-
Anais Brasileiros de Dermatologia 2020Local anesthetics are essential medications for the conduction of dermatological procedures. They stop the depolarization of nerve fibers and are divided into two main... (Review)
Review
Local anesthetics are essential medications for the conduction of dermatological procedures. They stop the depolarization of nerve fibers and are divided into two main categories, the amide and ester types. Systemic toxicity with reflex on the central nervous and cardiovascular systems is their most feared adverse reactions, and the anaphylactic reaction is the most concerning one. Although potentially fatal, these events are extremely rare, so local anesthetics are considered safe for use in in-office procedures.
Topics: Anesthetics, Local; Bupivacaine; Drug Hypersensitivity; Epinephrine; Humans; Lidocaine; Mepivacaine; Risk Factors; Time Factors
PubMed: 31952994
DOI: 10.1016/j.abd.2019.09.025 -
Anesthesiology Feb 2021The authors provide a comprehensive summary of all randomized, controlled trials (n = 76) involving the clinical administration of liposomal bupivacaine (Exparel; Pacira... (Review)
Review
The authors provide a comprehensive summary of all randomized, controlled trials (n = 76) involving the clinical administration of liposomal bupivacaine (Exparel; Pacira Pharmaceuticals, USA) to control postoperative pain that are currently published. When infiltrated surgically and compared with unencapsulated bupivacaine or ropivacaine, only 11% of trials (4 of 36) reported a clinically relevant and statistically significant improvement in the primary outcome favoring liposomal bupivacaine. Ninety-two percent of trials (11 of 12) suggested a peripheral nerve block with unencapsulated bupivacaine provides superior analgesia to infiltrated liposomal bupivacaine. Results were mixed for the 16 trials comparing liposomal and unencapsulated bupivacaine, both within peripheral nerve blocks. Overall, of the trials deemed at high risk for bias, 84% (16 of 19) reported statistically significant differences for their primary outcome measure(s) compared with only 14% (4 of 28) of those with a low risk of bias. The preponderance of evidence fails to support the routine use of liposomal bupivacaine over standard local anesthetics.
Topics: Anesthetics, Local; Bupivacaine; Humans; Liposomes; Nerve Block; Pain Management; Pain, Postoperative; Peripheral Nerves; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33372949
DOI: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000003630 -
Anticancer Research Apr 2020Pancreatic cancer is often diagnosed due to the patient seeking medical attention for abdominal pain. It is among the most painful cancers, with pain severity strongly... (Review)
Review
Pancreatic cancer is often diagnosed due to the patient seeking medical attention for abdominal pain. It is among the most painful cancers, with pain severity strongly correlating with prognosis. Perineural invasion is a prominent feature of pancreatic cancer and often the first route of metastasis resulting in neuropathic pain. While surgical pain is present, it is generally short-lived; chemo- and radio-therapy associated side effect pain is often longer lasting and more difficult to manage. Treatment-induced mucositis in response to chemotherapy occurs throughout the GI tract resulting in infection-prone ulcers on the lip, buccal mucosa, palate or tongue. Cisplatin treatment is associated with axonal neuropathy in the dorsal root ganglion, although other large sensory fibers can be affected. Opioid-induced hyperalgesia can also emerge in patients. Along with traditional means to address pain, neurolytic celiac plexus block of afferent nociceptive fibers has been reported to be effective in 74% of patients. Moreover, as cancer treatments become more effective and result in improved survival, treatment-related side effects become more prevalent. Here, pancreatic cancer and treatment associated pain are reviewed along with current treatment strategies. Potential future therapeutic strategies to target the pathophysiology underlying pancreatic cancer and pain induction are also presented.
Topics: Abdominal Pain; Analgesics, Opioid; Bupivacaine; Cancer Pain; Cisplatin; Humans; Mucositis; Pain Management; Pain Measurement; Pancreatic Neoplasms
PubMed: 32234867
DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.14133 -
Veterinary Medicine and Science May 2020Pain management in veterinary patients is a crucial component of appropriate patient care. Multimodal analgesia that includes both systemically and locally/regionally... (Review)
Review
Pain management in veterinary patients is a crucial component of appropriate patient care. Multimodal analgesia that includes both systemically and locally/regionally administered drugs is generally the most effective approach to providing pain relief. Local anaesthetic drugs used in local and regional blockade are unique in that they can completely block the transmission of pain (in conscious patients) or nociceptive (in anaesthetized patients) signals, thereby providing profound analgesia. In addition, local and regional administration of drugs, when compared with systemic bolus administration, generally results in a lower incidence of dose-related adverse effects. Due to the potential to provide profound analgesia and the high safety margin (when used correctly) of this drug class, local anaesthetics are recommended as part of the analgesic protocol in the majority of patients undergoing surgical procedures or suffering traumatic injuries. This manuscript, Part 1 of a two-part instalment, emphasizes the importance of using local and regional anaesthesia as a component of multimodal analgesia, provides a review of the basic pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of local anaesthetic drugs in general, lists information on commonly used local anaesthetic drugs for local and regional blockade in dogs and cats, and briefly introduces the novel liposome-encapsulated bupivacaine (NOCITA®). Part 2 is a review of local and regional anaesthetic techniques used in dogs and cats (Grubb & Lobprise, 2020).
