-
British Journal of Anaesthesia Feb 2017Dexmedetomidine has been proposed as a perineural local anaesthetic (LA) adjunct to prolong peripheral nerve block duration; however, results from our previous... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Evidence basis for using perineural dexmedetomidine to enhance the quality of brachial plexus nerve blocks: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
BACKGROUND
Dexmedetomidine has been proposed as a perineural local anaesthetic (LA) adjunct to prolong peripheral nerve block duration; however, results from our previous meta-analysis in the setting of brachial plexus block (BPB) did not support its use. Many additional randomized trials have since been published. We thus conducted an updated meta-analysis.
METHODS
Randomized trials investigating the addition of dexmedetomidine to LA compared with LA alone (Control) in BPB for upper extremity surgery were sought. Sensory and motor block duration, onset times, duration of analgesia, analgesic consumption, pain severity, patient satisfaction, and dexmedetomidine-related side-effects were analysed using random-effects modeling. We used ratio-of-means (lower confidence interval [point estimate]) for continuous outcomes.
RESULTS
We identified 32 trials (2007 patients), and found that dexmedetomidine prolonged sensory block (at least 57%, P < 0.0001), motor block (at least 58%, P < 0.0001), and analgesia (at least 63%, P < 0.0001) duration. Dexmedetomidine expedited onset for both sensory (at least 40%, P < 0.0001) and motor (at least 39%, P < 0.0001) blocks. Dexmedetomidine also reduced postoperative oral morphine consumption by 10.2mg [-15.3, -5.2] (P < 0.0001), improved pain control, and enhanced satisfaction. In contrast, dexmedetomidine increased odds of bradycardia (3.3 [0.8, 13.5](P = 0.0002)), and hypotension (5.4 [2.7, 11.0] (P < 0.0001)). A 50-60µg dexmedetomidine dose maximized sensory block duration while minimizing haemodynamic side-effects. No patients experienced any neurologic sequelae. Evidence quality for sensory block was high according to the GRADE system.
CONCLUSIONS
New evidence now indicates that perineural dexmedetomidine improves BPB onset, quality, and analgesia. However, these benefits should be weighed against increased risks of motor block prolongation and transient bradycardia and hypotension.
Topics: Anesthetics, Local; Brachial Plexus Block; Dexmedetomidine; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 28100520
DOI: 10.1093/bja/aew411 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2010Treatment of cancer is increasingly effective but associated with short and long term side effects. Oral side effects, including oral mucositis (mouth ulceration),... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Treatment of cancer is increasingly effective but associated with short and long term side effects. Oral side effects, including oral mucositis (mouth ulceration), remain a major source of illness despite the use of a variety of agents to treat them.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of interventions for treating oral mucositis or its associated pain in patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy or both.
SEARCH STRATEGY
Electronic searches of Cochrane Oral Health Group and PaPaS Trials Registers (to 1 June 2010), CENTRAL via The Cochrane Library (to Issue 2, 2010), MEDLINE via OVID (1950 to 1 June 2010), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 1 June 2010), CINAHL via EBSCO (1980 to 1 June 2010), CANCERLIT via PubMed (1950 to 1 June 2010), OpenSIGLE (1980 to 1 June 2010) and LILACS via the Virtual Health Library (1980 to 1 June 2010) were undertaken. Reference lists from relevant articles were searched and the authors of eligible trials were contacted to identify trials and obtain additional information.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised controlled trials comparing agents prescribed to treat oral mucositis in people receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy or both. Outcomes were oral mucositis, time to heal mucositis, oral pain, duration of pain control, dysphagia, systemic infection, amount of analgesia, length of hospitalisation, cost and quality of life.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Data were independently extracted, in duplicate, by two review authors. Authors were contacted for details of randomisation, blindness and withdrawals. Risk of bias assessment was carried out on six domains. The Cochrane Collaboration statistical guidelines were followed and risk ratio (RR) values calculated using fixed-effect models (less than 3 trials in each meta-analysis).
