RESUMO
The conduct and reporting of studies with a noninferiority hypothesis is challenging because of the complexity involved in their design and interpretation. However, studies with a noninferiority design have increased in popularity. A recently published trial reported on the noninferiority of lidocaine infusion to epidural analgesia in major abdominal surgeries. Apart from needing a critical appraisal, this draws attention to improve our understanding of noninferiority study framework and its unique features. Given the increasing focus on using various analgesic adjuncts and multiple approaches to fascial plane blocks to avoid more definitive and standard approaches, it is imperative that particular attention is paid to appropriate execution and reporting of noninferiority studies.
Assuntos
Dor Aguda , Analgesia Epidural , Humanos , Abdome , Dor Aguda/tratamento farmacológico , Lidocaína , Dor Pós-Operatória/tratamento farmacológico , Estudos de Equivalência como AsuntoRESUMO
Despite the general agreement that implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways decrease hospital length of stay, a continuous challenge that has often been neglected is a procedure- and patient-specific approach. For example, asking 'Why is the patient still in hospital?' is the original premise for ERAS. Outcomes improve with increased compliance with recommended elements, but overcomplication of pathways can lead to cherry picking of elements that are convenient, resulting in 'partial ERAS'. As there are few high-quality randomised clinical trials (RCTs) that evaluate the specific role of individual preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative elements, challenges lie ahead to identify essential ERAS elements to facilitate more widespread implementation. To achieve this goal, the balance between large RCTs and smaller detailed hypothesis-generating observational studies needs to be addressed in order to enhance knowledge and limit waste of research resources.
RESUMO
This consensus statement is a comprehensive update of the 2010 Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia (SAMBA) Consensus Statement on perioperative blood glucose management in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) undergoing ambulatory surgery. Since the original consensus guidelines in 2010, several novel therapeutic interventions have been introduced to treat DM, including new hypoglycemic agents and increasing prevalence of insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitors. The updated recommendations were developed by an expert task force under the provision of SAMBA and are based on a comprehensive review of the literature from 1980 to 2022. The task force included SAMBA members with expertise on this topic and those contributing to the primary literature regarding the management of DM in the perioperative period. The recommendations encompass preoperative evaluation of patients with DM presenting for ambulatory surgery, management of preoperative oral hypoglycemic agents and home insulins, intraoperative testing and treatment modalities, and blood glucose management in the postanesthesia care unit and transition to home after surgery. High-quality evidence pertaining to perioperative blood glucose management in patients with DM undergoing ambulatory surgery remains sparse. Recommendations are therefore based on recent guidelines and available literature, including general glucose management in patients with DM, data from inpatient surgical populations, drug pharmacology, and emerging treatment data. Areas in need of further research are also identified. Importantly, the benefits and risks of interventions and clinical practice information were considered to ensure that the recommendations maintain patient safety and are clinically valid and useful in the ambulatory setting. What Other Guidelines Are Available on This Topic? Since the publication of the SAMBA Consensus Statement for perioperative blood glucose management in the ambulatory setting in 2010, several recent guidelines have been issued by the American Diabetes Association (ADA), the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE), the Endocrine Society, the Centre for Perioperative Care (CPOC), and the Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland (AAGBI) on DM care in hospitalized patients; however, none are specific to ambulatory surgery. How Does This Guideline Differ From the Previous Guidelines? Previously posed clinical questions that were outdated were revised to reflect current clinical practice. Additional questions were developed relating to the perioperative management of patients with DM to include the newer therapeutic interventions.
Assuntos
Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Ambulatórios , Glicemia , Consenso , Diabetes Mellitus , Hipoglicemiantes , Assistência Perioperatória , Humanos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Ambulatórios/normas , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Ambulatórios/efeitos adversos , Glicemia/efeitos dos fármacos , Glicemia/metabolismo , Diabetes Mellitus/sangue , Diabetes Mellitus/tratamento farmacológico , Assistência Perioperatória/normas , Assistência Perioperatória/métodos , Hipoglicemiantes/uso terapêutico , Hipoglicemiantes/efeitos adversos , Anestesia/normas , Anestesia/efeitos adversos , Anestesia/métodos , Sociedades Médicas/normas , Adulto , Anestesiologia/normas , Anestesiologia/métodos , Insulina/uso terapêutico , Insulina/administração & dosagem , Hipoglicemia/sangue , Hipoglicemia/induzido quimicamente , Hipoglicemia/prevenção & controle , Controle Glicêmico/normasRESUMO
Colorectal cancer is the second most common cancer diagnosed in women and third most common in men. Laparoscopic resection has become the standard surgical technique worldwide given its notable benefits, mainly the shorter length of stay and less postoperative pain. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the current literature on postoperative pain management following laparoscopic colorectal surgery and update previous procedure-specific pain management recommendations. The primary outcomes were postoperative pain scores and opioid requirements. We also considered study quality, clinical relevance of trial design, and a comprehensive risk-benefit assessment of the analgesic intervention. We performed a literature search to identify randomised controlled studies (RCTs) published before January 2022. Seventy-two studies were included in the present analysis. Through the established PROSPECT process, we recommend basic analgesia (paracetamol for rectal surgery, and paracetamol with either a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug or cyclo-oxygenase-2-specific inhibitor for colonic surgery) and wound infiltration as first-line interventions. No consensus could be achieved either for the use of intrathecal morphine or intravenous lidocaine; no recommendation can be made for these interventions. However, intravenous lidocaine may be considered when basic analgesia cannot be provided.
