The role of regional anaesthesia and multimodal analgesia in the prevention of chronic postoperative pain: a narrative review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Chen YK
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8369227 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6080861 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6377212 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough evidence-based guidelines recommend a multimodal approach to pain management, limited information exists on adherence to these guidelines and its association with outcomes in a generalized population. We sought to assess the association between discharge multimodal analgesia and postoperative pain outcomes in two diverse health care settings.MethodsWe evaluated patients undergoing four common surgeries associated with high pain in electronic health records from an academic hospital (AH) and Veterans Health Administration (VHA). Multimodal analgesia at discharge was characterized as opioids in combination with acetaminophen (O + A) and nonsteroidal antiinflammatory (O + A + N) drugs. Hierarchical models estimated associations of analgesia with 45-d follow-up pain scores and 30-d readmissions.ResultsWe identified 7893 patients at AH and 34,581 at VHA. In both settings, most patients were discharged with O + A (60.6% and 54.8%, respectively), yet a significant proportion received opioids alone (AH: 24.3% and VHA: 18.8%). Combining acetaminophen with opioids was associated with decreased follow-up pain in VHA (Odds ratio [OR]: 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.79, 0.93) and readmissions (AH OR: 0.74, CI: 0.60, 0.90; VHA OR: 0.89, CI: 0.82, 0.96). Further addition of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs was associated with further decreased follow-up pain (AH OR: 0.71, CI: 0.53, 0.96; VHA OR: 0.77, CI: 0.69, 0.86) and readmissions (AH OR: 0.46, CI: 0.31, 0.69; VHA OR: 0.84, CI: 0.76, 0.93). In both systems, patients receiving multimodal analgesia received 10%-40% less opioids per day compared to opioids only.ConclusionsA majority of surgical patients receive a multimodal pain approach at discharge yet many receive only opioids. Multimodal regimen at discharge was associated with better follow-up pain and all-cause readmissions compared to the opioid-only regimen.
| S-EPMC6476628 | 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:BACKGROUND:Previous studies suggest that truncal regional anaesthesia (TRA), including techniques such as paravertebral block, may contribute significantly to analgesia after mastectomy. However, the severity and impact of postoperative pain varies markedly amongst individuals, making the identification of patients who would benefit most from TRA a potentially important step toward personalised perioperative care. METHODS:In this prospective observational study, mastectomy patients (n=122) were recruited and systematically assessed for psychosocial characteristics including pain catastrophising before surgery, and either received preoperative TRA (n=57) or no block (n=65). RESULTS:Age, baseline pain, and psychosocial traits did not differ between these groups. TRA was associated with lower overall pain scores and opioid consumption perioperatively, with a larger proportion of patients without block (50% vs 28%) reporting moderate-severe pain (more than three/10) on the day of surgery. Mixed model analysis of variance revealed a significant interaction between catastrophising and TRA, such that amongst patients with high baseline catastrophising, TRA was associated with substantially lower pain severity score (58% lower), while amongst patients with low baseline catastrophising, TRA was associated with only 18% lower pain severity. At 2 weeks, this interaction between baseline catastrophising and TRA was also observed when examining surgical pain burden, with higher baseline catastrophising patients who had received TRA reporting lower pain and less frequent opioid use (40% vs 70% of patients). CONCLUSIONS:TRA provided immediate analgesic benefit for patients undergoing mastectomy on the day of surgery, but this effect appeared more pronounced and sustained amongst patients with higher baseline catastrophising. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:NCT02329574.
| S-EPMC6676159 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRegional anaesthesia may reduce the rate of persistent (chronic) pain after surgery, a frequent and debilitating condition.ObjectivesTo compare local anaesthetics and regional anaesthesia versus conventional analgesia for the prevention of persistent pain six or 12 months after surgery.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 4), PubMed (1966 to April 2012), EMBASE (1966 to May 2012) and CINAHL (1966 to May 2012) without any language restriction. We used a combination of free text search and controlled vocabulary search. The results were limited to randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs). We conducted a handsearch in reference lists of included trials, review articles and conference abstracts.Selection criteriaWe included RCTs comparing local anaesthetics or regional anaesthesia versus conventional analgesia with a pain outcome at six or 12 months after surgery.Data collection and analysisTwo authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data, including information on adverse events. We contacted study authors for additional information. Results are presented as pooled odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), based on random-effects models (inverse variance method). We grouped studies according to surgical interventions. We employed the Chi(2) test and calculated the I(2) statistic to investigate study heterogeneity.Main resultsWe identified 23 RCTs studying local anaesthetics or regional anaesthesia for the prevention of persistent (chronic) pain after surgery. Data from a total of 1090 patients with outcomes at six months and of 441 patients with outcomes at 12 months were presented. No study included children. We pooled data from 250 participants after thoracotomy, with outcomes at six months. Data favoured regional anaesthesia for the prevention of chronic pain at six months after thoracotomy with an OR of 0.33 (95% CI 0.20 to 0.56). We pooled two studies on paravertebral block for breast cancer surgery; the pooled data of 89 participants with outcomes at five to six months favoured paravertebral block with an OR of 0.37 (95% CI 0.14 to 0.94).The methodological quality of the included studies was intermediate. Adverse effects were not studied systematically and were reported sparsely. Clinical heterogeneity, attrition and sparse outcome data hampered the assessment of effects, especially at 12 months.Authors' conclusionsEpidural anaesthesia may reduce the risk of developing chronic pain after thoracotomy in about one patient out of every four patients treated. Paravertebral block may reduce the risk of chronic pain after breast cancer surgery in about one out of every five women treated. Our conclusions are significantly weakened by performance bias, shortcomings in allocation concealment, considerable attrition and incomplete outcome data. We caution that our evidence synthesis is based on only a few, small studies. More studies with high methodological quality, addressing various types of surgery and different age groups, including children, are needed.
