RESUMO
Background: Postoperative pain remains a significant challenge after knee and hip surgeries, two of the most frequently performed procedures, preventing patients from seeking timely surgical help. Gabapentinoids, gabapentin, and pregabalin, have been gaining attention in postoperative pain management. Methods: We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of gabapentinoids in pain management after knee and hip surgery. PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published before January 2023. Results: Fifteen articles reporting 1320 patients were analyzed. Cumulative pain intensity at rest and on movement was lower in the experimental group with the mean difference (MD) = -0.30 [-0.55,-0.05], p-value = 0.02, and MD = -0.41 [-0.68,-0.13], p-value = 0.004, respectively. However, the difference was not clinically meaningful and lacked statistical significance at each time period. The gabapentinoid group required less opioid consumption in morphine equivalents (MD = -6.42 [-9.07, -3.78] mg, p-value < 0.001). There was a lower incidence of postoperative nausea in the experimental group with a risk ratio (RR) of 0.69 [0.55, 0.86], p-value < 0.001. A subgroup analysis showed that gabapentinoids reduced pain on movement on postoperative day two after total knee arthroplasty but not hip arthroplasty. There was insufficient data to examine the efficacy of gabapentinoids in the reduction of chronic postoperative pain in knee/hip surgery. Conclusions: Thus, gabapentinoids were associated with a reduction in postoperative pain intensity at rest and on movement, morphine consumption, and the incidence of postoperative nausea in the early postoperative period following knee and hip surgeries. However, pain reduction was not clinically relevant. Sedation has not been evaluated in this work and, if performed, this may have influenced the conclusions. An important limitation of this study is that different gabapentinoids, their administration times and dosages, as well as varying intraoperative management protocols, were pooled together.
RESUMO
The objective of this study was to compare the outcomes of the ultrasound- and fluoroscopy-guided techniques in the management of back pain. Using PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library, we searched randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published before May 2023, which reported relevant data on the topic. The effectiveness of the ultrasound-guided (US-guided) and fluoroscopy-guided (FL-guided) approaches for back pain management was compared in terms of postoperative pain intensity, postoperative functional outcomes, and postoperative complications. Subgroup analyses were conducted for different postoperative periods. Eight studies were included in the analysis. There was no significant difference in post-procedural pain relief at one week, two weeks, one month, two months, and three months between the US-guided and FL-guided interventions for back pain management (SMD with 95% CI is -0.01 [-0.11, 0.10]), p = 0.91, I2 = 0%). In terms of the postoperative functional outcomes assessed by the "Oswestry Disability Index" (ODI) functionality score, the model tends to favor the FL-guided injections over the US-guided injections (SMD with 95% CI: 0.13 [-0.00, 0.25], p = 0.05, I2 = 0). Finally, the US-guided and FL-guided injections did not show significantly different results in terms of postoperative complications (RR with 95% CI is 0.99 [0.49, 1.99], p = 0.97, I2 = 0). The subgroup analysis also did not demonstrate differences between the US-guided and FL-guided techniques in the following outcomes: vasovagal reaction, transient headache, and facial flushing. There was no significant difference between the US-guided and FL-guided injections for treating back pain in terms of postoperative pain intensity and complications. Still, the model tends to favor the FL-guided injections over the US-guided injections in terms of functionality.