Using the nociception level index to compare the intraoperative antinociceptive effect of propofol and sevoflurane during clinical and experimental noxious stimulus in patients under general anesthesia.

STUDY: Propofol and sevoflurane are two anesthetic agents widely used to induce and maintain general anesthesia (GA). Their intrinsic antinociceptive properties remain unclear and are still debated. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether propofol presents stronger antinociceptive properties than sevoflurane using intraoperative clinical and experimental noxious stimulations and evaluating postoperative pain outcomes. DESIGN: A prospective randomized monocentric trial. SETTING: Perioperative care. PATIENTS: 60 adult patients with ASA status I to III who underwent elective abdominal laparoscopic surgery under GA were randomized either in propofol or sevoflurane group to induce and maintain GA. INTERVENTIONS: We used clinical and experimental noxious stimulations (intubation, tetanic stimulation) to assess the antinociceptive properties of propofol and sevoflurane in patients under GA and monitored using the NOL index, BIS index, heart rate, and mean arterial blood pressure. MEASUREMENTS: We measured the difference in the NOL index alterations after intubation and tetanic stimulation during either intravenous anesthesia (propofol) or inhaled anesthesia (sevoflurane). We also intraoperatively measured the NOL index and remifentanil consumption and recorded postoperative pain scores and opioid consumption in the post-anesthesia care unit. Intraoperative management was standardized by targeting similar values of depth of anesthesia (BIS index), hemodynamic (HR and MAP), NOL index values (below the threshold of 20), same multimodal analgesia and type of surgery. MAIN RESULTS: We found the antinociceptive properties of propofol and sevoflurane similar. The only minor difference was after tetanic stimulation: the delta NOL was higher in the sevoflurane group (39 ± 13 for the propofol group versus 47 ± 15 for sevoflurane; P = 0.04). Intraoperative and postoperative pain outcomes and opioid consumption were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a precise intraoperative experimental and clinical protocol using the NOL index, propofol does not provide a higher level of antinociception during anesthesia or analgesia after surgery when compared to sevoflurane. Anesthesiologists may prefer propofol over sevoflurane to reduce PONV or anesthesia-related pollution, but not for superior antinociceptive properties.

Chronic postsurgical pain: A European survey.

BACKGROUND: Chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP) is a clinical problem, and large prospective studies are needed to determine its incidence, characteristics, and risk factors. OBJECTIVE: To find predictive factors for CPSP in an international survey. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: Multicentre European prospective observational trial. PATIENTS: Patients undergoing breast cancer surgery, sternotomy, endometriosis surgery, or total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHOD: Standardised questionnaires were completed by the patients at 1, 3, and 7 days, and at 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery, with follow-up via E-mail, telephone, or interview. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary goal of NIT-1 was to propose a scoring system to predict those patient likely to have CPSP at 6 months after surgery. RESULTS: A total of 3297 patients were included from 18 hospitals across Europe and 2494 patients were followed-up for 6 months. The mean incidence of CPSP at 6 months was 10.5%, with variations depending on the type of surgery: sternotomy 6.9%, breast surgery 7.4%, TKA 12.9%, endometriosis 16.2%. At 6 months, neuropathic characteristics were frequent for all types of surgery: sternotomy 33.3%, breast surgery 67.6%, TKA 42.4%, endometriosis 41.4%. One-third of patients experienced CPSP at both 3 and 6 months. Pre-operative pain was frequent for TKA (leg pain) and endometriosis (abdomen) and its frequency and intensity were reduced after surgery. Severe CPSP and a neuropathic pain component decreased psychological and functional wellbeing as well as quality of life. No overarching CPSP risk factors were identified. CONCLUSION: Unfortunately, our findings do not offer a new CPSP predictive score. However, we present reliable new data on the incidence, characteristics, and consequences of CPSP from a large European survey. Interesting new data on the time course of CPSP, its neuropathic pain component, and CPSP after endometriosis surgery generate new hypotheses but need to be confirmed by further research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT03834922.

Limited impact of a top-down approach to improve enhanced recovery programme in French university hospitals: a before-after retrospective survey.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery programme (ERP) after surgery needs development in Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris (APHP). METHODS: A retrospective before-and-after study was performed in 2015 and 2017 on three surgical models (total knee arthroplasty (TKA), colectomy and hysterectomy) in 17 hospitals including 29 surgical departments. Data were collected in one control intervention (total hip arthroplasty (THA), gastrectomy and ovariectomy). In 2016, Massive Open Online Course on ERP and a day meeting information were developed by APHP. A national update on ERP was also organized by HAS and a regional professional partnership programme was started. Primary outcomes were length of stay (LOS) and complications after surgery. Data on ERP items were collected in the patients' chart and in anaesthetist and surgeon interview. Seventy percent application rate reflects application of ERP procedure. RESULTS: 1321 patient's files were analysed (812 in 2015 and 509 in 2017). The LOS (mean (SD)) is reduced by 1.6 day for TKA (2015, 8.7 (6.7) versus 7.1 (3.4) in 2017; p<0.001) but stable for colectomy and hysterectomy. Incidence of severe complications after surgery is unchanged in all types of surgical models. For TKA and hysterectomy respectively applied items of ERP (i.e. >70% application) increased respectively from 5 to 7 out of 17 and 16 in 2015 and 2017. For colectomy, they were stable at 6 out of 21 in 2015 and 2017. The mean application rates of ERP items stayed below 50% in all cases in 2017. The LOS was negatively correlated with ERP items' application when data collected in 2015 and 2017 were analysed together. CONCLUSION: ERP application did not significantly improved between 2015 and 2017 for three surgical models after an institutional information and diffusion of recommendations in 29 surgical departments of seventeen French University hospitals underlining the limit of a top-down approach.

Opioid-Free Anesthesia Benefit-Risk Balance: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) is used in surgery to avoid opioid-related side effects. However, uncertainty exists in the balance between OFA benefits and risks. We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing OFA to opioid-based anesthesia (OBA) in five international databases. The co-primary outcomes were postoperative acute pain and morphine consumption at 2, 24, and 48 h. The secondary outcomes were the incidence of postoperative chronic pain, hemodynamic tolerance, severe adverse effects, opioid-related adverse effects, and specific adverse effects related to substitution drugs. Overall, 33 RCTs including 2209 participants were assessed. At 2 h, the OFA groups had lower pain scores at rest MD (0.75 (-1.18; -0.32)), which did not definitively reach MCID. Less morphine was required in the OFA groups at 2 and 24 h, but with very small reductions: 1.61 mg (-2.69; -0.53) and -1.73 mg (p < 0.05), respectively, both not reaching MCID. The reduction in PONV in the OFA group in the PACU presented an RR of 0.46 (0.38, 0.56) and an RR of 0.34 (0.21; 0.56), respectively. Less sedation and shivering were observed in the OFA groups with an SMD of -0.81 (-1.05; -0.58) and an RR of 0.48 (0.33; 0.70), respectively. Quantitative analysis did not reveal differences between the hemodynamic outcomes, although severe side effects have been identified in the literature. No clinically significant benefits were observed with OFA in terms of pain and opioid use after surgery. A clear benefit of OFA use was observed with respect to a reduction in PONV. However, more data on the safe use of OFAs should be collected and caution should be taken in the development of OFA.

Paravertebral block for the prevention of chronic postsurgical pain after breast cancer surgery.