| S-EPMC4004344 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo evaluate three different analgesic techniques, continuous epidural analgesia (EA), continuous intra-articular (IA) infusion analgesia and continuous femoral nerve block (FNB) in postoperative pain management, length of hospital stay (LOS), and time of patient mobilization after total knee arthroplasty (TKA).MethodsSeventy-two patients undergoing TKA were randomly allocated into three groups according to the analgesic technique used for postoperative pain management. Group EA patients received epidural analgesia (control group), group IA received intra-articular infusion and group FNB received femoral nerve block.ResultsUpon analyzing the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) scores at rest, at passive and active movement, up to 3 days postoperatively, we observed no statistically significant differences at any time point among the three groups. Similarly, no association among these analgesic techniques (EA, IA, FNB) was revealed regarding LOS. However, significant differences emerged concerning the time of mobilization. Patients who received IA achieved earlier mobilization compared to FNB and EA.ConclusionsBoth IA and FNB generate similar analgesic effect with EA for postoperative pain management after TKA. However, IA appears to be significantly more effective in early mobilization compared to EA and FNB. Finally, no clinically important differences could be detected regarding LOS among the techniques studied.
| S-EPMC8020020 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo compare the postoperative analgesic effect of propofol total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) versus inhalational anaesthesia (GAS) in patients using morphine patient-controlled analgesia (PCA).MethodsA retrospective cohort study was performed in a single tertiary university hospital. Adult patients who used PCA morphine after general anaesthesia across 15 types of surgeries were included. Patients who received propofol TIVA were compared to those who had inhalational anaesthesia. Primary outcomes assessed were postoperative numerical rating scale (NRS) pain scores and postoperative opioid consumption.ResultsData from 4202 patients were analysed. The overall adjusted NRS pain scores were significantly lower in patients who received propofol TIVA at rest (GEE: β estimate of the mean on a 0 to 10 scale = -0.56, 95% CI = (-0.74 to -0.38), p < 0.001; GAS as reference group) and with movement (β estimate = -0.89, 95% CI = (-1.1 to -0.69), p < 0.001) from postoperative days (POD) 1-3. Propofol TIVA was associated with lower overall adjusted postoperative morphine consumption (β estimate = -3.45, 95% CI = (-4.46 to -2.44), p < 0.001). Patients with propofol TIVA had lower adjusted NRS pain scores with movement for hepatobiliary/pancreatic (p < 0.001), upper gastrointestinal (p < 0.001) and urological surgeries (p = 0.005); and less adjusted postoperative morphine consumption for hepatobiliary/pancreatic (p < 0.001), upper gastrointestinal (p = 0.006) and urological surgeries (p = 0.002). There were no differences for other types of surgeries.ConclusionPropofol TIVA was associated with statistically significant, but small reduction in pain scores and opioid consumption in patients using PCA morphine. Subgroup analysis suggests clinically meaningful analgesia possibly for hepatobiliary/pancreatic and upper gastrointestinal surgeries.Trial registrationThis study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT03875872 ).
| S-EPMC9088064 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Postoperative pain relief in 40 children undergoing elective infraumbilical surgery was assessed after caudal epidural adminstration of either lignocaine or bupivacaine in the doses of 0.5 mL/kg body weight of a 1 per cent solution and 0.5 mL/kg body weight of a 0.25 per cent solution respectively. Pain free period was assessed by subjective pain scales. The pain free period was significantly prolonged in children who were given bupivacaine (14.75 ± 2.75 hours) as compared to lignocaine (7.25 ± 3.25 hours).
| S-EPMC5530789 | biostudies-other
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