Dataset Information

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Postoperative Thoracic Epidural Analgesia Versus Intravenous Patient-controlled Analgesia After Major Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:The primary objective of this randomized trial was to compare thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) to intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) for pain control over the first 48 hours after hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) surgery. Secondary endpoints were patient-reported outcomes, total narcotic utilization, and complications. BACKGROUND:Although adequate postoperative pain control is critical to patient and surgeon success, the optimal analgesia regimen in HPB surgery remains controversial. METHODS:Using a 2.5:1 randomization strategy, 140 patients were randomized to TEA (N = 106) or intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (N = 34). Patient-reported pain was measured on a Likert scale (0-10) at standard time intervals. Cumulative pain area under the curve was determined using the trapezoidal method. RESULTS:Between the study groups key demographic, comorbidity, clinical, and operative variables were equivalently distributed. The median area under the curve of the postoperative time 0- to 48-hour pain scores was lower in the TEA group (78.6 vs 105.2 pain-hours, P = 0.032) with a 35% reduction in patients experiencing ?7/10 pain (43% vs 62%, P = 0.07). Patient-reported outcomes and total opiate use further supported the benefit of TEA on patient experience. Anesthesia-related events requiring change in analgesic therapy were comparable (12.2% vs 2.9%, respectively, P = 0.187). Grade 3 or higher surgical complications (6.6% vs 9.4%), median length of stay (6 days vs 6 days), readmission (1.9% vs 3.1%), and return to the operating room (0.9% vs 3.1%) were similar (all P > 0.05). There were no mortalities in either group. CONCLUSIONS:In major HPB surgery, TEA provides a superior patient experience through improved pain control and less narcotic use, without increased length of stay or complications.

SUBMITTER: Aloia TA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5784834 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Postoperative Thoracic Epidural Analgesia Versus Intravenous Patient-controlled Analgesia After Major Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery.

Aloia Thomas A TA Kim Bradford J BJ Segraves-Chun Yun Shin YS Cata Juan P JP Truty Mark J MJ Shi Qiuling Q Holmes Alexander A Soliz Jose M JM Popat Keyuri U KU Rahlfs Thomas F TF Lee Jeffrey E JE Wang Xin Shelley XS Morris Jeffrey S JS Gottumukkala Vijaya N R VNR Vauthey Jean-Nicolas JN

Annals of surgery 20170901 3

<h4>Objectives</h4>The primary objective of this randomized trial was to compare thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) to intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) for pain control over the first 48 hours after hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) surgery. Secondary endpoints were patient-reported outcomes, total narcotic utilization, and complications.<h4>Background</h4>Although adequate postoperative pain control is critical to patient and surgeon success, the optimal analgesia regimen in HPB surg ...[more]

PMID: 28746153

Similar Datasets

Project description:Postoperative pain after major open gynecologic surgeries requires appropriate pain management.This study aimed at comparing perioperative patient controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) and patient controlled intravenous analgesia (PCA) after gynecologic oncology surgeries.In this clinical trial study, 90 patients with American society of anesthesiologists (ASA) class I or II scheduled for gynecologic oncologic surgeries were randomly allocated to two groups (45 patients each group) to receive: patient-controlled epidural analgesia with bupivacaine and fentanyl (PCEA group), or patient controlled intravenous analgesia (IV PCA group) with fentanyl, pethidine and ondansetron. Postoperative pain was assessed over 48 hours using the visual analog scale (VAS). The frequency of rescue analgesia was recorded. Occurrence of any concomitant events such as nausea, vomiting, ileus, purities, sedation and respiratory complications were recorded postoperatively.There were no statistically significant differences in demographic data including; age, weight, ASA physical status, duration of surgery, intraoperative bleeding, and the amount of blood transfusion (P > 0.05), between the two studied groups. Severity of postoperative pain was not significantly different between the two groups (P > 0.05); however, after first patient mobilization, pain was significantly lower in the epidural group than the IV group (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding the incidence of complications such as nausea, vomiting, purities or ileus (P > 0.05). Nevertheless, the incidence and severity of sedation was significantly higher in the IV group (P < 0.001). Respiratory depression was higher in the IV group than the epidural group; this difference, however, was not significant (P = 0.11). In the epidural group, only 10 patients (22.2%) had mild and transient lower extremities parenthesis.Both intravenous and epidural analgesic techniques with combination of analgesics provide proper postoperative pain control after major gynecologic cancer surgeries without any significant complications. Regarding lower sedative and respiratory depressant effects of epidural analgesia, it seems that this method is a safer technique for postoperative pain relief in these patients.

