Racial and ethnic disparities in regional anesthesia in the United States: A narrative review.

BACKGROUND: Racial and ethnic disparities exist in the delivery of regional anesthesia in the United States. Anesthesiologists have ethical and economic obligations to address existing disparities in regional anesthesia care. OBJECTIVES: Current evidence of racial and ethnic disparities in regional anesthesia utilization in adult patients in the United States is presented. Potential contributors and solutions to racial disparities are also discussed. EVIDENCE REVIEW: Literature search was performed for studies examining racial and ethnic disparities in utilization of regional anesthesia, including neuraxial anesthesia and/or peripheral nerve blocks. FINDINGS: While minoritized patients are generally less likely to receive regional anesthesia than white patients, the pattern of disparities for different racial/ethnic groups and for types of regional anesthetics can be complex and varied. Contributors to racial/ethnic disparities in regional anesthesia span hospital, provider, and patient-level factors. Potential solutions include standardization of regional anesthetic practices via Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways, increasing patient education, health literacy, language translation services, and improving diversity and cultural competency in the anesthesiology workforce. CONCLUSION: Racial and ethnic disparities in regional anesthesia exist. Contributors and solutions to these disparities are multifaceted. Much work remains within the subspecialty of regional anesthesia to identify and address such disparities.

Gastric Point of Care Ultrasound in Adults: Image Acquisition and Interpretation.

Over the past two decades, diagnostic point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) has emerged as a rapid and non-invasive bedside tool for addressing clinical inquiries related to gastric content. One emerging concern pertains to patients about to undergo sedation and/or endotracheal intubation: the elevated risk of aspiration from the patient's stomach contents. Aspiration of gastric contents into the lungs poses a serious and potentially life-threatening complication. This occurs more frequently when the stomach is considered "full" and can be affected by the techniques employed for airway management, making it potentially preventable. To mitigate the risk of peri-procedural aspiration, two distinct medical specialties (anesthesiology and critical care medicine) have independently developed techniques to utilize ultrasonography for identifying patients requiring "full stomach" precautions. Due to these separate specialties, the work of each group remains relatively unfamiliar outside its respective field. This article presents descriptions of both techniques for gastric ultrasound. Furthermore, it explains how these approaches can complement each other when one of them falls short. Regarding image acquisition, the article covers the following topics: indications and contraindications, selection of the appropriate probe, patient positioning, and troubleshooting. The article also delves into image interpretation, complete with example images. Additionally, it demonstrates how one of the two techniques can be employed to estimate gastric fluid volume. Lastly, the article briefly discusses medical decision-making based on the findings of this examination.

Point-Of-Care Ultrasound Screening for Proximal Lower Extremity Deep Venous Thrombosis.

Acute lower extremity deep venous thrombosis (DVT) is a serious vascular disorder that requires accurate and early diagnosis to prevent life-threatening sequelae. While whole leg compression ultrasound with color and spectral Doppler is commonly performed in radiology and vascular labs, point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is becoming more common in the acute care setting. Providers appropriately trained in focused POCUS can perform a rapid bedside examination with high sensitivity and specificity in critically ill patients. This paper describes a simplified yet validated approach to POCUS by describing a three-zone protocol for lower extremity DVT POCUS image acquisition. The protocol explains the steps in obtaining vascular images at six compression points in the lower extremity. Beginning at the level of the proximal thigh and moving distally to the popliteal space, the protocol guides the user through each of the compression points in a stepwise manner: from the common femoral vein to the femoral and deep femoral vein bifurcation, and, finally, to the popliteal vein. Further, a visual aid is provided that may assist providers during real-time image acquisition. The goal in presenting this protocol is to help make proximal lower extremity DVT exams more accessible and efficient for POCUS users at the patient's bedside.

