for injured and critically ill patients. Clinical studies indicate the need for...
ABSTRAC
BACKGROUND: Treatment of acute pain is an essential element of pre-hospital care for injured and critically ill patients. Clinical studies indicate the need for improvement in the prehospital analgesia.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study is to assess the current situation in out of hospital pain management in Germany regarding the substances, indications, dosage and the delegation of the use of analgesics to emergency medical service (EMS) staff.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A standardized survey of the medical directors of the emergency services (MDES) in Germany was carried out using an online questionnaire. The anonymous results were evaluated using the statistical software SPSS (Chi-squared test, Mann-Whitney-U test).
RESULTS
Seventy-seven MDES responsible for 989 rescue stations and 397 EMS- physician bases in 15 federal states took part in this survey. Morphine (98.7%), Fentanyl (85.7%), Piritramide (61%), Sufentanil (18.2%) and Nalbuphine (14,3%) are provided as opioid analgesics. The non-opioid analgesics (NOA) including Ketamine/Esketamine (98,7%), Metamizole (88.3%), Paracetamol (66,2%), Ibuprofen (24,7%) and COX-2-inhibitors (7,8%) are most commonly available. The antispasmodic Butylscopolamine is available (81,8%) to most rescue stations. Fentanyl is the most commonly provided opioid analgesic for treatment of a traumatic pain (70.1%) and back pain (46.8%), Morphine for visceral colic-like (33.8%) and non-colic pain (53.2%). In cases of acute coronary syndrome is Morphine (85.7%) the leading analgesic substance. Among the non-opioid analgesics is Ketamine/Esketamine (90.9%) most frequently provided to treat traumatic pain, Metamizole for visceral colic-like (70.1%) and non-colic (68.6%) as well as back pain (41.6%). Butylscopolamine is the second most frequently provided medication after Metamizole for "visceral colic-like pain" (55.8%). EMS staff (with or without a request for presence of the EMS physician on site) are permitted to use the following: Morphine (16.9%), Piritramide (13.0%) and Nalbuphine (10.4%), and of NOAs for (Es)Ketamine (74.1%), Paracetamol (53.3%) and Metamizole (35.1%). The dosages of the most important and commonly provided analgesic substances permitted to independent treatment by the paramedics are often below the recommended range for adults (RDE). The majority of medical directors (78.4%) of the emergency services consider the independent application of analgesics by paramedics sensible. The reason for the relatively rare authorization of opioids for use by paramedics is mainly due to legal (in)certainty (53.2%).
CONCLUSION
Effective analgesics are available for EMS staff in Germany, the approach to improvement lies in the area of application. For this purpose, the adaptations of the legal framework as well as the creation of a guideline for prehospital analgesia are useful.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Ketamine; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Dipyrone; Acetaminophen; Nalbuphine; Pirinitramide; Butylscopolammonium Bromide; Physician Executives; Analgesics; Analgesics, Opioid; Fentanyl; Germany; Acute Pain; Morphine Derivatives
PubMed: 37710177
DOI: 10.1186/s12873-023-00878-8 -
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) Apr 2023: The pupillary pain index (PPI) allows the evaluation of intraoperative nociception by measuring pupillary reaction after a localized electrical stimulus. It was the... (Observational Study)
Observational Study
Pupillary Pain Index Predicts Postoperative Pain but Not the Effect of Peripheral Regional Anaesthesia in Patients Undergoing Total Hip or Total Knee Arthroplasty: An Observational Study.
: The pupillary pain index (PPI) allows the evaluation of intraoperative nociception by measuring pupillary reaction after a localized electrical stimulus. It was the objective of this observational cohort study to investigate the pupillary pain index (PPI) as a method to evaluate the fascia iliaca block (FIB) or adductor canal block (ACB) sensory areas during general anaesthesia in orthopaedic patients with lower-extremity joint replacement surgery. : Orthopaedic patients undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty were included. After anaesthesia induction, patients received an ultrasound-guided single-shot FIB or ACB with 30 mL and 20 mL of 0.375% ropivacaine, respectively. Anaesthesia was maintained with isoflurane or propofol/remifentanil. The first PPI measurements were performed after anaesthesia induction and before block insertion, the second at the end of surgery. Pupillometry scores were evaluated in the area of the femoral or saphenous nerve (target) and C3 dermatome (control). Primary outcomes were differences between PPIs before and after peripheral block insertion as well as the relationship between PPIs and postoperative pain scores; secondary outcomes were the relationship between PPIs and opioid requirements after surgery. : PPI decreased significantly from the first to the second measurement (4.17 ± 2.7 vs. 1.6 ± 1.2, < 0.001 for target; 4.46 ± 2.7 vs. 2.17 ± 2.1, < 0.001 for control). Control and target measurements did not show significant differences. A linear regression analysis showed that early postoperative pain scores could be predicted with intraoperative piritramide with improved prediction after adding PPI scores, PCA opioids and surgery type. Forty-eight-hour pain scores at rest and in movement were correlated with intraoperative piritramide and control PPI after the PNB in movement and with second-postoperative-day opioids and target PPI scores before block insertion, respectively. : While the effect of an FIB and ACB could not be shown with PPI postoperative pain scores due to a large effect of opioids, perioperative PPI was shown to be associated with postoperative pain. These results suggest that preoperative PPI may be used to predict postoperative pain.