Project description:IntroductionThis study aimed to compare the efficacy between patient-controlled caudal epidural analgesia (PCCA) and patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) after perianal surgery, to provide a feasible solution to postoperative pain.MethodsThis was a prospective, randomized controlled trial comprising 100 patients who underwent caudal epidural block on perianal surgery at Chengdu Shang Jin Nan Fu Hospital of West China Hospital at Sichuan University between April and August 2020. Patients were randomly divided into the PCCA and PCIA groups. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores were recorded at 2, 4, 6, 24, 48, and 72 h after surgery, and at the first dressing change and first defecation. The lower limb mobility in the post-anesthetic recovery room (PACU) was determined. The analgesic effect, usage amount of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), usage amount and frequency of remedial analgesic measures, number of individuals who must be catheterized, and incidence of adverse reactions were recorded. Satisfaction of postoperative analgesic effect and convenience of PCA were also assessed.ResultsThe patients in the PCCA group had significantly lower VAS scores at 4, 6, 24, 48, 72 h, the first dressing change, and the first defecation compared with the PCIA group. There were more patients receiving postoperative remedial analgesics in the PCIA group than in the PCCA group. The outcome of the number of PCA and catheterization rates did not differ significantly between the groups. There were two cases of sensory numbness below the S3 plane. The major postoperative complications in the PCIA group were pruritus (3/47, 6.4%), nausea, and vomiting (6/47, 12.8%) (one case combined with pruritus). Patients in the PCCA group were more satisfied with the analgesic effect, while those in the PCIA group were more satisfied with the convenience.ConclusionIn the postoperative analgesia program of perianal surgery, PCCA may provide a better analgesic effect without increasing the incidence of complications.Trial registrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry identifier, ChiCTR2000038425, September 2020, retrospectively registered.

Project description:BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:The use of patient-controlled epidural analgesia after various operations has been associated with an early return of bowel function, thus decreasing patients' length of stay (LOS). The primary aim of this study was to compare LOS after radical cystectomy between patients who received epidural analgesia versus those who received intravenous patient-controlled analgesia. Our secondary analysis included the assessment of other metrics such as total opioid requirements, pain scores, return of bowel function, and complication rates between the 2 groups. METHODS:We conducted a retrospective review using the electronic medical records of 308 patients who underwent radical cystectomies at Memorial Sloan Kettering between 2006 and 2011. We aimed to understand if epidural analgesia was associated with a reduced LOS compared with patient-controlled intravenous opioid analgesia. We also aimed to identify performance improvements as a function of epidural analgesia status using various metrics such as pain management, bowel function return, and complication rates. We used both univariate and multivariate analyses to identify if epidural analgesia was associated with meaningful differences in the aforementioned metrics. RESULTS:Median age at radical cystectomy, body mass index, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and T stage were similar for both groups. For our primary objective of LOS, we found no significant difference between the 2 cohorts (8 vs 7 days, P = 0.2). Analysis of our secondary outcome measures revealed that epidural analgesia use was associated with less total opioid requirement for the first 3 postoperative days (PODs) (P = 0.0001). In addition, epidural analgesia was found to be associated with improved postoperative pain scores compared with intravenous patient-controlled analgesia on PODs 1 (P = 0.0001) and 2 (P = 0.004), and there was a slight improvement on POD 3, but this was not significant (P = 0.77). In contrast, we found no difference between pain management types with regard to proportion of patients who experienced a delay in gastrointestinal recovery, fluid bolus requirements within the first 3 perioperative days, rates of infection, pulmonary complications, and grade 3 or greater complications. CONCLUSIONS:We have demonstrated that, despite significant improvements in initial pain control and less opioid requirement with patient-controlled epidural analgesia, there was no association between analgesic approach and LOS, return of bowel function, or complications.

Project description:BackgroundRectus sheath catheter analgesia (RSCA) and thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) are both used for analgesia following laparotomy. The aim was to compare the analgesic effectiveness of RSCA with TEA after laparotomy for elective colorectal and urological surgery.MethodsPatients undergoing elective midline laparotomy were randomized in a non-blinded fashion to receive RSCA or TEA for postoperative analgesia at a single UK teaching hospital. The primary quantitative outcome measure was dynamic pain score at 24 h after surgery. A nested qualitative study (reported elsewhere) explored the dual primary outcome of patient experience and acceptability. Secondary outcome measures included rest and movement pain scores over 72 h, functional analgesia, analgesia satisfaction, opiate consumption, functional recovery, morbidity, safety, and cost-effectiveness.ResultsA total of 131 patients were randomized: 66 in the RSCA group and 65 in the TEA group. The median (interquartile range; i.q.r.) dynamic pain score at 24 h was significantly lower after TEA than RSCA (33 (11-60) versus 50.5 (24.50-77.25); P = 0.018). Resting pain score at 72 h was significantly lower after RSCA (4.5 (0.25-13.75) versus 12.5 (2-13); P = 0.019). Opiate consumption on postoperative day 3 (median (i.q.r.) morphine equivalent 17 (10-30) mg versus 40 (13.25-88.50) mg; P = 0.038), hypotension, or vasopressor dependency (29.7 versus 49.2 per cent; P = 0.023) and weight gain to day 3 (median (i.q.r.) 0 (-1-2) kg versus 1 (0-3) kg; P = 0.046) were all significantly greater after TEA, compared with RSCA. There were no significant differences between groups in other secondary outcomes, although more participants experienced serious adverse events after TEA compared with RSCA, which was also the more cost-effective.ConclusionsTEA provided superior initial postoperative analgesia but only for the first 24 h. By 72 hours RSCA provides superior analgesia, is associated with a lower incidence of unwanted effects, and may be more cost-effective.

