CAUDAL ANALGESIA FOR POSTOPERATIVE PAIN RELIEF IN CHILDREN.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Sivashankar KR
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5530789 | biostudies-other | 1996 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND:Multiple studies claim that caudal administration of ketamine causes effective postoperative analgesia. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical effectiveness of ketamine after caudal or topical administration in pediatric patients undergoing inguinal herniotomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS:This randomized, comparative, double-blind study included eighty children (aged 6 months to 6 years) received either 1 ml/kg of 0.25% bupivacaine/ketamine 0.5 mg/kg for caudal analgesia (caudal group) or 0.3 ml/kg of 0.25% bupivacaine/ketamine 0.5 mg/kg sprayed by the surgeon around the spermatic cord and upon the ilioinguinal nerve before wound closure for topical analgesia (topical group). The duration of postoperative analgesia, pain scores, rescue analgesic consumption, sedation score, hemodynamic monitoring, and side-effects were evaluated 48 h postoperative. RESULTS:Kaplan-Meier survival analysis of analgesia free time demonstrated a significant advantage of topical ketamine (TK) group over caudal ketamine (CK) group. The duration of postoperative analgesia was longer in TK group than in CK group (28.74 ± 2.88 vs. 21.43 ± 5.01 h, P = 0.000). Fewer children asked for oral analgesics in the topical group (24 of 36, 66.7%) than in the caudal one (28 of 32, 87.5%; P < 0.01). Postoperative pain scores at the 6th till 48th h were lower in topical group with comparable analgesic consumption between two groups. In the caudal group, four subjects suffered from retention of urine: Two presented with a residual motor block and two had photophobia. CONCLUSION:Wound instillation of bupivacaine/ketamine is a simple, noninvasive, and effective technique that could be a safe alternative to CK for postoperative analgesia in children undergoing inguinal hernia repair.
| S-EPMC5292851 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAdding ketamine to local anesthetics used for caudal block in children is an emerging clinical practice. This review aims to resolve controversies related to this adjuvant for a caudal block in children who underwent sub-umbilical surgeries.MethodsBetween January 2010 and November 2021, PubMed, Cochrane Review, and Google Scholar were searched for a caudal block with ketamine added local anesthetics for children. After screening for eligibility and removing duplicates, 38,187 articles were found, 13 reviewed.DiscussionDespite adding ketamine to local anesthetics used for a caudal block, it is a recent technique practiced worldwide. Ketamine showed equi-efficacious as other adjuvants used for the caudal block to control postoperative pain in children.ConclusionKetamine with a 0.5 mg/kg dose is safe and effective to manage postoperative children's pain when used as an adjuvant to local anesthetics used for caudal block.
| S-EPMC8978094 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Pain feels different in different social contexts, yet the mechanisms behind social pain modulation remain poorly understood. To elucidate the impact of social context on pain processing, we investigated how group membership, one of the most important social context factors, shapes pain relief behaviourally and neurally in humans undergoing functional neuroimaging. Participants repeatedly received pain relief from a member of their own group (ingroup treatment) or a member of a disliked outgroup (outgroup treatment). We observed a decrease in pain ratings and anterior insula (AI) pain responses after outgroup treatment, but not after ingroup treatment. Moreover, path analyses revealed that the outgroup treatment induced a stronger relief learning in the AI, which in turn altered pain processing, in particular if the participant entered the treatment with a negative impression toward the outgroup individual. The finding of enhanced analgesia after outgroup treatment is relevant for intergroup clinical settings. More generally, we found that group membership affects pain responses through neural learning and we thus elucidate one possible mechanism through which social context impacts pain processing.
| S-EPMC6170805 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study aimed to compare the effects of rectal midazolam addition after applying bupivacaine and caudal anesthesia on postoperative analgesia time, the need for additional analgesics, postoperative recovery, and sedation and to find out its adverse effects in children having lower abdominal surgery.40 children between 2 and 10 years of ASA I-II were randomized, and they received caudal anesthesia under general anesthesia. Patients underwent the application of caudal block in addition to saline and 1 mL/kg bupivacaine 0.25%. In the postoperative period, Group C (n = 20) was given 5 mL saline, and Group M (n = 20) was given 0.30 mg/kg rectal midazolam diluted with 5 mL saline. Sedation scale and postoperative pain scale (CHIPPS) of the patients were evaluated. The patients were observed for their analgesic need, first analgesic time, and adverse effects for 24 hours.Demographic and hemodynamic data of the two groups did not differ. Postoperative sedation scores in both groups were significantly lower compared with the preoperative period. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of sedation and sufficient analgesia.We conclude that caudal anesthesia provided sufficient analgesia in peroperative and postoperative periods, and rectal midazolam addition did not create any differences. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02127489.
