Association of Perioperative Regional Analgesia with Postoperative Patient-Reported Pain Outcomes and Opioid Requirements: Comparing 22 Different Surgical Groups in 23,911 Patients from the QUIPS Registry.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Komann M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8160876 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND:This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 4, 2006. Patients may control postoperative pain by self administration of intravenous opioids using devices designed for this purpose (patient controlled analgesia or PCA). A 1992 meta-analysis by Ballantyne et al found a strong patient preference for PCA over non-patient controlled analgesia, but disclosed no differences in analgesic consumption or length of postoperative hospital stay. Although Ballantyne's meta-analysis found that PCA did have a small but statistically significant benefit upon pain intensity, a 2001 review by Walder et al did not find statistically significant differences in pain intensity or pain relief between PCA and groups treated with non-patient controlled analgesia. OBJECTIVES:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of patient controlled intravenous opioid analgesia (termed PCA in this review) versus non-patient controlled opioid analgesia of as-needed opioid analgesia for postoperative pain relief. SEARCH METHODS:We ran the search for the previous review in November 2004. For this update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2014, Issue 12), MEDLINE (1966 to 28 January 2015), and EMBASE (1980 to 28 January 2015) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in any language, and reference lists of reviews and retrieved articles. SELECTION CRITERIA:We selected RCTs that assessed pain intensity as a primary or secondary outcome. These studies compared PCA without a continuous background infusion with non-patient controlled opioid analgesic regimens. We excluded studies that explicitly stated they involved patients with chronic pain. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:Two review authors independently extracted data, which included demographic variables, type of surgery, interventions, efficacy, and adverse events. We graded each included study for methodological quality by assessing risk of bias and employed the GRADE approach to assess the overall quality of the evidence. We performed meta-analysis of outcomes that included pain intensity assessed by a 0 to 100 visual analog scale (VAS), opioid consumption, patient satisfaction, length of stay, and adverse events. MAIN RESULTS:Forty-nine studies with 1725 participants receiving PCA and 1687 participants assigned to a control group met the inclusion criteria. The original review included 55 studies with 2023 patients receiving PCA and 1838 patients assigned to a control group. There were fewer included studies in our updated review due to the revised exclusion criteria. For the primary outcome, participants receiving PCA had lower VAS pain intensity scores versus non-patient controlled analgesia over most time intervals, e.g., scores over 0 to 24 hours were nine points lower (95% confidence interval (CI) -13 to -5, moderate quality evidence) and over 0 to 48 hours were 10 points lower (95% CI -12 to -7, low quality evidence). Among the secondary outcomes, participants were more satisfied with PCA (81% versus 61%, P value = 0.002) and consumed higher amounts of opioids than controls (0 to 24 hours, 7 mg more of intravenous morphine equivalents, 95% CI 1 mg to 13 mg). Those receiving PCA had a higher incidence of pruritus (15% versus 8%, P value = 0.01) but had a similar incidence of other adverse events. There was no difference in the length of hospital stay. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:Since the last version of this review, we have found new studies providing additional information. We reanalyzed the data but the results did not substantially alter any of our previously published conclusions. This review provides moderate to low quality evidence that PCA is an efficacious alternative to non-patient controlled systemic analgesia for postoperative pain control.
| S-EPMC7387354 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and purpose - Immediate postoperative pain management offered in knee arthroplasty is suboptimal in up to one-third of patients resulting in high opiate consumption and delayed discharge. In this meta-analysis we investigate the analgesic effect and safety of perioperative adjuvant corticosteroids in knee arthroplasty. Methods - Databases Medline, Embase, and Central were searched for randomized studies comparing the analgesic effect of adjuvant perioperative corticosteroids in knee arthroplasty. Our primary outcome was pain score at 24?hours postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included pain at 12, 48, and 72?hours, opiate consumption, postoperative nausea and vomiting, infection, and discharge time. Systemic (intravenous) and local (intra-articular) corticosteroids were analyzed separately. Results - 14 randomized controlled trials (1,396 knees) were included. Mean corticosteroid dosages were predominantly 50-75mg oral prednisolone equivalents for both systemic and local routes. Systemic corticosteroids demonstrated statistically significant and clinically modest reductions in pain at 12?hours by -1.1 points (95%CI -2.2 to 0.02), 24?hours by -1.3 points (CI -2.3 to -0.26) and 48?hours by -0.4 points (CI -0.67 to -0.04). Local corticosteroids did not reduce pain. Opiate consumption, postoperative nausea and vomiting, infection, or time till discharge were similar between groups. Interpretation - Corticosteroids modestly reduce pain postoperatively at 12 and 24?hours when used systemically without any increase in associated risks for dosages between 50 and 75?mg oral prednisolone equivalents.