Project description:PurposePostoperative complications after major liver surgery are common. Thoracic epidural anesthesia may provide beneficial effects on postoperative outcome. We strove to compare postoperative outcomes in major liver surgery patients with and without thoracic epidural anesthesia.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study in a single university medical center. Patients undergoing elective major liver surgery between April 2012 and December 2016 were eligible for inclusion. We divided patients into two groups according to whether or not they had thoracic epidural anesthesia for major liver surgery. The primary outcome was postoperative hospital length of stay, i.e., from day of surgery until hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes included 30-day postoperative mortality and major postoperative complications. Additionally, we investigated the effect of thoracic epidural anesthesia on perioperative analgesia doses and the safety of thoracic epidural anesthesia.ResultsOf 328 patients included in this study, 177 (54.3%) received thoracic epidural anesthesia. There were no clinically important differences in postoperative hospital length of stay (11.0 [7.00-17.0] vs. 9.00 [7.00-14.0] days, p = 0.316, primary outcome), death (0.0 vs. 2.7%, p = 0.995), or the incidence of postoperative renal failure (0.6 vs. 0.0%, p = 0.99), sepsis (0.0 vs. 1.3%, p = 0.21), or pulmonary embolism (0.6 vs. 1.4%, p = 0.59) between patients with or without thoracic epidural anesthesia. Perioperative analgesia doses - including the intraoperative sufentanil dose (0.228 [0.170-0.332] vs. 0.405 [0.315-0.565] μg·kg-1·h-1, p < 0.0001) - were lower in patients with thoracic epidural anesthesia. No major thoracic epidural anesthesia-associated infections or bleedings occurred.ConclusionThis retrospective analysis suggests that thoracic epidural anesthesia does not reduce postoperative hospital length of stay in patients undergoing major liver surgery - but it may reduce perioperative analgesia doses. Thoracic epidural anesthesia was safe in this cohort of patients undergoing major liver surgery. These findings need to be confirmed in robust clinical trials.

Project description:BackgroundRecently, robot-assisted thoracic surgery has been increasingly performed for mediastinal disease. However, appropriate postoperative analgesic methods have not been evaluated.MethodsWe retrospectively studied patients who underwent robot-assisted thoracic surgery for mediastinal disease at a single university hospital between January 2019 and December 2021. Patients were performed either general anesthesia alone, general anesthesia combined with thoracic epidural anesthesia, or general anesthesia combined with ultrasound-guided thoracic block. Patients were divided into three groups [non-block (NB), thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA), and thoracic paraspinal block (TB)] according to postoperative analgesic methods, and they compared with terms of postoperative pain scores by using numerical rating scale (NRS) at 0, 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, and 48 h. Additionally, rescue supplemental analgesic within 24 h, side effects of anesthesia such as respiratory depression, hypotension, postoperative nausea and vomiting, pruritus and urinary retention, time to ambulation after surgery, and hospital stay after surgery were also compared among the three groups.ResultsData from 169 patients (Group NB: 25, Group TEA: 102, and Group TB: 42) were progressed to the analysis. Postoperative pain scale at 6 and 12 h was significantly lower in Group TEA than NB (1.2±1.6 vs. 2.4±1.8, P<0.01; and 1.2±1.5 vs. 2.2±1.7, P=0.018, respectively). There were no differences in pain scores between Groups TB and TEA at any point. The incidence of patients using rescue analgesics within 24 h was significantly different between groups [Group NB: 15/25 (60%), Group TEA: 30/102 (29.4%), Group TB: 25/42 (59.5%), P=0.01]. For postoperative side effects, only the number of patients complaining of postoperative nausea and vomiting for 24 h after surgery differed significantly between groups [Group NB: 7/25 (28%), Group TEA: 19/102 (18.6%), Group TB: 1/42 (2.4%), P=0.01].ConclusionsTEA provided better analgesia after robot-assisted thoracic surgery for mediastinal disease than NB as indicated by lower pain scores and fewer rescue analgesic requirements. However, the frequency of postoperative nausea and vomiting was lowest in Group TB of all the groups. Thus, TBs might also provide adequate postoperative analgesia following robot-assisted thoracic surgery for mediastinal disease.

Dataset Information

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Postoperative Thoracic Epidural Analgesia Versus Intravenous Patient-controlled Analgesia After Major Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery.

Publications

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Postoperative Thoracic Epidural Analgesia Versus Intravenous Patient-controlled Analgesia After Major Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets