Neurolytic Splanchnic Nerve Block and Pain Relief, Survival, and Quality of Life in Unresectable Pancreatic Cancer: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Neurolytic splanchnic nerve block is used to manage pancreatic cancer pain. However, its impact on survival and quality of life remains controversial. The authors' primary hypothesis was that pain relief would be better with a nerve block. Secondarily, they hypothesized that analgesic use, survival, and quality of life might be affected. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, parallel-armed trial was conducted in five Chinese centers. Eligible patients suffering from moderate to severe pain conditions were randomly assigned to receive splanchnic nerve block with either absolute alcohol (neurolysis) or normal saline (control). The primary outcome was pain relief measured on a visual analogue scale. Opioid consumption, survival, quality of life, and adverse effects were also documented. Analgesics were managed using a protocol common to all centers. Patients were followed up for 8 months or until death. RESULTS: Ninety-six patients (48 for each group) were included in the analysis. Pain relief with neurolysis was greater for the first 3 months (largest at the first month; mean difference, 0.7 [95% CI, 0.3 to 1.0]; adjusted P < 0.001) compared with placebo injection. Opioid consumption with neurolysis was lower for the first 5 months (largest at the first month; mean difference, 95.8 [95% CI, 67.4 to 124.1]; adjusted P < 0.001) compared with placebo injection. There was a significant difference in survival (hazard ratio, 1.56 [95% CI, 1.03 to 2.35]; P = 0.036) between groups. A significant reduction in survival in neurolysis was found for stage IV patients (hazard ratio, 1.94 [95% CI, 1.29 to 2.93]; P = 0.001), but not for stage III patients (hazard ratio, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.59 to 1.97]; P = 0.809). No differences in quality of life were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Neurolytic splanchnic nerve block appears to be an effective option for controlling pain and reducing opioid requirements in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer.

Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Using Fascia Iliaca Block as an Alternative Approach to Conscious Sedation as Compared to General Anesthesia.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: General Anesthesia (GA) and conscious sedation (CS) are anesthetics for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TF-TAVR). We compared TF-TAVR outcomes using a novel anesthetic approach with fascia iliaca block (FIB) plus minimal CS (MCS) versus GA. METHODS: This retrospective propensity-matched study included consecutive TF-TAVR patients from January 2013 to December 2017 and dichotomized into FIB-MCS vs. GA. Data were collected from electronic records, Society of Thoracic Surgery (STS) database, and the Transcatheter Valve Therapies (TVT) Registry. Primary endpoints were operating room (OR) time, intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay (LOS). Secondary endpoints were 30-day, 1-year mortality, quality of life, 30-day re-hospitalization rate, failure of FIB-MCS, and hospital safety outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 304 TF-TAVR patients; FIB-MCS (n = 219) vs. GA (n = 85). Propensity matched 162 patients; FIB-MCS (n = 108) vs. GA (n = 54). FIB-MCS had shorter OR time (197.6 ±â€¯56.3 vs. 248.2 ±â€¯46.3 min, p < 0.001), ICU (67.8 ±â€¯71.7 vs. 84.9 ±â€¯72.1 h, p = 0.004) and hospital LOS (3.2 ±â€¯3.7 vs. 5.9 ±â€¯3.5 d, p < 0.001). FIB-MCS had lower rate of blood transfusion. FIB-MCA vs. GA 30-day and 1-year mortality were similar in the entire (2.3 vs. 2.4%, p = 1.0; and 8.2 vs. 5.9%, p = 0.49) and matched cohorts (0 vs. 3.7%, p = 0.11 and 7.4 vs. 5.6%, p = 0.75). FIB-MCS were less likely to be re-hospitalized [Odd Ratio: 0.32, CI:0.13-0.76] and 2% to 3% higher KCCQ-12 score. CONCLUSION: TF-TAVR using FIB-MCS is feasible and safe with shorter OR time, ICU and hospital LOS, lower risk of 30-day re-hospitalization, similar 30-day and 1-year mortality with better quality of life at 1-year follow-up.

Local Anesthetic Systemic Toxicity: A Review of Recent Case Reports and Registries.