| S-EPMC5810836 | biostudies-other
Project description:ImportanceThe overprescription of opioids to surgical patients is recognized as an important factor contributing to the opioid crisis. However, the value of prescribing opioid analgesia (OA) vs opioid-free analgesia (OFA) after postoperative discharge remains uncertain.ObjectiveTo investigate the feasibility of conducting a full-scale randomized clinical trial (RCT) to assess the comparative effectiveness of OA vs OFA after outpatient general surgery.Design, setting, and participantsThis parallel, 2-group, assessor-blind, pragmatic pilot RCT was conducted from January 29 to September 3, 2020 (last follow-up on October 2, 2020). at 2 university-affiliated hospitals in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Participants were adult patients (aged ≥18 years) undergoing outpatient abdominal (ie, cholecystectomy, appendectomy, or hernia repair) or breast (ie, partial or total mastectomy) general surgical procedures. Exclusion criteria were contraindications to drugs used in the trial, preoperative opioid use, conditions that could affect assessment of outcomes, and intraoperative or early complications requiring hospitalization.InterventionsPatients were randomized 1:1 to receive OA (around-the-clock nonopioids and opioids for breakthrough pain) or OFA (around-the-clock nonopioids with increasing doses and/or addition of nonopioid medications for breakthrough pain) after postoperative discharge.Main outcomes and measuresMain outcomes were a priori RCT feasibility criteria (ie, rates of surgeon agreement, patient eligibility, patient consent, treatment adherence, loss to follow-up, and missing follow-up data). Secondary outcomes included pain intensity and interference, analgesic intake, 30-day unplanned health care use, and adverse events. Between-group comparison of outcomes followed the intention-to-treat principle.ResultsA total of 15 surgeons were approached; all (100%; 95% CI, 78%-100%) agreed to have patients recruited and adhered to the study procedures. Rates of patient eligibility and consent were 73% (95% CI, 66%-78%) and 57% (95% CI, 49%-65%), respectively. Seventy-six patients were randomized (39 [51%] to OA and 37 [49%] to OFA) and included in the intention-to-treat analysis (mean [SD] age, 55.5 [14.5] years; 50 [66%] female); 40 (53%) underwent abdominal surgery, and 36 (47%) underwent breast surgery. Seventy-five patients (99%; 95% CI, 93%-100%) adhered to the allocated treatment; 1 patient randomly assigned to OFA received an opioid prescription. Seventeen patients (44%) randomly assigned to OA consumed opioids after discharge. Seventy-three patients (96%; 95% CI, 89%-99%) completed the 30-day follow-up. The rate of missing questionnaires was 37 of 3724 (1%; 95% CI, 0.7%-1.4%). All the a priori RCT feasibility criteria were fulfilled.Conclusions and relevanceThe findings of this pilot RCT support the feasibility of conducting a robust, full-scale RCT to inform evidence-based prescribing of analgesia after outpatient general surgery.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04254679.
| S-EPMC9294998 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Dexamethasone is commonly used as an adjuvant to prolong peripheral nerve block analgesia, but the optimal timing is unclear. This randomized equivalence trial tested whether preoperative versus postoperative intravenous dexamethasone have equivalent analgesic effects when combined with interscalene brachial plexus block for shoulder surgery. 168 patients were randomized to receive 5 mg dexamethasone either preoperatively or postoperatively. The primary outcome was duration of analgesia, analyzed for equivalence with a 2-h margin. The mean durations were equivalent between groups (11.5 h preoperative versus 10.7 h postoperative). The confidence intervals fell within the equivalence margin. There were no other clinically significant differences in secondary outcomes like time to first analgesia, motor recovery, opioid consumption, blood glucose, or complications. In conclusion, as an adjuvant for nerve block, preoperative and postoperative intravenous dexamethasone provide equivalent analgesic duration, allowing for flexibility in clinical use. This addresses previous uncertainty about timing while demonstrating equivalent efficacy.