Assuntos
Cirurgia Colorretal , Laparoscopia , Dor Pós-Operatória , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Acetaminofen/uso terapêutico , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Cirurgia Colorretal/efeitos adversos , Laparoscopia/efeitos adversos , Lidocaína/uso terapêutico , Dor Pós-Operatória/diagnóstico , Dor Pós-Operatória/tratamento farmacológico , Dor Pós-Operatória/etiologia , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como AssuntoRESUMO
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy can be associated with significant postoperative pain that is difficult to treat. We aimed to evaluate the available literature and develop updated recommendations for optimal pain management after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A systematic review was performed using the procedure-specific postoperative pain management (PROSPECT) methodology. Randomised controlled trials and systematic reviews published in the English language from August 2017 to December 2022 assessing postoperative pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy using analgesic, anaesthetic or surgical interventions were identified from MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Databases. From 589 full text articles, 157 randomised controlled trials and 31 systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria. Paracetamol combined with NSAIDs or cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors should be given either pre-operatively or intra-operatively, unless contraindicated. In addition, intra-operative intravenous (i.v.) dexamethasone, port-site wound infiltration or intraperitoneal local anaesthetic instillation are recommended, with opioids used for rescue analgesia. As a second-line regional technique, the erector spinae plane block or transversus abdominis plane block may be reserved for patients with a heightened risk of postoperative pain. Three-port laparoscopy, a low-pressure pneumoperitoneum, umbilical port extraction, active aspiration of the pneumoperitoneum and saline irrigation are recommended technical aspects of the operative procedure. The following interventions are not recommended due to limited or no evidence on improved pain scores: single port or mini-port techniques, routine drainage, low flow insufflation, natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES), infra-umbilical incision, i.v. clonidine, nefopam and regional techniques such as quadratus lumborum block or rectus sheath block. Several interventions provided better pain scores but are not recommended due to risk of side effects: spinal or epidural anaesthesia, gabapentinoids, i.v. lidocaine, i.v. ketamine and i.v. dexmedetomidine.
RESUMO
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To discuss the role of opioids during general anesthesia and examine their advantages and risks in the context of clinical practice. We define opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) as the absolute avoidance of intraoperative opioids. RECENT FINDINGS: In most minimally invasive and short-duration procedures, nonopioid analgesics, analgesic adjuvants, and local/regional analgesia can significantly spare the amount of intraoperative opioid needed. OFA should be considered in the context of tailoring to a specific patient and procedure, not as a universal approach. Strategies considered for OFA involve several adjuncts with low therapeutic range, requiring continuous infusions and resources, with potential for delayed recovery or other side effects, including increased short-term and long-term pain. No evidence indicates that OFA leads to decreased long-term opioid-related harms. SUMMARY: Complete avoidance of intraoperative opioids remains questionable, as it does not necessarily ensure avoidance of postoperative opioids. Multimodal analgesia including local/regional anesthesia may allow OFA for selected, minimally invasive surgeries, but further research is necessary in surgeries with high postoperative opioid requirements. Until there is definitive evidence regarding procedure and patient-specific combinations as well as the dose and duration of administration of adjunct agents, it is imperative to practice opioid-sparing approach in the intraoperative period.
