Dataset Information

Short-term efficacy of epidural pain management in dogs undergoing cystoscopy.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The effects of epidural anesthesia in dogs undergoing cystoscopy are unknown.

Objective

To investigate the effect of epidural analgesia on postcystoscopy pain in dogs.

Animals

Twenty-six dogs undergoing routine cystoscopy for lower urinary tract disease.

Methods

Prospective, randomized, blinded observational study. Dogs were assigned either to a treatment group that received epidural anesthesia (preservative free morphine sulfate, 0.09 mg/kg; 1% ropivacaine, 0.2 mg/kg; total volume delivered, 1 mL/4.5 kg of body weight to a maximum of 10 mL; n = 9) or to a nonepidural control group (n = 13). Vital signs were monitored for 24 hours, and sedation and pain scores, behavioral assessments, and presence or absence of complications was evaluated for 5 days postprocedure.

Results

All dogs tolerated the epidural without complications. Four dogs were removed from the study because of status unblinding, lack of patient cooperation, or incomplete follow-up. No significant differences were noted in postprocedural pain scores in dogs that received epidural analgesia. Significant differences in postprocedural pain scores were noted in the nonepidural control group. No significant differences were noted in vital signs, behavioral assessments, or the proportion of dogs with a 50% increase in pain scores between the epidural and nonepidural groups.

Conclusions and clinical importance

Epidural anesthesia was well-tolerated. Dogs not receiving the epidural had poor postprocedural pain control. A consistent benefit for the epidural vs nonepidural group could not be identified. Additional studies are required to better assess the impact and efficacy of epidural anesthesia for cystoscopic procedures.

SUBMITTER: Rayhel LH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7995430 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Epidural anesthesia is commonly administered as part of balanced anesthesia for perioperative analgesia. The main goal of this randomized clinical trial was to compare the efficacy of two epidural approaches in dogs undergoing surgery for a perineal hernia. A secondary aim was to compare motor blockade. Intact ASA 1 and 2 male dogs, weighing ≤25 kg with no previous surgery for perineal hernia were enrolled. After premedication with IM acepromazine 0.02 mg/kg and butorphanol 0.3 mg/kg, general anesthesia was induced with propofol and maintained with sevoflurane in oxygen. Dogs were randomly allocated to receive either a lumbosacral (LS, n = 30) or a sacrococcygeal (SC, n = 26) epidural injection with ropivacaine 1% (0.2 mL/kg) under computed tomography guidance. Successful analgesia was defined as no need of intraoperative rescue analgesia (fentanyl 3 μg/kg IV). Clinical failure was defined as the need of more than two boluses of fentanyl/h each dog received meloxicam 0.2 mg/kg IV at the end of the surgery. The Glasgow Composite Pain Scale short form (GCPS-SF), tactile sensitivity, pressure pain thresholds and motor blockade were assessed at 4, 6, 8, and 24 h after the epidural injection. Methadone (0.2 mg/kg, IV) was administered if the GCPS-SF was ≥6/24 points. Differences between groups were analyzed with the Mann-Whitney U test, Student's t-test or Fisher's Exact test, as appropriate. Success rate was assessed for non-inferiority between groups. The non-inferiority margin was set at -10%. Epidural analgesia was successful in 24 dogs in group LS and 17 dogs in group SC (p = 0.243), resulting in success rates of 80 and 65% in LS and SC groups, respectively. The non-inferiority of group SC versus group LS was confirmed. Clinical failure was recorded in two dogs in group LS and one dog in group SC. No significant differences between groups were detected in the GCPS-SF score, tactile sensitivity, pressure pain thresholds, need of post-operative methadone, or motor blockade. Both epidural techniques are valuable analgesic options for perineal hernia repair in dogs.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Hypertonic dextrose injection (prolotherapy) is reported to reduce pain including non-surgical chronic low back pain (CLBP), and subcutaneous injection of 5% dextrose is reported to reduce neurogenic pain, hyperalgesia and allodynia. The mechanism in both cases is unclear, though a direct effect of dextrose on neurogenic pain has been proposed. This study assessed the short-term analgesic effects of epidural 5% dextrose injection compared with saline for non-surgical CLBP. METHODS:Randomized double-blind (injector, participant) controlled trial. Adults with moderate-to-severe non-surgical low back pain with radiation to gluteal or leg areas for at least 6 months received a single epidurogram-confirmed epidural injection of 10 mL of 5% dextrose or 0.9% saline using a published vertical caudal injection technique. The primary outcome was change in a numerical rating scale (NRS, 0 - 10 points) pain score between baseline and 15 minutes; and 2, 4, and 48 hours and 2 weeks post-injection. The secondary outcome was percentage of participants achieving 50% or more pain improvement at 4 hours. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS:No baseline differences existed between groups; 35 participants (54 ± 10.7 years old; 11 female) with moderate-to-severe CLBP (6.7 ± 1.3 points) for 10.6 ± 10.5 years. Dextrose participants reported greater NRS pain score change at 15 minutes (4.4 ± 1.7 vs 2.4 ± 2.8 points; P = 0.015), 2 hours (4.6 ± 1.9 vs 1.8 ± 2.8 points; P = 0.001), 4 hours (4.6 ± 2.0 vs 1.4 ± 2.3 points; P < 0.001), and 48 hours (3.0 ± 2.3 vs 1.0 ± 2.1 points; P = 0.012), but not at 2 weeks (2.1 ± 2.9 vs 1.2 ± 2.4 points; P = 0.217). Eighty four percent (16/19) of dextrose recipients and 19% (3/16) of saline recipients reported ? 50% pain reduction at 4 hours (P < 0.001). These findings suggest a neurogenic effect of 5% dextrose on pain at the dorsal root level; waning pain control at 2 weeks suggests the need to assess the effect of serial dextrose epidural injections in a long-term study with robust outcome assessment.