Effectiveness of oral versus intravenous tranexamic acid in primary total hip and knee arthroplasty: a randomised, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Tranexamic acid (TXA) reduces rates of blood transfusion for total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Although the use of oral TXA rather than intravenous (i.v.) TXA might improve safety and reduce cost, it is not clear whether oral administration is as effective. METHODS: This noninferiority trial randomly assigned consecutive patients undergoing primary THA or TKA under neuraxial anaesthesia to either one preoperative dose of oral TXA or one preoperative dose of i.v. TXA. The primary outcome was calculated blood loss on postoperative day 1. Secondary outcomes were transfusions and complications within 30 days of surgery. RESULTS: Four hundred participants were randomised (200 THA and 200 TKA). The final analysis included 196 THA patients (98 oral, 98 i.v.) and 191 TKA patients (93 oral, 98 i.v.). Oral TXA was non-inferior to i.v. TXA in terms of calculated blood loss for both THA (effect size=-18.2 ml; 95% confidence interval [CI], -113 to 76.3; P<0.001) and TKA (effect size=-79.7 ml; 95% CI, -178.9 to 19.6; P<0.001). One patient in the i.v. TXA group received a postoperative transfusion. Complication rates were similar between the two groups (5/191 [2.6%] oral vs 5/196 [2.6%] i.v.; P=1.00). CONCLUSIONS: Oral TXA can be administered in the preoperative setting before THA or TKA and performs similarly to i.v. TXA with respect to blood loss and transfusion rates. Switching from i.v. to oral TXA in this setting has the potential to improve patient safety and decrease costs.

Core outcome set for peripheral regional anesthesia research: a systematic review and Delphi study.

BACKGROUND/IMPORTANCE: There is heterogeneity among the outcomes used in regional anesthesia research. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to produce a core outcome set for regional anesthesia research. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and Delphi study to develop this core outcome set. A systematic review of the literature from January 2015 to December 2019 was undertaken to generate a long list of potential outcomes to be included in the core outcome set. For each outcome found, the parameters such as the measurement scale, timing and definitions, were compiled. Regional anesthesia experts were then recruited to participate in a three-round electronic modified Delphi process with incremental thresholds to generate a core outcome set. Once the core outcomes were decided, a final Delphi survey and video conference vote was used to reach a consensus on the outcome parameters. RESULTS: Two hundred and six papers were generated following the systematic review, producing a long list of 224 unique outcomes. Twenty-one international regional anesthesia experts participated in the study. Ten core outcomes were selected after three Delphi survey rounds with 13 outcome parameters reaching consensus after a final Delphi survey and video conference. CONCLUSIONS: We present the first core outcome set for regional anesthesia derived by international expert consensus. These are proposed not to limit the outcomes examined in future studies, but rather to serve as a minimum core set. If adopted, this may increase the relevance of outcomes being studied, reduce selective reporting bias and increase the availability and suitability of data for meta-analysis in this area.

Effect of Duloxetine on Opioid Use and Pain After Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Triple-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Duloxetine, a serotonin-norepinephrine dual reuptake inhibitor, may improve analgesia after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Previous studies had one primary outcome, did not consistently use multimodal analgesia, and used patient-controlled analgesia devices, potentially delaying discharge. We investigated whether duloxetine would reduce opioid consumption or pain with ambulation. METHODS: A total of 160 patients received 60 mg duloxetine or placebo daily, starting from the day of surgery and continuing 14 days postoperatively. Patients received neuraxial anesthesia, peripheral nerve blocks, acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and oral opioids as needed. The dual primary outcomes were Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) scores with movement on postoperative days 1, 2, and 14, and cumulative opioid consumption surgery through postoperative day 14. RESULTS: Duloxetine was noninferior to placebo for both primary outcomes and was superior to placebo for opioid consumption. Opioid consumption (mean ± SD) was 288 ± 226 mg OME [94, 385] vs 432 ± 374 [210, 540] (duloxetine vs placebo) P = .0039. Pain scores on POD14 were 4.2 ± 2.0 vs 4.8 ± 2.2 (duloxetine vs placebo) P = .018. Median satisfaction with pain management was 10 (8, 10) and 8 (7, 10) (duloxetine vs placebo) P = .046. Duloxetine reduced interference by pain with walking, normal work, and sleep. CONCLUSION: The 29% reduction in opioid use corresponds to 17 fewer pills of oxycodone, 5 mg, and was achieved without increasing pain scores. Considering the ongoing opioid epidemic, duloxetine can be used to reduce opioid usage after knee arthroplasty in selected patients that can be appropriately monitored for potential side effects of the medication.

Interscalene Brachial Plexus Block with Liposomal Bupivacaine versus Standard Bupivacaine with Perineural Dexamethasone: A Noninferiority Trial.