Topics: Anesthesia, Conduction; Anesthesia, Local; Anesthetics, Local; Animals; Bupivacaine; Cats; Dogs; Pain Management
PubMed: 31965742
DOI: 10.1002/vms3.219 -
Anesthesiology Mar 2022The interscalene nerve block provides analgesia for shoulder surgery. To extend block duration, provide adequate analgesia, and minimize opioid consumption, the use of... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
The interscalene nerve block provides analgesia for shoulder surgery. To extend block duration, provide adequate analgesia, and minimize opioid consumption, the use of adjuvants such as dexamethasone as well as the application of perineural liposomal bupivacaine have been proposed. This randomized, double-blinded, noninferiority trial hypothesized that perineural liposomal bupivacaine is noninferior to standard bupivacaine with perineural dexamethasone in respect to average pain scores in the first 72 h after surgery.
METHODS
A total of 112 patients undergoing ambulatory shoulder surgery were randomized into two groups. The liposomal bupivacaine group received a 15-ml premixed admixture of 10 ml of 133 mg liposomal bupivacaine and 5 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine (n = 55), while the bupivacaine with dexamethasone group received an admixture of 15 ml of 0.5% standard bupivacaine with 4 mg dexamethasone (n = 56), respectively. The primary outcome was the average numerical rating scale pain scores at rest over 72 h. The mean difference between the two groups was compared against a noninferiority margin of 1.3. Secondary outcomes were analgesic block duration, motor and sensory resolution, opioid consumption, numerical rating scale pain scores at rest and movement on postoperative days 1 to 4 and again on postoperative day 7, patient satisfaction, readiness for postanesthesia care unit discharge, and adverse events.
RESULTS
A liposomal bupivacaine group average numerical rating scale pain score over 72 h was not inferior to the bupivacaine with dexamethasone group (mean [SD], 2.4 [1.9] vs. 3.4 [1.9]; mean difference [95% CI], -1.1 [-1.8, -0.4]; P < 0.001 for noninferiority). There was no significant difference in duration of analgesia between the groups (26 [20, 42] h vs. 27 [20, 39] h; P = 0.851). Motor and sensory resolutions were similar in both groups: 27 (21, 48) h versus 27 (19, 40) h (P = 0.436) and 27 [21, 44] h versus 31 (20, 42) h (P = 0.862), respectively. There was no difference in opioid consumption, readiness for postanesthesia care unit discharge, or adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS
Interscalene nerve blocks with perineural liposomal bupivacaine provided effective analgesia similar to the perineural standard bupivacaine with dexamethasone. The results show that bupivacaine with dexamethasone can be used interchangeably with liposomal bupivacaine for analgesia after shoulder surgery.
Topics: Adult; Ambulatory Surgical Procedures; Anesthetics, Local; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Brachial Plexus Block; Bupivacaine; Dexamethasone; Double-Blind Method; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Pain, Postoperative; Shoulder
PubMed: 35041742
DOI: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000004111 -
The Journal of Thoracic and... May 2021
Topics: Bupivacaine; Epinephrine; Humans; Liposomes; Lung
PubMed: 32448682
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2020.01.113 -
Pain Physician Jan 2021
Topics: Bupivacaine; Dexmedetomidine; Humans; Ultrasonography; Ultrasonography, Interventional
PubMed: 33400447
DOI: No ID Found -
Anesthesiology Feb 2021
Topics: Analgesia; Anesthetics, Local; Bupivacaine; Humans; Pain, Postoperative; Peripheral Nerves
PubMed: 33433621
DOI: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000003658 -
Pain Physician Jan 2021Transforaminal epidural injections have been used since the late 1990s to treat lumbar radicular pain. They have been the subject of considerable attention, with varying...
BACKGROUND
Transforaminal epidural injections have been used since the late 1990s to treat lumbar radicular pain. They have been the subject of considerable attention, with varying conclusions from systematic reviews as to their efficacy. Transforaminal injections have been associated with rare but major complications. Further, the use of transforaminal injections has increased since the passage of the Affordable Care Act. Finally, with the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, there has been heightened concern regarding the risk associated with steroid injections.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate and update the effectiveness of transforaminal injections for 4 indications: radicular pain; from spinal stenosis; from failed back surgery syndrome; and for axial low back pain; and to evaluate the safety of the procedure.
STUDY DESIGN
A systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of transforaminal injections.