| S-EPMC10863306 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Opioids play a critical role in acute postoperative pain management. Our objective was to develop machine learning models to predict postoperative opioid requirements in patients undergoing ambulatory surgery. To develop the models, we used a perioperative dataset of 13,700 patients (≥ 18 years) undergoing ambulatory surgery between the years 2016-2018. The data, comprising of patient, procedure and provider factors that could influence postoperative pain and opioid requirements, was randomly split into training (80%) and validation (20%) datasets. Machine learning models of different classes were developed to predict categorized levels of postoperative opioid requirements using the training dataset and then evaluated on the validation dataset. Prediction accuracy was used to differentiate model performances. The five types of models that were developed returned the following accuracies at two different stages of surgery: 1) Prior to surgery-Multinomial Logistic Regression: 71%, Naïve Bayes: 67%, Neural Network: 30%, Random Forest: 72%, Extreme Gradient Boost: 71% and 2) End of surgery-Multinomial Logistic Regression: 71%, Naïve Bayes: 63%, Neural Network: 32%, Random Forest: 72%, Extreme Gradient Boost: 70%. Analyzing the sensitivities of the best performing Random Forest model showed that the lower opioid requirements are predicted with better accuracy (89%) as compared with higher opioid requirements (43%). Feature importance (% relative importance) of model predictions showed that the type of procedure (15.4%), medical history (12.9%) and procedure duration (12.0%) were the top three features contributing to model predictions. Overall, the contribution of patient and procedure features towards model predictions were 65% and 35% respectively. Machine learning models could be used to predict postoperative opioid requirements in ambulatory surgery patients and could potentially assist in better management of their postoperative acute pain.
| S-EPMC7394436 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of a single perioperative dose of dexamethasone are unclear. We performed a systematic review to evaluate the impact of a single i.v. dose of dexamethasone on postoperative pain and explore adverse events associated with this treatment.MethodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Register were searched for randomized, controlled studies that compared dexamethasone vs placebo or an antiemetic in adult patients undergoing general anaesthesia and reported pain outcomes.ResultsForty-five studies involving 5796 patients receiving dexamethasone 1.25-20 mg were included. Patients receiving dexamethasone had lower pain scores at 2 h {mean difference (MD) -0.49 [95% confidence interval (CI): -0.83, -0.15]} and 24 h [MD -0.48 (95% CI: -0.62, -0.35)] after surgery. Dexamethasone-treated patients used less opioids at 2 h [MD -0.87 mg morphine equivalents (95% CI: -1.40 to -0.33)] and 24 h [MD -2.33 mg morphine equivalents (95% CI: -4.39, -0.26)], required less rescue analgesia for intolerable pain [relative risk 0.80 (95% CI: 0.69, 0.93)], had longer time to first dose of analgesic [MD 12.06 min (95% CI: 0.80, 23.32)], and shorter stays in the post-anaesthesia care unit [MD -5.32 min (95% CI: -10.49 to -0.15)]. There was no dose-response with regard to the opioid-sparing effect. There was no increase in infection or delayed wound healing with dexamethasone, but blood glucose levels were higher at 24 h [MD 0.39 mmol litre(-1) (95% CI: 0.04, 0.74)].ConclusionsA single i.v. perioperative dose of dexamethasone had small but statistically significant analgesic benefits.
| S-EPMC3544008 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Labor initiates one of the most intensely painful episodes in a woman's life. Opioids are used to provide analgesia with substantial interindividual variability in efficacy. mu-Opioid receptor (muOR, OPRM1) genetic variants may explain differences in response to opioid analgesia. We hypothesized that OPRM1 304A/G polymorphism influences the median effective dose (ED(50)) of intrathecal fentanyl via combined spinal-epidural for labor analgesia. Nulliparous women were prospectively recruited around 35 weeks gestation (n=224), and genotyped for 304A/G polymorphism. Those requesting neuraxial labor analgesia were enrolled in one of the two double-blinded trials: up-down sequential allocation (SA, n=50) and a separate confirmatory random-dose allocation trial (RA, n=97). Effective analgesia from intrathecal fentanyl was defined by >or=60 min analgesia with verbal rating score <or=1 (scale 0-10) and was compared between mu OR 304A homozygotes (Group A) and women carrying at least one 304G allele (Group G). OPRM1 304G allele frequency f(-) was 0.18. Using SA, intrathecal fentanyl ED(50) was 26.8 microg (95% CI 22.7-30.9) in Group A and 17.7 microg (95% CI 13.4-21.9) in Group G (p<0.001; 304A homozygosity increased the ED(50) 1.5-fold). RA confirmed that 304A homozygosity significantly increases intrathecal fentanyl ED(50) (27.4 microg in Group A and 12.8 microg in Group G [p<0.002; 2.1-fold]). We demonstrate for the first time that the muOR 304G variant significantly reduces intrathecal fentanyl ED(50) for labor analgesia, suggesting women with the G variant may be more responsive to opioids and require less analgesic drugs. These findings for intrathecal fentanyl pharmacogenetics may have implications for patients receiving opioids in other settings.