Topics: Humans; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Pirinitramide; Nerve Block; Pain, Postoperative; Analgesics, Opioid; Anesthesia, Conduction
PubMed: 37241058
DOI: 10.3390/medicina59050826 -
Scandinavian Journal of Trauma,... Jan 2023Pain management in the pre-hospital setting remains a particular challenge for paramedics and emergency physicians, especially in children. This study evaluates the...
BACKGROUND
Pain management in the pre-hospital setting remains a particular challenge for paramedics and emergency physicians, especially in children. This study evaluates the pre-hospital use and effect of analgesics in children with trauma or pain due to other reasons.
METHODS
This study is a retrospective analysis of the database of a German air rescue service and was conducted over a period of 9 years (2012-2020) to assess pain in general and whether patients with trauma pain due to other reasons received treatment with analgesics. We included all patients in the registry under the age of 16 years. Patients with a Glasgow Coma Scale of 3 at hospital admission and incomplete records were excluded. The intensity of pain was determined by the emergency physician on scene at arrival and hospital admission in a ten-point rating scale (0 = no pain). Effective pain reduction was analyzed.
RESULTS
Out of 227,458 cases, a total of 22,025 emergency cases involved pediatric patients aged 0-16 years. 20,405 cases were included in the study. 12,000 (58.8%) children had suffered a trauma, 8108 (39.7%) had pain due to other reasons and 297 (1.5%) had both. In total, 4,608 (38.4%) of the children with trauma were assessed having a numerical rating scale (NRS) > 4 at EMS arrival. These patients received mainly ketamine (34.5%) and the opioids fentanyl (38.7%) and piritramide (19.1%). The value on the NRS was significantly lower at admission to hospital (mean 1.9) compared with the EMS arrival (mean 6.9). In 4.9% the NRS at hospital admission was still > 4. 282 patients within the non-trauma group had a pre-hospital NRS of > 4. The pain therapy consisted of opioids (35.8%) and ketamine (2.8%). 28.4% patients in the non-trauma group received no pain medication. In 16.0% the NRS at hospital admission was still > 4.
CONCLUSIONS
German emergency physicians achieved a sufficient pain therapy in pediatric patients with a NRS > 4 after trauma. In case of non-trauma, the pain management by the emergency physicians is restrained and less successful. The most common analgesic medications administered were ketamine and fentanyl, followed by piritramide.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
The study has been retrospectively registered at DRKS (DRKS00026222).
Topics: Humans; Child; Pain Management; Ketamine; Pirinitramide; Critical Illness; Retrospective Studies; Pain; Analgesia; Analgesics; Fentanyl; Analgesics, Opioid; Hospitals; Emergency Medical Services
PubMed: 36709289
DOI: 10.1186/s13049-023-01069-x -
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and... Aug 2022Insufficient pain control after lower limb arthroplasty results in delayed recovery and increased risk for pain chronicization. The ideal kind of analgesia is still...
Pain levels and patient comfort after lower limb arthroplasty comparing i.v. patient-controlled analgesia, continuous peripheral nerve block and neuraxial analgesia: a retrospective cohort analysis of clinical routine data.
BACKGROUND
Insufficient pain control after lower limb arthroplasty results in delayed recovery and increased risk for pain chronicization. The ideal kind of analgesia is still discussed controversially. We conducted a retrospective analysis of single-center routine data from a German university hospital, including patients receiving either total hip (THA) or knee arthroplasty (TKA).
METHODS
All patients received general anesthesia. Patients undergoing THA received either continuous epidural ropivacaine infusion (0.133%, Epi) or patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with the Wurzburg Pain Drip (tramadol, metamizole and droperidol, WPD) or with piritramide (Pir). After TKA, patients received either continuous femoral nerve block (ropivacaine 0.2%, PNB) or Pir.