| S-EPMC4026913 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Genetic variations and gender contribute significantly to the large interpatient variations in opioid-related serious adverse effects and differences in pain relief with other analgesics. Opioids are the most commonly used analgesics to relieve moderate-to-severe postoperative pain. Narrow therapeutic index and unexplained large interpatient variations in opioid-related serious adverse effects and analgesia negatively affect optimal perioperative outcomes. In surgical, experimental, chronic, and neuropathic pain models, females have been reported to have more pain than males. This review focuses on literature evidence of differences in pain relief due to multiple genetic variations and gender of the patient.
| S-EPMC6235329 | biostudies-literature
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: Not available
| S-EPMC6080861 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6377212 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe quadratus lumborum (QL) block, also known as the abdominal truncal block, was developed to provide visceral and somatic analgesia during abdominal procedures.ObjectivesThis study aimed to assess pain alleviation, the incidence of complications in lower abdominal procedures, and hemodynamic stability between the caudal block and ultrasound-guided QL block.MethodsFifty-two patients aged 1 to 7 years old from both genders scheduled for unilateral lower abdominal surgery were randomly assigned to 2 study groups: group QL, unilateral QL block (n = 26), and group C, caudal block (n = 26). In group C, children received caudal block. In group QL, an ultrasound-guided QL block was performed. The time to first rescue analgesia was evaluated as a primary outcome. The quality of analgesia was determined using the face, legs, activity, cry, consolability scale (FLACC scale), hemodynamic parameters, and incidence of complications because hemodynamic instability was recorded under ultrasound guidance. Signs of local anesthetics toxicity and the parents' satisfaction were secondary outcomes.ResultsThe time until the first demand for analgesia postoperatively was statistically longer in group QL compared to group C. A non-significant difference was observed between the 2 groups (P > 0.05) regarding age, weight, gender, duration of surgery, type of surgery, FLACC scale, and hemodynamics (SBP, systolic blood pressure), except at 30 minutes, which was significant in QL block. Also, a non-significant difference was observed in the severity of postoperative pain up to 1 day postoperatively. Group QL showed more satisfaction than group C. No intraoperative complications were detected.ConclusionsCompared to caudal block, QL block produced sustained and adequate analgesia time postoperatively, with higher satisfaction.
| S-EPMC10016135 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background:Children undergoing major orthopedic surgery of the lower extremities can experience severe postoperative pain; yet, the ideal postoperative pain management strategy is unknown. Thus, in this patient population, we investigated the effect of intraoperative epidural infusion of local anesthetic on acute postoperative pain and analgesic consumption. Patients and methods:Patients (N=50, 3-12 years) randomly received either ropivacaine 0.15% (preemptive group) or normal saline (control group) as an initial bolus of 0.2 mL/kg, followed by continuous infusion of 0.15 mL/kg/h throughout surgery. Following surgery, patient-controlled epidural analgesia with ropivacaine 0.1% was provided. The main study outcomes were the revised Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, and Consolability pain scores, epidural ropivacaine consumption, and additional analgesic requirements during the first 48 hours postoperatively. Results:Forty-seven patients completed the study, 23 in the preemptive group and 24 in the control group, respectively. The revised Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, and Consolability pain scores were significantly lower in the preemptive group only at 30 minutes after postanesthesia care unit arrival and 6 hours after surgery (median difference -1.0, 95% CI -2.0 to -1.0, P=0.001 and median difference -2.0, 95% CI -3.0 to -1.0, P=0.005, respectively). However, they were not significantly different between the groups at 12, 24, and 48 hours postoperatively. Epidural ropivacaine consumption and additional analgesic requirements throughout 48 hours postoperatively were not significantly different between the groups. Conclusion:Intraoperative epidural infusion of ropivacaine did not demonstrate preemptive analgesic efficacy within 48 hours postoperatively in children undergoing extensive lower limb orthopedic surgery.
| S-EPMC6162994 | biostudies-literature