MAIN RESULTS
Thirty-two trials involving 1505 patients satisfied the inclusion criteria. Three comparisons for mucositis treatment including two or more trials were: benzydamine HCl versus placebo, sucralfate versus placebo and low level laser versus sham procedure. Only the low level laser showed a reduction in severe mucositis when compared with the sham procedure, RR 5.28 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.30 to 12.13).Only 3 comparisons included more than one trial for pain control: patient controlled analgesia (PCA) compared to the continuous infusion method, therapist versus control, cognitive behaviour therapy versus control. There was no evidence of a difference in mean pain score between PCA and continuous infusion, however, less opiate was used per hour for PCA, mean difference 0.65 mg/hour (95% CI 0.09 to 1.20), and the duration of pain was less 1.9 days (95% CI 0.3 to 3.5).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is weak and unreliable evidence that low level laser treatment reduces the severity of the mucositis. Less opiate is used for PCA versus continuous infusion. Further, well designed, placebo or no treatment controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of interventions investigated in this review and new interventions for treating mucositis are needed.
Topics: Analgesics; Anti-Ulcer Agents; Humans; Low-Level Light Therapy; Mouth Diseases; Neoplasms; Oral Ulcer; Pain; Pain Management; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stomatitis
PubMed: 20687070
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001973.pub4 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2020As a retained placenta is a potential life-threatening obstetrical complication, effective and timely management is important. The estimated mortality rates from a...
BACKGROUND
As a retained placenta is a potential life-threatening obstetrical complication, effective and timely management is important. The estimated mortality rates from a retained placenta in developing countries range from 3% to 9%. One possible factor contributing to the high mortality rates is a delay in initiating manual removal of the placenta. Effective anaesthesia or analgesia during this procedure will provide adequate uterine relaxation and pain control, enabling it to be carried out effectively.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and safety of general, regional, and local anaesthesia or analgesia during manual removal of a retained placenta.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform to 30 September 2019, and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We sought randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-randomised controlled trials, and cluster-randomised trials that compared different methods of preoperative or intraoperative anaesthetic or analgesic, administered during the manual removal of a retained placenta.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed the study reports for inclusion, and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We followed standard Cochrane methodology.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified only one randomised controlled trial (N = 30 women) that evaluated the effect of paracervical block on women undergoing manual removal of a retained placenta compared with intravenous pethidine and diazepam. The study was conducted in a hospital in Papua New Guinea. The study was at high risk of bias of performance bias and detection bias, low risk of attrition bias, and an unclear risk of selection bias, reporting bias, and other bias. The included study did not measure this review's primary outcomes of pain intensity and adverse events. The study reported that there were no women, in either group, who experienced an estimated postpartum blood loss of more than 500 mL. We are uncertain about the providers' satisfaction with the procedure, defined as their perception of achieving good pain relief during the procedure (risk ratio (RR) 1.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71 to 3.16, one study, 30 women; very low quality evidence). We are also uncertain about the women's satisfaction with the procedure, defined as their perception of achieving good pain relief during the procedure (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.37; one study, 30 women; very low quality evidence). The included study did not report on any of our other outcomes of interest.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is insufficient evidence from one small study to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of anaesthesia or analgesia during the manual removal of a retained placenta. The quality of the available evidence was very low. We downgraded based on issues of limitations in study design (risk of bias) and imprecision (single study with small sample size, few or no events, and wide confidence intervals). There is a need for well-designed, multi-centre, randomised, controlled trials to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of different types of anaesthesia and analgesia during manual removal of a retained placenta. These studies could report on the important outcomes outlined in this review.
Topics: Analgesia, Obstetrical; Anesthesia, Obstetrical; Female; Humans; Job Satisfaction; Nerve Block; Pain, Procedural; Patient Satisfaction; Placenta, Retained; Pregnancy
PubMed: 32529658
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013013.pub2 -
Supportive Care in Cancer : Official... Jul 2022Cancer prevalence is increasing, with many patients requiring opioid analgesia. Clinicians need to ensure patients receive adequate pain relief. However, opioid misuse... (Review)
Review
CONTEXT
Cancer prevalence is increasing, with many patients requiring opioid analgesia. Clinicians need to ensure patients receive adequate pain relief. However, opioid misuse is widespread, and cancer patients are at risk.
OBJECTIVES
This study aims (1) to identify screening approaches that have been used to assess and monitor risk of opioid misuse in patients with cancer; (2) to compare the prevalence of risk estimated by each of these screening approaches; and (3) to compare risk factors among demographic and clinical variables associated with a positive screen on each of the approaches.
METHODS
Medline, Cochrane Controlled Trial Register, PubMed, PsycINFO, and Embase databases were searched for articles reporting opioid misuse screening in cancer patients, along with handsearching the reference list of included articles. Bias was assessed using tools from the Joanna Briggs Suite.