BACKGROUND: The interscalene nerve block provides analgesia for shoulder surgery. To extend block duration, provide adequate analgesia, and minimize opioid consumption, the use of adjuvants such as dexamethasone as well as the application of perineural liposomal bupivacaine have been proposed. This randomized, double-blinded, noninferiority trial hypothesized that perineural liposomal bupivacaine is noninferior to standard bupivacaine with perineural dexamethasone in respect to average pain scores in the first 72 h after surgery. METHODS: A total of 112 patients undergoing ambulatory shoulder surgery were randomized into two groups. The liposomal bupivacaine group received a 15-ml premixed admixture of 10 ml of 133 mg liposomal bupivacaine and 5 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine (n = 55), while the bupivacaine with dexamethasone group received an admixture of 15 ml of 0.5% standard bupivacaine with 4 mg dexamethasone (n = 56), respectively. The primary outcome was the average numerical rating scale pain scores at rest over 72 h. The mean difference between the two groups was compared against a noninferiority margin of 1.3. Secondary outcomes were analgesic block duration, motor and sensory resolution, opioid consumption, numerical rating scale pain scores at rest and movement on postoperative days 1 to 4 and again on postoperative day 7, patient satisfaction, readiness for postanesthesia care unit discharge, and adverse events. RESULTS: A liposomal bupivacaine group average numerical rating scale pain score over 72 h was not inferior to the bupivacaine with dexamethasone group (mean [SD], 2.4 [1.9] vs. 3.4 [1.9]; mean difference [95% CI], -1.1 [-1.8, -0.4]; P < 0.001 for noninferiority). There was no significant difference in duration of analgesia between the groups (26 [20, 42] h vs. 27 [20, 39] h; P = 0.851). Motor and sensory resolutions were similar in both groups: 27 (21, 48) h versus 27 (19, 40) h (P = 0.436) and 27 [21, 44] h versus 31 (20, 42) h (P = 0.862), respectively. There was no difference in opioid consumption, readiness for postanesthesia care unit discharge, or adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Interscalene nerve blocks with perineural liposomal bupivacaine provided effective analgesia similar to the perineural standard bupivacaine with dexamethasone. The results show that bupivacaine with dexamethasone can be used interchangeably with liposomal bupivacaine for analgesia after shoulder surgery.

Diagnostic Point-of-Care Ultrasound: Recommendations From an Expert Panel.

Diagnostic point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) has emerged as a powerful tool to help anesthesiologists guide patient care in both the perioperative setting and the subspecialty arenas. Although anesthesiologists can turn to guideline statements pertaining to other aspects of ultrasound use, to date there remains little in the way of published guidance regarding diagnostic PoCUS. To this end, in 2018, the American Society of Anesthesiologists chartered an ad hoc committee consisting of 23 American Society of Anesthesiologists members to provide recommendations on this topic. The ad hoc committee convened and developed a committee work product. This work product was updated in 2021 by an expert panel of the ad hoc committee to produce the document presented herein. The document, which represents the consensus opinion of a group of practicing anesthesiologists with established expertise in diagnostic ultrasound, addresses the following issues: (1) affirms the practice of diagnostic PoCUS by adequately trained anesthesiologists, (2) identifies the scope of practice of diagnostic PoCUS relevant to anesthesiologists, (3) suggests the minimum level of training needed to achieve competence, (4) provides recommendations for how diagnostic PoCUS can be used safely and ethically, and (5) provides broad guidance about diagnostic ultrasound billing.