Assuntos
Analgésicos Opioides , Anestesia Geral , Dor Pós-Operatória , Humanos , Analgésicos Opioides/administração & dosagem , Analgésicos Opioides/efeitos adversos , Anestesia Geral/métodos , Anestesia Geral/efeitos adversos , Anestesia Geral/normas , Dor Pós-Operatória/prevenção & controle , Dor Pós-Operatória/tratamento farmacológico , Dor Pós-Operatória/etiologia , Dor Pós-Operatória/diagnóstico , Analgésicos não Narcóticos/administração & dosagem , Analgésicos não Narcóticos/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
Background: Skeletal muscle relaxants have emerged as a broad category of analgesic adjuncts, aiming to improve pain relief and reduce opioid reliance. These drugs induce muscle relaxation and reduce muscle spasms, and therefore, they are commonly used in surgical procedures involving muscle manipulation, such as abdominal surgery, breast surgery, and spine surgery. However, their analgesic efficacy and opioid-sparing effects are poorly explored. Methods: A scoping review of literature was performed with several electronic databases. We used a search string with a sequence of text words and word variants related to central muscle relaxants, pain management, postoperative pain, and specific muscle relaxants. Results: Review of literature shows significant heterogeneity among the studies in terms of surgical procedures, patient populations, choice of muscle relaxant, and timing and duration of administration, potentially limiting the generalizability of the findings and the ability for pooled analysis. Conclusions: Given the lack of evidence, we recommend that the use of skeletal muscle relaxants be reserved for patients in whom an optimal multimodal analgesic technique is not adequate. Also, there may be a limited role for these drugs in patients at high risk of postoperative pain undergoing surgical procedures with expected high opioid requirements. Due to the concerns of potential adverse effects, the decision to use muscle relaxants in vulnerable populations should be made carefully, weighing the benefits against the risks.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: A vaginal delivery may be associated with acute postpartum pain, particularly after perineal trauma. However, pain management in this setting remains poorly explored. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the literature and to develop recommendations for pain management after a vaginal delivery with perineal trauma. EVIDENCE REVIEW: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews assessing pain after a vaginal delivery with perineal tears or episiotomy until March 2023. Cochrane Covidence quality assessment generic tool and the RoB Vis 2 tool were used to grade the quality of evidence. FINDINGS: Overall, 79 studies (69 RCTs and 10 systematic reviews and meta-analyses) of good quality of evidence were included. Acetaminophen and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are recommended as first-line treatment. Epidural morphine (≤2 mg) is recommended among women with labor epidural analgesia and severe perineal tears, with adequate respiratory monitoring. Local anesthetic infiltration, topical local anesthetic, ointment application, and pudendal nerve block are not recommended due to insufficient or lack of evidence. Ice or chemical cold packs are recommended for postpartum pain first-line treatment due to their simplicity of use. Transcutaneous nerve stimulation and acupuncture are recommended as adjuvants. When a perineal suture is indicated, a continuous suture compared with an interrupted suture for the repair of episiotomy or second-degree perineal tears is recommended for the outcome of pain. For women with first-degree or second-degree perineal tears, no suturing or glue compared with suturing is recommended for the outcome of pain. CONCLUSIONS: Postpartum pain management after a vaginal delivery with perineal trauma should include acetaminophen, NSAIDs, and ice or chemical cold packs. Epidural morphine should be reserved for severe perineal tears. A surgical repair technique should depend on perineal tear severity.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The suitability of ambulatory surgery for patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) remains controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the odds of perioperative adverse events in patients with OSA undergoing ambulatory surgery, compared to patients without OSA. METHODS: Four electronic databases were searched for studies published between January 1, 2011 and July 11, 2023. The inclusion criteria were: adult patients with diagnosed or high-risk of OSA undergoing ambulatory surgery; perioperative adverse events; control group included; general and/or regional anesthesia; and publication on/after February 1, 2011. We calculated effect sizes as odds ratios using a random effects model, and additional sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Seventeen studies (375,389 patients) were included. OSA was associated with an increased odds of same-day admission amongst all surgery types (OR 1.94, 95% CI 1.46-2.59, I2:79%, P < 0.00001, 11 studies, n = 347,342), as well as when only orthopedic surgery was considered (OR 2.68, 95% CI 2.05-3.48, I2:41%, P < 0.00001, 6 studies, n = 132,473). Three studies reported that OSA was strongly associated with prolonged post anesthesia care unit (PACU) length of stay (LOS), while one study reported that the association was not statistically significant. In addition, four studies reported that OSA was associated with postoperative respiratory depression/hypoxia, with one large study on shoulder arthroscopy reporting an almost 5-fold increased odds of pulmonary compromise, 5-fold of myocardial infarction, 3-fold of acute renal failure, and 5-fold of intensive care unit (ICU) admission. CONCLUSIONS: Ambulatory surgical patients with OSA had almost two-fold higher odds of same-day admission compared to non-OSA patients. Multiple large studies also reported an association of OSA with prolonged PACU LOS, respiratory complications, and/or ICU admission. Clinicians should screen preoperatively for OSA, optimize comorbidities, adhere to clinical algorithm-based management perioperatively, and maintain a high degree of vigilance in the postoperative period.