RESULTS
The analyzed cohort comprised 769 cases. Use of WPD after THA (n = 333) resulted in significantly reduced Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) values at rest, compared to Epi (n = 48) and Pir (n = 72) (.75 [IQR 1.14] vs. 1.17 [1.5], p = .02 vs. 1.47 [1.33], p < .0001) as well as maximum NRS scores (2.4 [1.7] vs. 3.29 [1.94], p < .001 vs. 3.32 [1.76], p < .0001). Positive feedback during follow-up visits was significantly increased in patients with a WPD PCA (p < .0001), while negative feedback (senso-motoric weakness/technical problems/nausea/dizziness/constipation) was particularly increased in Epi patients and lowest in those with WPD (p < .0001). After TKA, Pir (n = 131) resulted in significantly reduced NRS values at rest, compared to PNB (n = 185) (1.4 [1.4] vs. 1.6 [1.68], p = .02). Positive feedback was increased in patients with a Pir PCA in comparison with PNB (p = .04), while negative feedback was increased in PNB patients (p = .04). Overall, WPD presented with the lowest rate of any complications (8.7%), followed by Pir (20.2%), PNB (27.6%) and Epi (31.3%) (p < .001).
CONCLUSIONS
In the assessed population, the use of a WPD PCA after THA offered better pain control and patient comfort in comparison with continuous epidural or piritramide-based analgesia. After TKA, the use of a Pir PCA provided superior analgesia and a lower complication rate compared to continuous PNB.
Topics: Analgesia, Patient-Controlled; Anesthetics, Local; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Femoral Nerve; Humans; Lower Extremity; Nerve Block; Pain, Postoperative; Patient Comfort; Peripheral Nerves; Pirinitramide; Retrospective Studies; Ropivacaine
PubMed: 35962409
DOI: 10.1186/s13018-022-03277-0 -
Clinical Oral Investigations May 2022The aim of this prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical study was to evaluate the analgesic effect of ibuprofen versus diclofenac plus orphenadrine on... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical study was to evaluate the analgesic effect of ibuprofen versus diclofenac plus orphenadrine on postoperative pain in orthognathic surgery.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Patients who underwent orthognathic surgery were randomized into two groups to receive intravenously either 600 mg of ibuprofen (I-group) or 75 mg diclofenac plus 30 mg orphenadrine (D-group), both of which were given twice daily. Additionally, both groups were given metamizole 500 mg. Rescue pain medication consisted of acetaminophen 1000 mg and piritramide 7.5 mg as needed. To assess the pain intensity, the primary end point was the numeric rating scale (NRS) recorded over the course of the hospital stay three times daily for 3 days.
RESULTS
One hundred nine patients were enrolled (age range, 18 to 61 years) between May 2019 and November 2020. Forty-eight bilateral sagittal split osteotomies (BSSO) and 51 bimaxillary osteotomies (BIMAX) were performed. Surgical subgroup analysis found a significant higher mean NRS (2.73 vs.1.23) in the BIMAX D-group vs. I-group (p = 0.015) on the third postoperative day. Additionally, as the patient's body mass index (BMI) increased, the mean NRS (r = 0.517, p = 0.001) also increased. No differences were found between age, gender, length of hospital stay, weight, operating times, number of patients with complete pain relief, acetaminophen or piritramide intake, and NRS values. No adverse events were observed.
CONCLUSION
The results of this study demonstrate that ibuprofen administration and lower BMI were associated with less pain for patients who underwent bimaxillary osteotomy on the third postoperative day. Therefore, surgeons may prefer ibuprofen for more effective pain relief after orthognathic surgery.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
Ibuprofen differs from diclofenac plus orphenadrine in class and is a powerful analgetic after orthognathic surgery.
Topics: Acetaminophen; Adolescent; Adult; Diclofenac; Double-Blind Method; Humans; Ibuprofen; Middle Aged; Orphenadrine; Orthognathic Surgery; Pain, Postoperative; Pirinitramide; Prospective Studies; Young Adult
PubMed: 35103836
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-022-04381-5 -
Der Anaesthesist Jun 2021Patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) is a well-established technique in acute pain management and available in most German hospitals. Despite its widespread...
BACKGROUND
Patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) is a well-established technique in acute pain management and available in most German hospitals. Despite its widespread use, information on current clinical practice is limited. This investigation evaluated clinical practice and monitoring as well as PCIA-associated adverse events and critical incidents in German hospitals.
METHODS
An invitation to participate in this online-survey was sent to 995 heads of anesthesiology departments belonging to the "German Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine".
