Dataset Information

Epidural analgesia versus intravenous analgesia after minimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum in pediatric patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Postoperative pain control after the minimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum (MIRPE) is essential, but there is a controversy about a better analgesic method between epidural and intravenous (IV) analgesia. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the effect of epidural versus IV analgesia following MIRPE.

Methods

We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register, and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) dated up to 31st May 2021. The primary outcome was the area under the curve (AUC) of the weighted mean visual analog scale (VAS) after MIRPE. The secondary outcomes were postoperative nausea, operation time, total operating room time, and postoperative length of hospital stay.

Results

Four RCTs involving 243 patients were finally included in this meta-analysis. The AUC of the weighted mean VAS was 343.62 in the epidural group and 375.24 in the IV group. The epidural group showed lower VAS than the IV group at 12 to 48 h after the surgery. Postoperative nausea, operation time and length of hospital stay was not different between two groups. The epidural group had a significantly longer total operating room time due to epidural catheter insertion time.

Conclusions

Epidural analgesia after the MIRPE had a better analgesic effect than IV analgesia. However, IV analgesia may also be a viable option, and physicians should wisely choose analgesic modalities after MIRPE.

SUBMITTER: Heo MH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8497911 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionEpidural analgesia is currently considered the gold standard in postoperative pain management for the minimally invasive Nuss procedure for pectus excavatum. Alternative analgesic strategies (eg, patient-controlled analgesia and paravertebral nerve block) fail in accomplishing adequate prolonged pain management. Furthermore, the continuous use of opioids, often prescribed in addition to all pain management strategies, comes with side effects. Intercostal nerve cryoablation seems a promising novel technique. Hence, the primary objective of this study is to determine the impact of intercostal nerve cryoablation on postoperative length of hospital stay compared with standard pain management of young pectus excavatum patients treated with the minimally invasive Nuss procedure.Methods and analysisThis study protocol is designed for a single centre, prospective, unblinded, randomised clinical trial. Intercostal nerve cryoablation will be compared with thoracic epidural analgesia in 50 young pectus excavatum patients (ie, 12-24 years of age) treated with the minimally invasive Nuss procedure. Block randomisation, including stratification based on age (12-16 years and 17-24 years) and sex, with an allocation ratio of 1:1 will be performed.Postoperative length of hospital stay will be recorded as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes include (1) pain intensity, (2) operative time, (3) opioid usage, (4) complications, including neuropathic pain, (5) creatine kinase activity, (6) intensive care unit admissions, (7) readmissions, (8) postoperative mobility, (9) health-related quality of life, (10) days to return to work/school, (11) number of postoperative outpatient visits and (12) hospital costs.Ethics and disseminationThis protocol has been approved by the local Medical Ethics Review Committee, METC Zuyderland and Zuyd University of Applied Sciences. Participation in this study will be voluntary and informed consent will be obtained. Regardless of the outcome, the results will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed international medical journal.Trial registration numberNCT05731973.

Project description:BackgroundMinimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum (MIRPE) is a popular method for surgical correction of PE, and its impact on quality of life is a growing area of interest. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of MIRPE on the quality of life of patients.MethodsThis study was registered with PROSPERO under reference number CRD42020222061. A literature search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE and Scopus was conducted from the date of inception till November 23, 2020. We included studies which administered one or more questionnaires on patients up to 60 years old, parents or both, to assess the quality of life before and after MIRPE. Studies not written in English, abstracts, articles without primary data, reviews and studies which combined data on PE and other deformities were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies of Interventions and the Cochrane risk of bias tool. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to obtain mean differences for key themes of quality of life before and after MIRPE. Responses from the same questionnaires, as well as common themes across different questionnaires, were compared.ResultsOf the 20 studies identified for systematic review, 7 studies that reported the responses of 478 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Patients who underwent MIRPE experienced an increased self-esteem [standardized mean difference (SMD): 1.38, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.95 to 1.81, P<0.00001] and a smaller degree of chest interference with their social activities (SMD: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.60 to 1.08, P<0.00001). These findings were consistent even after the implanted bar was removed.ConclusionsMIRPE may be associated with a better quality of life for patients with PE as self-esteem and extent of chest interference with social activities are improved after the procedure. The key limitations of this study are the lack of high-quality evidence due to paucity of randomized trials, and the significant heterogeneity in reported outcomes due to variations in the questionnaires and timepoints of administration.

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.