This review summarizes presenting features, management, and outcomes of local anesthetic systemic toxicity (LAST) from published cases and those submitted to online registries capturing use of intravenous lipid emulsion (ILE) therapy. The results of single-center and multicenter registries and epidemiologic studies complement this information. Between March 2014 and November 2016, 47 separate cases of LAST were described in 35 peer-reviewed articles. Local anesthetic systemic toxicity events occurred as a result of penile blocks (23%), local infiltration (17%), and upper/lower extremity, torso, and neuraxial blockade. Twenty-two patients (47%) were treated with ILE, and 2 patients (4.3%) died. During the same time period, 11 cases submitted to lipidrescue.org were treated with ILE and survived. The incidence of LAST reported in registries is 0.03% or 0.27 (95% confidence interval, 0.21-0.35) per 1000 peripheral nerve blocks (denominator of 251,325). Seizure (53% and 61% from case reports and registries, respectively) was the most common presenting feature.

Local Anesthetic Systemic Toxicity in Total Joint Arthroplasty: Incidence and Risk Factors in the United States From the National Inpatient Sample 1998-2013.

BACKGROUND: Local anesthetic systemic toxicity (LAST) is a rare and potentially devastating complication of regional anesthesia. Single-institution registries have reported a decreasing incidence, but these results have limited broad applicability. A recent study using a US database found a relatively high incidence of LAST. We used the National Inpatient Sample, a US database of inpatient admissions, to identify the national incidence and associated risk factors for LAST in total joint arthroplasties. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we studied patients undergoing hip, knee, or shoulder arthroplasty, from 1998 to 2013, with an adjunct peripheral nerve blockade. We used a multivariable logistic regression to identify patient conditions, hospital level variables, and procedure sites associated with LAST. RESULTS: A total of 710,327 discharges met inclusion criteria. The average adjusted incidence was 1.04 per 1000 peripheral nerve blocks, with decreasing trend over the 15-year study period (odds ratio [OR], 0.90; P = 0.002). Shoulder arthroplasty (OR, 4.35; P = 0.0001) compared with knee or hip arthroplasty and medium-size (OR, 3.34; P = 0.003) and large-size (OR, 2.40; P = 0.025) hospitals as compared with small hospitals were associated with increased odds of LAST. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of LAST nationally in total joint arthroplasty with adjunct nerve blocks is similar to recent estimates from academic centers, with a small decreasing trend through the study period. Despite an overall low incidence rate, practitioners should continue to maintain vigilance for manifestations of LAST, especially as the use of regional anesthesia continues to increase.

Perioperative Outcomes after Regional Versus General Anesthesia for Above the Knee Amputations.

BACKGROUND: Nontraumatic lower extremity amputation (LEA) remains a common procedure among patients who frequently have significant comorbidities. Patients undergoing above knee amputation (AKA) have the highest rates of mortality in this cohort, yet there is little evidence to support selection between peripheral nerve block or neuraxial regional anesthesia (RA) versus general anesthesia (GA) techniques. The objective of this study was to determine whether RA (neuraxial or peripheral nerve block) techniques were associated with more favorable outcomes versus general anesthesia among patients undergoing AKA. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study using propensity-matched groups. Patients undergoing AKA were identified in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) data set and grouped according to anesthetic type as either RA or GA. Patients undergoing AKA with RA were propensity matched to similar patients who had GA. Primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were numerous and included cardiac, pulmonary, infectious, and bleeding complications, as well as length of stay. Among a subset of patients for whom readmission data were available, rate of readmission was compared as a secondary outcome. RESULTS: Nine thousand nine hundred ninety-nine patients were identified in the ACS-NSQIP database. One thousand three hundred twelve received a regional anesthetic, and the remainder had a general anesthetic. Factors significantly associated with GA included younger age (70 vs. 75 years; P < 0.001), higher body mass index (26.5 vs. 25.4; P < 0.001), and ethnically white (62.4% vs. 57%; P < 0.001). Before matching, patients receiving RA were less likely to be smokers (22% vs. 29%; P < 0.001), have a bleeding disorder (15% vs 30%; P < 0.001), or have a diagnosis of sepsis (26% vs 34%; P < 0.001). Propensity score matching produced a cohort composed of 1,916 patients equally divided between RA and GA. We found no difference with respect to the primary end point of 30-day mortality (11.7% vs 11.7%; odds ratio [OR] 1.01; P = 0.943) nor was there any difference with respect to secondary outcomes. Among patients for whom readmission data were available, there was no statistically significant difference between rates of readmission between the groups (15.6% for RA vs. 12.7% for GA; OR 1.26, confidence interval 0.87-1.828, P = 0.221). CONCLUSIONS: The present investigation did not detect any difference between regional and general anesthetic with respect to morbidity or mortality among patients undergoing AKA. This data set did not allow us to address other relevant markers including pain control or phantom limb syndrome.