METHODS
The available literature on transforaminal injections was reviewed and the quality assessed. The level of evidence was classified on a 5-point scale based on the quality of evidence developed by the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) and modified by the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP). Data sources included relevant literature from 1966 to April 2020, and manual searches of the bibliographies of known primary and review articles. Pain relief and functional improvement were the primary outcome measures. A minimum of 6 months pain relief follow-up was required.
RESULTS
For this systematic review, 66 studies were identified. Eighteen randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria. No observational studies were included. Eleven randomized controlled trials dealt with various aspects of transforaminal injections for radicular pain owing to disc herniation. Based on these studies, there is Level 1 evidence supporting the use of transforaminal injections for radicular pain owing to disc herniation. A meta-analysis showed that at both 3 and 6 months, there was highly statistically significant improvement in both pain and function with both particulate and nonparticulate steroids. For radicular pain from central stenosis there is one moderate quality study, with Level IV evidence. For radicular pain caused by failed back surgery syndrome there is one moderate quality study, with Level IV evidence. For radicular pain from foraminal stenosis and for axial pain there is Level V evidence, opinion-based/consensus, supporting the use of transforaminal injections. Transforaminal injections are generally safe. However, they have been associated with major neurologic complications related to cord infarct. Causes other than intraluminal injection of particulates appear to be at play. The use of an infraneural approach and of blunt needles appear to offer the greatest patient safety. Because of concern over the role of particulate steroids, multiple other injectates have been evaluated, including nonparticulate steroids, tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-a) inhibitors, and local anesthetics without steroids. No injectate has been proven superior. If there is concern about immunosuppression because of risk of COVID-19 infection, either the lowest possible dose of steroid or no steroid should be used.
LIMITATIONS
The study was limited by the paucity of literature for some indications.
CONCLUSIONS
There is Level I evidence for the use of transforaminal injections for radicular pain from disc herniations.
Topics: Bupivacaine; COVID-19; Dexmedetomidine; Humans; Injections, Epidural; Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; SARS-CoV-2; Steroids; Ultrasonography, Interventional; United States
PubMed: 33492919
DOI: No ID Found -
Anesthesia and Analgesia Dec 2020In women undergoing cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine, transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block with bupivacaine hydrochloride (HCl) may... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
In women undergoing cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine, transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block with bupivacaine hydrochloride (HCl) may not improve postsurgical analgesia. This lack of benefit could be related to the short duration of action of bupivacaine HCl. A retrospective study reported that TAP block with long-acting liposomal bupivacaine (LB) reduced opioid consumption and improved analgesia following cesarean delivery. Therefore, we performed a prospective multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial examining efficacy and safety of TAP block with LB plus bupivacaine HCl versus bupivacaine HCl alone.
METHODS
Women (n = 186) with term pregnancies undergoing elective cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia were randomized (1:1) to TAP block with LB 266 mg plus bupivacaine HCl 50 mg or bupivacaine HCl 50 mg alone. Efficacy was evaluated in a protocol-compliant analysis (PCA) set that was defined a priori. The primary end point was total postsurgical opioid consumption (oral morphine equivalent dosing [MED]) through 72 hours. Pain intensity was measured using a visual analog scale. Adverse events (AEs) after treatment were recorded through day 14.
RESULTS
Total opioid consumption through 72 hours was reduced with LB plus bupivacaine HCl versus bupivacaine HCl alone (least squares mean [LSM] [standard error (SE)] MED, 15.5 mg [6.67 mg] vs 32.0 mg [6.25 mg]). This corresponded to an LSM treatment difference of -16.5 mg (95% confidence interval [CI], -30.8 to -2.2 mg; P = .012). The area under the curve of imputed pain intensity scores through 72 hours supported noninferiority of LB plus bupivacaine HCl versus bupivacaine HCl alone (LSM [SE], 147.9 [21.13] vs 178.5 [19.78]; LSM treatment difference, -30.6; 95% CI, -75.9 to 14.7), with a prespecified noninferiority margin of 36 (P = .002). In an analysis of all treated patients, including those not meeting criteria for inclusion in the PCA, there was no difference in postsurgical opioid consumption between groups. In the LB plus bupivacaine HCl group, 63.6% of patients experienced an AE after treatment versus 56.2% in the bupivacaine HCl-alone group. Serious AEs after treatment were rare (≈3% in both groups).
CONCLUSIONS
TAP block using LB plus bupivacaine HCl as part of a multimodal analgesia protocol incorporating intrathecal morphine resulted in reduced opioid consumption after cesarean delivery in the PCA set. Results suggest that with correct TAP block placement and adherence to a multimodal postsurgical analgesic regimen, there is an opioid-reducing benefit of adding LB to bupivacaine TAP blocks after cesarean delivery (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03176459).
Topics: Abdominal Muscles; Adult; Anesthetics, Local; Bupivacaine; Cesarean Section; Double-Blind Method; Female; Humans; Liposomes; Middle Aged; Nerve Block; Pain, Postoperative; Pregnancy
PubMed: 32739962
DOI: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000005075