RESULTS
Of the departments receiving the link, 244 took part (response rate 25%). PCIA was used in 193 of these hospitals (79%). All the following statements relate to the hospitals in which PCIA was used. Piritramide was the most frequently used opioid. In parallel with PCIA, additional nonopioid analgesics were used in 94% of the hospitals, and in 38%, additional slow-release oral opioids were used. Parenteral opioids were administered by the ward staff in 4% of the hospitals. In 75% of hospitals, there were standardized indications for PCIA therapy, with almost two thirds of respondents stating that PCIA was the technique of second choice if regional procedures were contraindicated or failed. In all, 76% of the hospitals had an acute pain service. Twenty-four percent of the hospitals regularly used PCIA in non-surgical patients. In pediatric patients, PCIA was used in 62 hospitals (32%). Only 31% of the hospitals reported the use of standardized protocols for the specific monitoring of patients' vital signs on general wards, exceeding general care. Of the department, 158 (82%) reported adverse events in connection with the use of PCIA within the six-month period preceding the survey (most frequently due to patients' noncompliance [52%], dislocated intravenous lines [41%], communication errors [16%], administration of additional analgesics [16%] and/ or sedatives [14%], problems with the pump [16%], programming errors [9%], incorrect opioid concentration in the reservoir [8%], non-observance of contraindications [7%], incorrect dosing [6%] and self-dosing by the patient [4%] or by third parties [3%], filling the reservoir with thewrong medication [2%]; and other problems [5%]). Only 35 of the hospitals (18%) reported no problems associated with PCIA therapy. Seventy-five of the 193 respondents (39%) stated that at least one critical incident had occurred in the context of the use of PCIA. This resulted in a total of 335 cases out of an estimate of 50.000 patients treated with PCIA. The respondents classified these as follows: I) 273 incidents requiring a prolonged stay in the recovery room, but without further complications, II) 58 requiring transfer to the intensive care unit, but without further complications, III) three resulting in permanent harm to the patient and IV) one resulting in the death of the patient. A comparison of the monitoring standards for PCIA showed that critical incidents were reported less frequently in hospitals with less intensive monitoring, and more frequently in hospitals with higher monitoring standards.
CONCLUSION
PCIA is a frequently used analgesic technique in German hospitals. There were many differences in how PCIA therapy was applied and monitored on general wards. Adverse events occurred to a significant extent, with a considerable part of them, which might be preventable. Critical incidents were perceived more often when standards for monitoring on general wards were higher. Consented current recommendations regarding treatment and monitoring standards as well as the systematic recording of complications when using PCIA are pending.
Topics: Analgesia, Patient-Controlled; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Analgesics, Opioid; Child; Hospitals; Humans; Pain, Postoperative; Pirinitramide
PubMed: 33373025
DOI: 10.1007/s00101-020-00907-2 -
Biomedical Papers of the Medical... Mar 2022The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy, consumption and safety after piritramide administered either intramuscularly (IM) on demand or via patient-controlled...
Analgesic effects of piritramide in acute postoperative pain - comparison of intramuscular administration with patient-controlled intravenous analgesia and impact of OPRM1 and ABCB1 polymorphisms.
AIMS
The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy, consumption and safety after piritramide administered either intramuscularly (IM) on demand or via patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCA) and to examine the impact of OPRM1 and ABCB1 gene polymorphisms on the drug efficacy/safety in both regimens.
METHODS
One hundred and four patients scheduled for elective inguinal hernioplasty received piritramide with PCA or IM for postoperative pain management. We evaluated piritramide consumption, pain intensity using visual analogue scale (VAS) and adverse effects.
RESULTS
Median (IQR) piritramide consumption was 18.5 (13.5-31.2) and 15.0 (15.0-15.0) mg in the PCA and IM groups, respectively (P=0.0092). The respective values of area under the VAS-time curve were 40 and 280 mm.h (P=0.0027). Opioid-induced adverse effects were more frequent in the PCA than in the IM group. Variant OPRM1 allele was associated with decreased pain relief, increased opioid consumption and increased incidence of adverse effects, while ABCB1 polymorphisms showed no impact on the observed parameters.
CONCLUSIONS
We observed higher piritramide consumption, better pain relief and slightly worse safety profile in the PCA group compared with IM administration. Variant OPRM1 118G allele carriers required higher opioid dosing and suffered from more adverse effects, however, the differences between genotypes have been less pronounced in the PCA patients likely due to improved pain management via PCA.
Topics: ATP Binding Cassette Transporter, Subfamily B; Analgesia, Patient-Controlled; Analgesics, Opioid; Humans; Pain, Postoperative; Pirinitramide; Polymorphism, Genetic; Receptors, Opioid, mu
PubMed: 33252118
DOI: 10.5507/bp.2020.053