Survival Analysis of Patients with Breast Cancer Undergoing a Modified Radical Mastectomy With or Without a Thoracic Paravertebral Block: a 5-Year Follow-up of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

AIM: This 5-year prospective follow-up of women randomized to general anesthesia (GA) with or without a thoracic paravertebral block (TPVB) examined the risk of local recurrence, metastasis and mortality after breast cancer surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 180 patients undergoing modified radical mastectomy were randomized to one of three study groups: standardized GA only; GA with a single-injection TPVB (s-TPVB) and placebo paravertebral infusion after surgery for 72-h; and GA plus with continuous TPVB (c-TPVB) for 72-h postoperatively. Cox proportional models were used to assess the effect of TPVB on long-term outcomes. Equivalence testing was used to help interpret the results. RESULTS: The incidence [95% confidence interval (CI)] of cancer recurrence, metastatic spread and all-cause mortality was 2.3% (0.7-5.4%), 7.9% (4.6-12.6%) and 6.8% (3.6-11.2%), respectively. Four women had cancer recurrence and had metastatic spread. Compared to the GA-only group, the risk of metastatic spread was not different from that of GA with s-TPVB [hazard ratio (HR)=1.11, 95% CI=0.32-3.83) nor from that with GA plus c-TPVB (HR=0.79, 95% CI=0.21-2.96) (p=0.88). Compared to the GA-only group, the risk of mortality was similarly not different from that of the two other groups (HR=2.57, 95% CI=0.66-9.92; and HR=0.66, 95% CI=0.11-3.97, respectively, p=0.15). CONCLUSION: Although the original study was underpowered to properly address long-term outcomes, the results of this analysis suggest that TPVB, administered whether as a single-injection or continuous infusion during the perioperative period, had little to no appreciable effect on local recurrence, metastasis or mortality after breast cancer surgery.

Paravertebral Block Does Not Reduce Cancer Recurrence, but Is Related to Higher Overall Survival in Lung Cancer Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative analgesic methods are suggested to have an impact on long-term prognosis after cancer surgery through opioid-induced immune suppression. We hypothesized that regional analgesia that reduces the systemic opioid requirement would be related to lower cancer recurrence and higher overall survival compared to intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) for lung cancer surgery. METHODS: Records for all patients who underwent open thoracotomy for curative resection of primary lung cancer between 2009 and 2013 in a tertiary care hospital were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided by postoperative analgesic methods: PCA (n = 574), thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA, n = 619), or paravertebral block (PVB, n = 536). Overall and recurrence-free survivals were compared among 3 analgesic methods via a multivariable Cox proportional hazard model and a log-rank test after adjusting confounding factors using propensity score matching (PSM). RESULTS: Analgesic method was associated with overall survival (P= .0015; hazard ratio against TEA [95% confidence intervals]: 0.58 [0.39-0.87] for PCA, 0.60 [0.45-0.79] for PVB). After confounder adjustment using PSM, PVB showed higher overall survival than PCA (log-rank P= .0229) and TEA (log-rank P= .0063) while PCA and TEA showed no difference (log-rank P= .6). Hazard ratio for PVB was 0.66 [0.46-0.94] against PCA and 0.65 [0.48-0.89] against TEA after PSM. However, there was no significant association between the analgesic methods and recurrence-free survival (P= .5; log-rank P with PSM = .5 between PCA and TEA, .5 between PCA and PVB, .1 between TEA and PVB). CONCLUSIONS: Pain-control methods are not related to cancer recurrence. However, PVB may have a beneficial effect on overall survival of patients with lung cancer.

Analgesic Choice in Management of Rib Fractures: Paravertebral Block or Epidural Analgesia?