RESULTS
Eighteen studies met the eligibility criteria, evaluating seven approaches: Urine Drug Test (UDT) (n = 8); the Screener and Opioid Assessment for Patients with Pain (SOAPP) and two variants, Revised and Short Form (n = 6); the Cut-down, Annoyed, Guilty, Eye-opener (CAGE) tool and one variant, Adapted to Include Drugs (n = 6); the Opioid Risk Tool (ORT) (n = 4); Prescription Monitoring Program (PMP) (n = 3); the Screen for Opioid-Associated Aberrant Behavior Risk (SOABR) (n = 1); and structured/specialist interviews (n = 1). Eight studies compared two or more approaches. The rates of risk of opioid misuse in the studied populations ranged from 6 to 65%, acknowledging that estimates are likely to have varied partly because of how specific to opioids the screening approaches were and whether a single or multi-step approach was used. UDT prompted by an intervention or observation of aberrant opioid behaviors (AOB) were conclusive of actual opioid misuse found to be 6.5-24%. Younger age, found in 8/10 studies; personal or family history of anxiety or other mental ill health, found in 6/8 studies; and history of illicit drug use, found in 4/6 studies, showed an increased risk of misuse.
CONCLUSIONS
Younger age, personal or familial mental health history, and history of illicit drug use consistently showed an increased risk of opioid misuse. Clinical suspicion of opioid misuse may be raised by data from PMP or any of the standardized list of AOBs. Clinicians may use SOAPP-R, CAGE-AID, or ORT to screen for increased risk and may use UDT to confirm suspicion of opioid misuse or monitor adherence. More research into this important area is required.
SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS
This systematic review summarized the literature on the use of opioid misuse risk approaches in people with cancer. The rates of reported risk range from 6 to 65%; however, true rate may be closer to 6.5-24%. Younger age, personal or familial mental health history, and history of illicit drug use consistently showed an increased risk of opioid misuse. Clinicians may choose from several approaches. Limited data are available on feasibility and patient experience. PROSPERO registration number. CRD42020163385.
Topics: Analgesics, Opioid; Humans; Illicit Drugs; Neoplasms; Opioid-Related Disorders; Pain
PubMed: 35166898
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-022-06895-w -
Pain Medicine (Malden, Mass.) Aug 2022Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) surgeries are among the most common elective procedures. Moderate to severe postoperative pain during the... (Review)
Review
Effectiveness of Pharmacological-Based Interventions, Including Education and Prescribing Strategies, to Reduce Subacute Pain After Total Hip or Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.
BACKGROUND
Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) surgeries are among the most common elective procedures. Moderate to severe postoperative pain during the subacute period (defined here as the period from hospital discharge to 3 months postoperatively) is a predictor of persistent pain 12 months postoperatively. This review aimed to examine the available postdischarge pharmacological interventions, including educational and prescribing strategies, and their effect on reducing pain during the subacute period after TKA or THA.
METHODS
We searched seven electronic databases from inception to April 22, 2021. Published randomized controlled trials of adults who underwent TKA or THA and received a pharmacological-based intervention commencing within 1 week after hospital discharge and conducted for up to 3 months postoperatively were compared with any treatment. Two reviewers independently extracted data on the primary outcome, pain intensity. This review was registered prospectively on PROSPERO (ID: CRD42021250384).
RESULTS
Four trials involving 660 participants were included. Interventions included changing analgesic prescribing practices upon hospital discharge and education on analgesic use. Providing multimodal non-opioid analgesia in addition to reduced opioid quantity was associated with lower subacute pain (coefficient -0.81; 95% confidence interval -1.33 to -0.29; P = 0.003). Education on analgesic use during multidisciplinary home visits was effective for reducing pain intensity during the subacute period (6.25 ± 10.13 vs 35.67 ± 22.05; P < 0.001) compared with usual care.
CONCLUSIONS
Interventions involving the provision of multimodal non-opioid analgesia and education on analgesic use show positive effects on reducing pain intensity during the subacute period after TKA and THA.
Topics: Adult; Aftercare; Analgesics; Analgesics, Opioid; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Humans; Pain, Postoperative; Patient Discharge; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 35325201
DOI: 10.1093/pm/pnac052 -
Journal of the American College of... Feb 2023Procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) and peripheral nerve blocks (NBs) are techniques to manage pain and facilitate reduction of dislocated joints or fractures....
BACKGROUND
Procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) and peripheral nerve blocks (NBs) are techniques to manage pain and facilitate reduction of dislocated joints or fractures. However, it is unclear if either approach provides any distinct advantage in the emergency department (ED). The aim of this systematic review is to compare these 2 techniques on pain scores, adverse events, patient satisfaction, and length of stay (LOS) in the ED.