Anterior Quadratus Lumborum Block Does Not Provide Superior Pain Control after Hip Arthroscopy: A Double-blinded Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Hip arthroscopy is associated with moderate to severe postoperative pain. This prospective, randomized, double-blinded study investigates the clinically analgesic effect of anterior quadratus lumborum block with multimodal analgesia compared to multimodal analgesia alone. The authors hypothesized that an anterior quadratus lumborum block with multimodal analgesia would be superior for pain control. METHODS: Ninety-six adult patients undergoing ambulatory hip arthroscopy were enrolled. Patients were randomized to either a single-shot anterior quadratus lumborum block (30 ml bupivacaine 0.5% with 2 mg preservative-free dexamethasone) or no block. All patients received neuraxial anesthesia, IV sedation, and multimodal analgesia (IV acetaminophen and ketorolac). The primary outcome was numerical rating scale pain scores at rest and movement at 30 min and 1, 2, 3, and 24 h. RESULTS: Ninety-six patients were enrolled and included in the analysis. Anterior quadratus lumborum block with multimodal analgesia (overall treatment effect, marginal mean [standard error]: 4.4 [0.3]) was not superior to multimodal analgesia alone (overall treatment effect, marginal mean [standard error]: 3.7 [0.3]) in pain scores over the study period (treatment differences between no block and anterior quadratus lumborum block, 0.7 [95% CI, -0.1 to 1.5]; P = 0.059). Postanesthesia care unit antiemetic use, patient satisfaction, and opioid consumption for 0 to 24 h were not significantly different. There was no difference in quadriceps strength on the operative side between groups (differences in means, 1.9 [95% CI, -1.5 to 5.3]; P = 0.268). CONCLUSIONS: Anterior quadratus lumborum block may not add to the benefits provided by multimodal analgesia alone after hip arthroscopy. Anterior quadratus lumborum block did not cause a motor deficit. The lack of treatment effect in this study demonstrates a surgical procedure without benefit from this novel block.

American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine expert panel recommendations on point-of-care ultrasound education and training for regional anesthesiologists and pain physicians-part II: recommendations.

Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is a critical skill for all regional anesthesiologists and pain physicians to help diagnose relevant complications related to routine practice and guide perioperative management. In an effort to inform the regional anesthesia and pain community as well as address a need for structured education and training, the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine Society (ASRA) commissioned this narrative review to provide recommendations for POCUS. The recommendations were written by content and educational experts and were approved by the guidelines committee and the Board of Directors of the ASRA. In part II of this two-part series, learning goals and objectives were identified and outlined for achieving competency in the use of POCUS, specifically, airway ultrasound, lung ultrasound, gastric ultrasound, the focus assessment with sonography for trauma exam, and focused cardiac ultrasound, in the perioperative and chronic pain setting. It also discusses barriers to POCUS education and training and proposes a list of educational resources. For each POCUS section, learning goals and specific skills were presented in the Indication, Acquisition, Interpretation, and Medical decision-making framework.

American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine expert panel recommendations on point-of-care ultrasound education and training for regional anesthesiologists and pain physicians-part I: clinical indications.

Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is a critical skill for all regional anesthesiologists and pain physicians to help diagnose relevant complications related to routine practice and guide perioperative management. In an effort to inform the regional anesthesia and pain community as well as address a need for structured education and training, the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine (ASRA) commissioned this narrative review to provide recommendations for POCUS. The guidelines were written by content and educational experts and approved by the Guidelines Committee and the Board of Directors of the ASRA. In part I of this two-part series, clinical indications for POCUS in the perioperative and chronic pain setting are described. The clinical review addresses airway ultrasound, lung ultrasound, gastric ultrasound, the focus assessment with sonography for trauma examination and focused cardiac ultrasound for the regional anesthesiologist and pain physician. It also provides foundational knowledge regarding ultrasound physics, discusses the impact of handheld devices and finally, offers insight into the role of POCUS in the pediatric population.

Point-of-care ultrasound for the pediatric regional anesthesiologist and pain specialist: a technique review.

Point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) has been well described for adult perioperative patients; however, the literature on children remains limited. Regional anesthesiologists have gained interest in expanding their clinical repertoire of PoCUS from regional anesthesia to increasing numbers of applications. This manuscript reviews and highlights emerging PoCUS applications that may improve the quality and safety of pediatric care.In infants and children, lung and airway PoCUS can be used to identify esophageal intubation, size airway devices such as endotracheal tubes, and rule in or out a pulmonary etiology for clinical decompensation. Gastric ultrasound can be used to stratify aspiration risk when nil-per-os compliance and gastric emptying are uncertain. Cardiac PoCUS imaging is useful to triage causes of undifferentiated hypotension or tachycardia and to determine reversible causes of cardiac arrest. Cardiac PoCUS can assess for pericardial effusion, gross ventricular systolic function, cardiac volume and filling, and gross valvular pathology. When PoCUS is used, a more rapid institution of problem-specific therapy with improved patient outcomes is demonstrated in the pediatric emergency medicine and critical care literature.Overall, PoCUS saves time, expedites the differential diagnosis, and helps direct therapy when used in infants and children. PoCUS is low risk and should be readily accessible to pediatric anesthesiologists in the operating room.