BACKGROUND: Rib fractures are commonly encountered in the setting of trauma. The aim of this study was to assess the association between the clinical outcome of rib fracture and epidural analgesia (EA) versus paravertebral block (PVB) using the National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB). METHODS: Using the 2011 and 2012 versions of the NTDB, we retrieved completed records for all patients above 18 years of age who were admitted with rib fractures. Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were length of stay (LOS), intensive care unit (ICU) admission, ICU LOS, mechanical ventilation, duration of mechanical ventilation, development of pneumonia, and development of any other complication. Clinical outcomes were first compared between propensity score-matched EA and PVB patients. Then, EA and PVB patients were combined into the procedure group and the outcomes were compared with propensity score-matched patients that received neither intervention (no-procedure group). RESULTS: A total of 194,766 patients were included in the study with 1073 patients having EA, 1110 patients having PVB, and 192,583 patients having neither procedure. After propensity score matching, comparison of primary and secondary outcomes between EA and PVB patients showed no difference. Comparison of propensity score-matched procedure and no-procedure patients showed prolonged LOS and more frequent ICU admissions in patients receiving a procedure (both P < .0001), yet having no procedure was associated with a significantly increased odds of mortality (odds ratio: 2.25; 95% confidence interval, 1.14-3.84; P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Using the NTDB, EA and PVB were not found to be significantly different in management of rib fractures. There was an association between use of a block and improved outcome, but this could be explained by selection of healthier patients to receive a block. Prospective study of this association is recommended.

The Impact of Paravertebral Block Analgesia on Breast Cancer Survival After Surgery.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The impact of regional anesthesia on breast cancer recurrence is controversial. We tested the hypothesis that the use of paravertebral block (PVB) analgesia during breast cancer surgery prolongs the recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) of women with breast cancer. METHODS: Seven hundred ninety-two women with nonmetastatic breast cancer were included in this retrospective study. Patients were divided based on the administration of PVB analgesia for mastectomy surgeries. One hundred ninety-eight (25%) were given a PVB, the remainder were treated with opioid-based analgesia. Propensity score matching was developed using several variables. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to assess the impact of PVB analgesia on RFS and OS. RESULTS: The median follow-up times for RFS and OS were 5.8 and 6 years, respectively. In the propensity score matching model, a total of 396 women were included in each group of treatment (non-PVB group, n = 198 vs PVB group, n = 198). As expected, the fentanyl consumption was significantly lower in PVB (122.8 ± 77.85 µg) patients than non-PVB subjects (402.23 ± 343.8 µg). Other variables were not statistically significant. After adjusting for several important covariates, the analysis indicated that the use of PVB is not associated with a significant change in RFS [1.60 (0.81-3.16), P = 0.172] or OS [1.28 (0.55-3.01)] survival. DISCUSSION: This retrospective study does not support the hypothesis that the use of regional analgesia is associated with longer survival after surgery for breast cancer.

Paravertebral block versus thoracic epidural for patients undergoing thoracotomy.

BACKGROUND: Operations on structures in the chest (usually the lungs) involve cutting between the ribs (thoracotomy). Severe post-thoracotomy pain can result from pleural (lung lining) and muscular damage, costovertebral joint (ribcage) disruption and intercostal nerve (nerves that run along the ribs) damage during surgery. Poor pain relief after surgery can impede recovery and increase the risks of developing complications such as lung collapse, chest infections and blood clots due to ineffective breathing and clearing of secretions. Effective management of acute pain following thoracotomy may prevent these complications and reduce the likelihood of developing chronic pain. A multi-modal approach to analgesia is widely employed by thoracic anaesthetists using a combination of regional anaesthetic blockade and systemic analgesia, with both non-opioid and opioid medications and local anaesthesia blockade.There is some evidence that blocking the nerves as they emerge from the spinal column (paravertebral block, PVB) may be associated with a lower risk of major complications in thoracic surgery but the majority of thoracic anaesthetists still prefer to use a thoracic epidural blockade (TEB) as analgesia for their patients undergoing thoracotomy. In order to bring about a change in practice, anaesthetists need a review that evaluates the risk of all major complications associated with thoracic epidural and paravertebral block in thoracotomy. OBJECTIVES: To compare the two regional techniques of TEB and PVB in adults undergoing elective thoracotomy with respect to:1. analgesic efficacy;2. the incidence of major complications (including mortality);3. the incidence of minor complications;4. length of hospital stay;5. cost effectiveness. SEARCH METHODS: We searched for studies in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2013, Issue 9); MEDLINE via Ovid (1966 to 16 October 2013); EMBASE via Ovid (1980 to 16 October 2013); CINAHL via EBSCO host (1982 to 16 October 2013); and reference lists of retrieved studies. We handsearched the Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery and Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia (16 October 2013). We reran the search on 31st January 2015. We found one additional study which is awaiting classification and will be addressed when we update the review. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PVB with TEB in thoracotomy, including upper gastrointestinal surgery. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors (JY and SG) independently assessed the studies for inclusion and then extracted data as eligible for inclusion in qualitative and quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis). MAIN RESULTS: We included 14 studies with a total of 698 participants undergoing thoracotomy. There are two studies awaiting classification. The studies demonstrated high heterogeneity in insertion and use of both regional techniques, reflecting real-world differences in the anaesthesia techniques. Overall, the included studies have a moderate to high potential for bias, lacking details of randomization, group allocation concealment or arrangements to blind participants or outcome assessors. There was low to very low-quality evidence that showed no significant difference in 30-day mortality (2 studies, 125 participants. risk ratio (RR) 1.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39 to 4.23, P value = 0.68) and major complications (cardiovascular: 2 studies, 114 participants. Hypotension RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.01 to 6.62, P value = 0.45; arrhythmias RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.29, P value = 0.36, myocardial infarction RR 3.19, 95% CI 0.13, 76.42, P value = 0.47); respiratory: 5 studies, 280 participants. RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.52, P value = 0.30). There was moderate-quality evidence that showed comparable analgesic efficacy across all time points both at rest and after coughing or physiotherapy (14 studies, 698 participants). There was moderate-quality evidence that showed PVB had a better minor complication profile than TEB including hypotension (8 studies, 445 participants. RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.38, P value < 0.0001), nausea and vomiting (6 studies, 345 participants. RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.75, P value = 0.001), pruritis (5 studies, 249 participants. RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.59, P value = 0.0005) and urinary retention (5 studies, 258 participants. RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.46, P value < 0.0001). There was insufficient data in chronic pain (six or 12 months). There was no difference found in and length of hospital stay (3 studies, 124 participants). We found no studies that reported costs. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Paravertebral blockade reduced the risks of developing minor complications compared to thoracic epidural blockade. Paravertebral blockade was as effective as thoracic epidural blockade in controlling acute pain. There was a lack of evidence in other outcomes. There was no difference in 30-day mortality, major complications, or length of hospital stay. There was insufficient data on chronic pain and costs. Results from this review should be interpreted with caution due to the heterogeneity of the included studies and the lack of reliable evidence. Future studies in this area need well-conducted, adequately-powered RCTs that focus not only on acute pain but also on major complications, chronic pain, length of stay and costs.

Effects of anesthesia versus regional nerve block on major leg amputation mortality rate.

There are greater than 120,000 above-knee amputations (AKA) and below-knee amputations (BKA) performed in the USA each year. Traditionally, general anesthesia (GA) was the preferred modality of anesthesia. The use of regional nerve blocks has recently gained popularity, however, without the supporting evidence of any mortality benefits. Our objective was to evaluate whether regional nerve blocks yield significant mortality reduction in major lower-extremity amputations. Retrospective data of both AKA and BKA procedures at the Maimonides Medical Center from 2005 to 2009 were analyzed. Patients received either general sedation, spinal or ultrasound-guided regional nerve blocks as per decision of the attending anesthesiologist. Regional nerve blocks for major lower-extremity amputations consisted of femoral, sciatic, saphenous and popliteal nerve blocks. A retrospective inquiry of 30-day mortality was performed with reference to the Social Security Death Index and hospital records. One hundred and fifty-eight patients were included in the study (82 men and 86 women with mean age of 74.5 years ± 12.9 SD, range of 33-98 years) of which 46 patients had regional nerve blocks and 112 had GA or spinal blocks. Patients who received both regional blocks and GA/spinal blocks within 30 days were excluded. The overall 30-day mortality was 17.1% (27 patients) consisting of 15.2% for regional nerve analgesia versus 17.9% for GA/spinal blocks (P = 0.867). Age did not affect mortality outcome in either groups of anesthesia modality. Our analysis did not reveal any mortality benefit of utilizing regional nerve block over GA or spinal blocks.