Project description:BackgroundAddiction to opiates and synthetic opioids poses a major threat to public health worldwide, with pharmaceutical opioids prescribed to manage pain constituting the main problem. To counteract this threat, suitable pain management strategies should be implemented in health care. Monitoring pain management seems to be feasible using telemedicine with a certain degree of resource intensity and digitization. As a communication channel for this type of monitoring, SMS appears to be a valid alternative.ObjectiveThe aim of this systematic literature review was to (1) provide information on the state of research regarding postoperative pain management via SMS, (2) establish a basic understanding of SMS-based pain management, and (3) provide insight into the feasibility of these management strategies. The research question was as follows: Is postoperative pain management feasible and effective utilizing SMS?MethodsA systematic literature review was performed mainly following the PRISMA guidelines and another guide on performing a systematic literature review for information systems-related research. A search string was developed based on the objectives and research question, and eight databases were searched.ResultsThe initial search resulted in 2083 records, which could be narrowed down by applying various exclusion criteria. Thereby, 11 articles were identified as relevant, which were accordingly analyzed and evaluated by full-text screening. In all articles, pain management interventions were performed using SMS communication between health care professionals and patients or their legal guardians. A prospective approach was predominantly chosen as the study design (91%) with the leading research objective of determining the intervention's feasibility (73%). The primary reason for sending SMS messages was to monitor patients (64%). Overall, the use of SMS improved adherence, acceptance, and satisfaction regarding postoperative pain management. With an average response rate of approximately 89.5% (SD 3.8%), the reliability of SMS as a communication and monitoring tool was further emphasized. This response rate is significantly higher than that for email interventions (66.63%, P<.001).ConclusionsThis study provides a comprehensive picture of the current status on postoperative pain management by SMS. Communication via SMS was beneficial in all interventions, even preoperative. Six SMS interventions could be certified by the respective institutional review board and three were Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant. Therefore, the results of this study could be leveraged to address the opioid epidemic. Overall, the research question could be confirmed. Future research should extend this systematic literature review regarding preoperative pain management. Based on these findings, a pre- and postoperative communication model should be developed to address the opioid epidemic effectively.