METHODS
We performed an electronic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library, and references were hand-searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PSA with NBs for orthopedic reductions in the ED were included. Outcomes of interest included pain scores, adverse events, patient satisfaction, and LOS in the ED. A total of 2 reviewers independently screened abstracts and extracted data into a standardized form. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used to evaluate study quality. The Grading of Recommendation Assessment Development and Evaluation approach was used to assess the certainty and strength of the evidence. Data on pain scores were pooled using a random-effects model and are reported as standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS
A total of 6 RCTs (n = 256) were included in a qualitative review, and 4 RCTs (n = 101) were included in the meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in pain scores between the PSA and NB groups ( = 0.47; SMD, 0.45; 95% CI, -0.78 to 1.69; I = 0.94). There were less adverse events in the NB group (0%-3.3%) compared with the PSA group (0%-20%; n = 256). LOS times were consistently shorter in the NB group (n = 215). Patient satisfaction was comparable in both groups (n = 196).
CONCLUSION
Based on the available evidence, NBs performed by emergency physicians are as effective as PSA in managing pain during orthopedic reductions in the ED. NBs are associated with fewer adverse events and shorter LOS in the ED. The quality of evidence is low.
PubMed: 36704208
DOI: 10.1002/emp2.12886 -
Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic... Oct 2013A best evidence topic in cardiothoracic surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was whether gabapentin, a commonly prescribed... (Review)
Review
A best evidence topic in cardiothoracic surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was whether gabapentin, a commonly prescribed neuropathic analgesic and anticonvulsant, is safe and beneficial in patients with post-thoracotomy pain following thoracic surgery. Seventeen papers were identified using the search described below, and five papers presented the best evidence to reach conclusions regarding the issues of interest for this review. Side effects and complications as well as evidence of benefit, typically using various pain-scoring systems, were included in the assessment. The author, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes, results and study weaknesses of the papers are tabulated. The systematic review of two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) demonstrated that the use of a single dose gabapentin does not reduce pain scores or the need for epidural or morphine immediately in hospital following thoracic surgery. One double-blinded RCT used multiple doses of gabapentin perioperatively and showed that oral gabapentin administered preoperatively and during the first 2 days postoperatively, in conjunction with patient controlled analgesia morphine, provides effective analgesia in thoracic surgery with a consequent improvement in postoperative pulmonary function and less morphine consumption. One prospective clinical study comparing a 2-month course of gabapentin with naproxen sodium for chronic post thoracotomy pain following surgery showed significant improvement in both the visual analogue scale (VAS) score and the Leeds assessment of neuropathic symptoms and signs (LANSS) at 60 days in the gabapentin (P = 0.001). One prospective study of out-patients with chronic pain (>4 weeks since thoracotomy performed) suggested that gabapentin is effective, safe and well tolerated when used for persistent postoperative and post-traumatic pain in thoracic surgery patients. We conclude that there is no evidence to support the role of a single preoperative oral dose of gabapentin in reducing pain scores or opioid consumption following thoracic surgery. Multiple dosing regimens may be beneficial in reducing acute and chronic pain; however, more robust randomized control studies are needed.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Amines; Analgesics; Benchmarking; Cyclohexanecarboxylic Acids; Drug Administration Schedule; Evidence-Based Medicine; Gabapentin; Humans; Pain, Postoperative; Thoracotomy; Treatment Outcome; gamma-Aminobutyric Acid
PubMed: 23832920
DOI: 10.1093/icvts/ivt301 -
Pain Physician Nov 2022Single-injection regional analgesia techniques can provide effective analgesia for abdominal hysterectomy. However, few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have directly... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Single-injection regional analgesia techniques can provide effective analgesia for abdominal hysterectomy. However, few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have directly compared these techniques for total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH), and the best strategy remains unknown.
OBJECTIVES
In this network meta-analysis, we compared the analgesic efficacy of single-injection regional analgesia techniques in patients who underwent TAH.
STUDY DESIGN
A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
METHODS
We searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and CINAHL databases for relevant trials from inception until April 2022. RCTs that examined single-injection regional analgesia techniques for TAH were included. Random-effects network meta-analyses were performed using the frequentist approach. The primary outcome was 24-hour cumulative morphine equivalent consumption. The secondary outcomes were pain scores, time to first request for rescue analgesia, and rates of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).
RESULTS
In total, 36 RCTs were included. Network meta-analyses indicated that the erector spinae plane block provided superior analgesia in terms of reduced morphine consumption, low PONV incidence, and longer time to first analgesia request. Moreover, compared with control (i.e., sham or placebo), the quadratus lumborum block provided superior analgesia in terms of time to first analgesia request and resting pain scores.
LIMITATIONS
(1) Few studies have examined single-injection regional analgesia techniques other than the transversus abdominis plane block (TAPB) and wound infiltration, leading to a few indirect effect estimates. (2) Heterogeneity existed due to analgesic type/dose, plane block timing, and injection site. (3) Objective outcomes, such as length of hospital stay, were lacking; most studies only included the patient-reported subjective pain score.
CONCLUSION
Single-injection blocks are effective analgesic techniques for TAH. Among them, the erector spinae plane block and quadratus lumborum block seem to have superior effects. Further studies should evaluate techniques other than TAPB and wound infiltration to draw definitive conclusions.
Topics: Humans; Female; Pain, Postoperative; Network Meta-Analysis; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting; Analgesics, Opioid; Morphine; Analgesia; Hysterectomy; Abdominal Muscles
PubMed: 36375182
DOI: No ID Found -
Minerva Anestesiologica Feb 2015Cesarean delivery is a major surgical procedure, after which a woman can experience substantial postoperative discomfort or pain. Inadequate postoperative analgesia is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Cesarean delivery is a major surgical procedure, after which a woman can experience substantial postoperative discomfort or pain. Inadequate postoperative analgesia is one of the most common reasons for poor patient satisfaction following cesarean delivery. Although spinal or systemic opioids are currently the gold standard to achieve effective analgesia, they are often associated with side effects. In the last few years there has been growing interest in abdominal plane blocks, with promising data on their efficacy. The transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block is a regional analgesic technique which is gaining acceptance in postoperative analgesia for lower abdominal surgeries. In this systematic review of articles published as of 31 December 2013, we searched the principal medical databases for randomized controlled trials that assessed the efficacy of ultrasound (US)-guided TAP block following cesarean delivery and reported on postoperative opioid consumption and pain score, opioid-related side-effects and patient satisfaction. Although controversy surrounds the utility of US-guided TAP block in cesarean section, evidence suggests that when correctly executed as part of a multimodal analgesic regimen, TAP block may reduce postoperative opioid consumption and opioid-related side effects, improving postoperative pain control and patient satisfaction. Further studies are necessary to explore this field of research.
Topics: Abdominal Muscles; Adult; Analgesia; Cesarean Section; Female; Humans; Nerve Block; Pain, Postoperative; Pregnancy
PubMed: 24739207
DOI: No ID Found -
Local and Regional Anesthesia 2021Posterior knee pain after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is common despite multimodal analgesia and regional anesthesia use. This review included randomized controlled... (Review)
Review
Ultrasound-Guided Local Anesthetic Infiltration Between the Popliteal Artery and the Capsule of the Posterior Knee (IPACK) Block for Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Posterior knee pain after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is common despite multimodal analgesia and regional anesthesia use. This review included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing analgesic outcomes after inclusion of local anesthetic infiltration between the popliteal artery and capsule of the knee (iPACK) block versus pathways without iPACK. Electronic databases (MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus) were searched from inception to 10/11/2020. Eligible studies evaluated iPACK use on primary outcomes: opioid consumption and pain scores with movement. Secondary outcomes included rest pain, patient satisfaction, length of stay (LOS), gait distance, knee range of motion (ROM), and complications. Bias and quality were appraised using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) guidelines. Eight RCTs (777 patients) were included. iPACK block use demonstrated similar opioid consumption in the PACU (4/7 RCTs) and 24 hours after TKA (5/7 RCTs) compared to without iPACK (moderate-quality GRADE evidence). Additionally, iPACK block use demonstrated lower movement pain scores in PACU (3/5 RCTs) but similar or higher pain scores after 24 hours (5/7 RCTs; low-quality GRADE evidence). Studies consistently reported no difference in gait distance (4/4 RCTs) or complications (7/7 RCTs) between treatment arms (high-quality GRADE evidence), although differing effect estimates were observed with resting pain, satisfaction, LOS, and knee ROM. This review provides a foundation of knowledge on iPACK efficacy. While evidence does not currently support widespread inclusion of iPACK within enhanced recovery pathways for TKA, limitations suggest further study is warranted.
PubMed: 34012290
DOI: 10.2147/LRA.S303827