Role of thoracic epidural block in improving post-operative outcome for septic patients: a preliminary report.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Sepsis is considered a relative contraindication for epidural blockade. Recent evidence indicates that thoracic epidural blockade may be of benefit during sepsis by improving gut perfusion. This study was planned to evaluate whether combining thoracic epidural blockade with general anaesthesia could decrease the post-operative mortality and morbidity in patients with sepsis due to perforation peritonitis. METHODS: This randomised non-blinded study included consenting adult patients of the American Society of Anesthesiologists grade II-III, undergoing emergency laparotomy for small intestinal perforation peritonitis. Severity of illness was evaluated using Mannheim Peritonitis Index, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III score and clinical indicators of systemic inflammatory response syndrome. Patients were randomised into two groups depending on the anaesthetic technique [general anaesthesia combined with thoracic epidural block (group GT) and general anaesthesia (group GA), n = 33 each. The thoracic block was extended from T5 to T10 using 0.125% bupivacaine in aliquots of 2-3 ml, with 50 µg fentanyl. Post-operatively, patients were followed for occurrence of any major morbidity till discharge from hospital, and 30-day mortality. 'Major morbidity' included development of organ failure. Post-operative markers for gut motility and perfusion, that is, time to passage of flatus, stools, resumption of oral feeds and occurrence of anastomotic leak were also observed. Sample size was calculated at power of 80% and α error of 0.05, aiming to detect a decrease of 50% in the incidence of post-operative major morbidity or mortality. RESULTS: Patients in the two groups were similar with respect to demographic profile and severity of sepsis. The number of patients with major morbidity or 30-day mortality were statistically similar between the two groups (group GT, 0/33; group GA 4/33; P = 0.114). A significantly shorter time to pass stools and resume oral feeds in group GT (4 ± 2 vs. 3 ± 1 days) (P = 0.006 and 0.012, respectively) and lesser incidence of anastomotic leak (0/33 vs. 4/33; P = 0.114) showed earlier recovery of gut motility and perfusion in that group. CONCLUSION: Use of intra-operative segmental thoracic epidural blockade performed in addition to general anaesthesia suggested some benefit in improving post-operative mortality or major morbidity, but the trend was not significant, perhaps due to the small sample size. There was, however, a significantly earlier return of bowel motility and earlier discharge from hospital.

Brief reports: paravertebral block for anesthesia: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this review was to assess the safety and efficacy of thoracic and lumbar paravertebral blocks (PVBs) for surgical anesthesia through a systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature. PVBs for surgical anesthesia were compared with general anesthesia (GA) or other regional anesthetic techniques. METHODS: We searched literature databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library up to May 2008. Included studies were limited to eligible randomized controlled trials. Eight randomized controlled trials were included in this review, 6 of which used PVBs for anesthesia during breast surgery, and 2 trials used PVB for anesthesia during herniorrhaphy. RESULTS: The ability to obtain firm conclusions was limited by the diversity of outcomes and how they were measured, which varied across studies. The PVB failure rate was not >13%, and patients were more satisfied with PVB than with GA. There was some indication that PVB could achieve shorter hospital stays than GA. PVB for anesthesia substantially reduces nausea and vomiting in comparison with GA (relative risk: 0.25, 95% CI: 0.13-0.50; P < 0.05), although it does carry a risk of pleural puncture and epidural spread of local anesthetic. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, based on the current evidence, PVBs for surgical anesthesia at the level of the thoracic and lumbar vertebrae are associated with less pain during the immediate postoperative period, as well as less postoperative nausea and vomiting, and greater patient satisfaction compared with GA.

Advanced regional anesthesia morbidity and mortality grading system: regional anesthesia outcomes reporting (ROAR).

OBJECTIVE: A regional anesthesia complication grading system (regional anesthesia outcomes reporting [ROAR]) was developed and applied to 1,213 consecutive patients over a 14-month period. The goal of the project was the creation of a system to standardize complication reporting in the regional anesthesia literature. DESIGN: Patient demographics, status as a war casualty, regional block procedure-specific details, and complication grade were entered into an Internet-based, encrypted Department of Defense database. Regional anesthesia complications were later graded and subcategorized depending on what phase of the block the procedural adverse event took place. RESULTS: One thousand ninety-eight (90.5%) patients had neither regional anesthesia associated technical difficulties or more severe complications. Of a total of 147 cases with adverse events among 115 patients (1.3 per patient), the majority (63.3%, 93/147) were low-grade complications resulting in no significant morbidity. The most common complications resulting in patient morbidity were failed block requiring catheter removal and/or supplemental block (35.4%, 17/48). High grade complications represented only 4.1% (6/147) of all peri-procedural morbidity. These complications included pneumothorax requiring tube thoracostomy, transient laryngeal nerve dysfunction, and cancellation of planned operation after peripheral nerve block or catheter placement. CONCLUSIONS: The value of the ROAR system is that it identifies important issues in risk management in regional anesthesia, thereby providing opportunities for further investigation and clinical practice refinement. Furthermore, it provides for a common language when reporting outcomes in the regional anesthesia literature. Use of the ROAR system will provide consistency in outcomes reporting and facilitate comparisons between methods and procedures.