| S-EPMC2669083 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe medical community is beginning to recognize the contribution of prescription opioids in the growing national opioid crisis. Many studies have compared the safety and efficacy of alternative analgesics to opioids, but none utilizing a completely opioid-free perioperative protocol in orthopedics.MethodsWe developed and tested an opioid-free perioperative analgesic pathway (from preoperative to postoperative period) among patients undergoing common elective orthopedic procedures. Patients will be randomized to receive either traditional opioid-including or completely opioid-free perioperative medications. This study is being conducted across multiple orthopedic subspecialties in patients undergoing the following common elective orthopedic procedures: single-level or two-level ACDF/ACDA, 1st CMC arthroplasty, Hallux Valgus/Rigidus corrections, diagnostic knee arthroscopies, total hip arthroplasty (THA), and total shoulder arthroplasty/reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA/RTSA). The primary outcome measure is pain score at 24 h postoperatively. Secondary outcome measures include pain scores at additional time points, medication side effects, and several patient-reported variables such as patient satisfaction, quality of life, and functional status.DiscussionWe describe the methods for a feasibility randomized controlled trial comparing opioid-free perioperative analgesics to traditional opioid-including protocols. We present this study so that it may be replicated and incorporated into future studies at other institutions, as well as disseminated to additional orthopedic and/or non-orthopedic surgical procedures. The ultimate goal of presenting this protocol is to aid recent efforts in reducing the impact of prescription opioids on the national opioid crisis.Trial registrationThe protocol was approved by the local institutional review board and registered with clinicaltrials.gov (Identifier: NCT04176783 ) on November 25, 2019, retrospectively registered.
| S-EPMC7824925 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundElective total joint arthroplasty may be a gateway to long-term opioid use.Questions/purposeWe sought to review the literature on multimodal and regional analgesia as a strategy to minimize perioperative opioid use and control pain in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA).MethodsWe conducted a narrative review to assess the state of the evidence informing opioid-sparing analgesics for THA and TKA. A PubMed search was conducted for English-language articles published before April 2018. We preferentially included well-designed randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. Where the highest levels of evidence were not yet apparent, we evaluated retrospective and/or observational studies.ResultsMultimodal analgesia emphasizing nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents and acetaminophen is associated with decreases in perioperative opioid use for THA and TKA. Regional analgesia, including peripheral nerve blocks and local infiltration analgesia, is also associated with decreased perioperative opioid use for THA and TKA. Emerging topics in post-arthroplasty analgesia include (1) the value of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, (2) the use of peripheral nerve catheters and extended-release local anesthetics to prolong the duration of opioid-free analgesia, and (3) novel peripheral nerve blocks, exemplified by the IPACK (interspace between the popliteal artery and posterior capsule of the knee) block for TKA.ConclusionsThe use of multimodal analgesia with regional techniques may decrease perioperative opioid use for patients undergoing THA and TKA. These techniques should be part of a comprehensive perioperative plan to promote adequate analgesia while minimizing overall opioid exposure.
| S-EPMC6384219 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionRegional techniques are a key component of multimodal analgesia and help decrease opioid use perioperatively, but some techniques may not be suitable for all patients, such as those with spina bifida. We hypothesized peripheral regional catheters would reduce postoperative opioid use compared with no regional analgesia without increasing pain scores in pediatric patients with spina bifida undergoing major urological surgery.MethodsA retrospective review of a multicenter database established for the study of enhanced recovery after surgery was performed of patients from 2009 to 2021 who underwent bladder augmentation or creation of catheterizable channels. Patients without spina bifida and those receiving epidural analgesia were excluded. Opioids were converted into morphine equivalents and normalized to patient weight.Results158 patients with pediatric spina bifida from 7 centers were included, including 87 with and 71 without regional catheters. There were no differences in baseline patient factors. Anesthesia setup increased from median 40 min (IQR 34-51) for no regional to 64 min (IQR 40-97) for regional catheters (p<0.01). The regional catheter group had lower median intraoperative opioid usage (0.24 vs 0.80 mg/kg morphine equivalents, p<0.01) as well as lower in-hospital postoperative opioid usage (0.05 vs 0.23 mg/kg/day morphine equivalents, p<0.01). Pain scores were not higher in the regional catheters group.DiscussionContinuous regional analgesia following major urological surgery in children with spina bifida was associated with a 70% intraoperative and 78% postoperative reduction in opioids without higher pain scores. This approach should be considered for similar surgical interventions in this population.Trial registration numberNCT03245242.
| S-EPMC10026848 | biostudies-literature