Patients frequently report chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP) after breast cancer surgery (BCS). The paravertebral block (PVB) is an effective technique to reduce acute postoperative pain after BCS, but its efficacy in preventing CPSP is unclear. This meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy of PVB in preventing CPSP after BCS. We searched Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for studies comparing PVB with control for CPSP prevention after BCS, from inception to April 2020. The primary outcome was CPSP at 6 months, and the secondary outcomes were CPSP at 3 and 12 months, chronic postsurgical neuropathic pain (CPSNP) at 6 months, and PVB-related complications. Data were pooled and analyzed with a random-effects model, and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) system was used to evaluate the certainty of evidence. A total of 12 studies were included in the study; data for the 6-month time point from 7 studies (2161 patients) were analyzed, and no difference was found between PVB and control in terms of efficacy in preventing CPSP after BCS (risk ratio (RR) 0.82 (95% CI 0.62 to 1.08)), with a moderate quality of evidence according to the GRADE system. Similar results were obtained at 3 and 12 months (RR 0.78 (95% CI 0.57 to 1.06), RR 0.45 (95% CI 0.14 to 1.41), respectively). Data for the 12-month time point from seven studies (2087 patients) were analyzed and showed that PVB protected against CPSNP, with low quality of evidence (RR 0.51 (95% CI 0.31 to 0.85)). In conclusion, CPSP was not found significantly prevented by PVB after BCS despite the limits in the included studies; nevertheless, PVB could prevent CPSNP by impacting the transition from acute to chronic pain.

Two per cent alcoholic chlorhexidine versus alcoholic five per cent povidone-iodine for the prevention of perineural catheter colonisation: The CHLOVEPI randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Multimodal analgesia, including a regional technique using perineural catheters (PNCs), is recommended for the treatment of moderate-to-severe acute postoperative pain. Perineural catheters are at risk of bacterial colonisation. In this study, we compared the cutaneous antiseptic efficacy of 2% alcoholic chlorhexidine and povidone-iodine-alcohol for preventing the bacterial colonisation of PNCs in orthopaedic surgery. METHODS: We performed a randomised, controlled trial, comparing two cutaneous antisepsis strategies, one based on 2% alcoholic chlorhexidine and the other on povidone-iodine-5% alcohol, for placed PNCs before orthopaedic surgery. The primary endpoint was the incidence of catheter bacterial colonisation (threshold > 1000 colony-forming units/ml). The secondary endpoints were the incidence of catheter-related infections and the adverse effects of the antiseptic solutions. RESULTS: From November 2016 to May 2018, we included 113 patients in this study. The use of alcoholic chlorhexidine was associated with a lower incidence of catheter colonisation (15.5% (n = 9) versus 32.7% (n = 18); OR: 0.28 [0.09-0.77], p = 0.01). No catheter-related infections or adverse effects of antiseptic solutions were observed in either group. The risk factors associated with colonisation were a duration of catheter use ≥ 3 days (p = 0.04) and obesity (p = 0.005). The most frequently identified bacterium was Staphylococcus epidermidis. CONCLUSION: Skin disinfection with 2% alcoholic chlorhexidine decreases bacterial colonisation rates for placed perineural catheters.

How to rationalize preoperative tests? A method to implement local guidelines successfully.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative screening includes clinical examination and tests. Systematic prescription leads to excessive tests. We conducted an observational retrospective study to assess the success of implementing a protocol-guided prescription procedure for preoperative tests (PTs). We compared the number of PTs prescribed for scheduled surgery before and after the implementation of local guidelines with a specific method. METHODS: Local guidelines for prescribing PTs based on the French Society of Anaesthesia's recommendations were developed, validated by the anaesthesia team and actively implemented. The implementation procedure was complex and based on the application of sociologic concepts to facilitate PT prescriptions in accordance with the protocol. All PTs (except for children and emergency surgeries) prescribed over a one-week observation period were analysed before and after protocol implementation, respectively in 2011 and 2013. RESULTS: Two hundred and ninety-two patient files were analysed: 157 in 2011 and 135 in 2013. Ninety-one percent of the prescriptions were in accordance with the recommendations in 2013. Excessive prescribing decreased significantly after the implementation of recommendations (7.1% versus 20.7%, P<0.0001), enabling us to reduce excess costs. CONCLUSION: We observed excellent adherence to the prescription protocol for PTs. The method used to implement the protocol was successful. A future evaluation should be undertaken to confirm these results over the long-term.