Quality of reporting of regional anesthesia outcomes in the literature.

OBJECTIVE: Consistent and reliable standards for reporting of regional anesthetic adverse events are lacking. The quality of reporting of regional anesthetic morbidity has not been assessed critically. AIM: To evaluate quality of regional anesthesia outcomes reporting. Methods. Published retrospective or prospective observational cohort or randomized controlled trials in peer-reviewed journals were reviewed, and judged according to seven criteria related to quality of reporting of regional anesthesia complications: method of accrual, duration of data collection, definition of complication, morbidity and mortality rates, grade of complication severity, exclusion criteria, and study follow up. Differences in reporting outcomes according to study design, sample size and time period were compared. RESULTS: Ninety-one articles published from 1996-2006 involving 8,833 patients were analyzed. The majority of studies (75%) met < or =4 reporting criteria. Recently published, prospective studies with >200 patients were associated with significantly higher-quality reporting (P < 0.05). Fewer than 50% of studies reported at least one recognized, accepted complication with defined criteria or indicated duration of follow up. Reporting compliance was worse (29%) for reporting of actual morbidity rates, and complications leading to death. Complication severity grading related to regional anesthesia was reported in 2% of studies. CONCLUSION: Consistent and comparative regional anesthesia outcome data are lacking in peer-reviewed journals. A graded regional anesthetic morbidity and mortality system according to the intensity of therapy required for the treatment of the defined complication is proposed, along with a structured format for the reporting of regional anesthesia complications according to defined reporting standards.

Effects of perioperative central neuraxial analgesia on outcome after coronary artery bypass surgery: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative central neuraxial analgesia may improve outcome after coronary artery bypass surgery due to attenuation of stress response and superior analgesia. METHODS: MEDLINE and other databases were searched for randomized controlled trials in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass who were randomized to either general anesthesia (GA) versus general anesthesia-thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) or general anesthesia-intrathecal analgesia (IT). RESULTS: Fifteen trials enrolling 1178 patients were included for TEA analysis. TEA did not affect incidences of mortality (0.7% TEA vs. 0.3% GA) or myocardial infarction (2.3% TEA vs. 3.4% GA). TEA significantly reduced the risk of dysrhythmias with an odds ratio of 0.52, pulmonary complications with an odds ratio of 0.41, and time to tracheal extubation by 4.5 h and reduced analog pain scores at rest by 7.8 mm and with activity by 11.6 mm. Seventeen trials enrolling 668 patients were included for IT analysis. IT had no significant effect on incidences of mortality (0.3% IT vs. 0.6% GA), myocardial infarction (3.9% IT vs. 5.7% GA), dysrhythmias (24.8% vs. 29.1%), nausea/vomiting (31.3% vs. 28.5%), or time to tracheal extubation (10.4 h IT vs. 10.9 h GA). IT modestly decreased systemic morphine use by 11 mg and decreased pain scores by 16 mm. IT significantly increased the incidence of pruritus (10% vs. 2.5%). CONCLUSIONS: There were no differences in the rates of mortality or myocardial infarction after coronary artery bypass grafting with central neuraxial analgesia. There were associated improvements in faster time until tracheal extubation, decreased pulmonary complications and cardiac dysrhythmias, and reduced pain scores.

Deaths from paracervical anesthesia used for first-trimester abortion, 1972-1975.

Since January 1, 1972, five women in the United States are reported to have died from paracervical anesthesia used for first-trimester abortions. This report describes the three most recent deaths. Toxic doses of lidocaine, substantiated by post-mortem blood levels of 5 and 9 mug per milliliter, probably led to two deaths; an intolerance to or inadvertent intravenous administration of mepivacaine probably caused the third. Administration of an appropriate dose of local anesthetic appears to be the single most important factor in preventing catastrophic reactions.