Opioid-Sparing Effects of the Bupivacaine Pleural Catheter in Surgical Decompression of the Thoracic Outlet.

BACKGROUND: Rib resection in thoracic outlet decompression can result in significant postoperative pain requiring high levels of opioid medications. We evaluated the impact of a bupivacaine infusing pleural catheter on postoperative pain and opioid usage in patients undergoing rib resection for thoracic outlet syndrome. We hypothesized that delivery of local anesthetic via the pleural catheter would improve postoperative pain control compared to standard multimodal analgesia, and that the use of the catheter would decrease opioid use during the index hospitalization and prescriptions for opioid pain medications at discharge. METHODS: We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study of 26 patients who underwent rib resection for thoracic outlet decompression. Primary outcome was opioid consumption during the index hospitalization, measured in morphine milligram equivalents (MME). Secondary outcomes were MME prescribed at discharge and pain scores during the index hospitalization before and after the pleural drain and pleural catheter were removed. RESULTS: Patients in the bupivacaine infusion pleural catheter group (n = 11) had significantly lower MME usage during the index hospitalization (22.5 [1.9, 65.6] vs. 119.8 [76.5, 167.4]), and significantly lower MME prescribed at discharge (0 [0, 37.5] vs. 225 [183, 315]), compared to standard multimodal analgesia in controls (n = 15). Only 3 patients in the bupivacaine pleural catheter group were discharged with any opioid prescriptions (27%), compared to 14 patients in the control group (93%). There was no difference in postoperative pain scores between groups before or after removal of the pleural drain, which was placed in all cases (P = 0.31 and P = 0.76, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative placement of a bupivacaine infusion pleural catheter significantly reduced opioid use during the index hospitalization and opioid prescribing at discharge. Anesthetic infusion pleural catheters should be the treatment modality of choice for postoperative pain management in patients undergoing thoracic outlet decompression.

Reporting of intention-to-treat analyses in recent analgesic clinical trials: ACTTION systematic review and recommendations.

The intention-to-treat (ITT) principle states that all subjects in a randomized clinical trial (RCT) should be analyzed in the group to which they were assigned, regardless of compliance with assigned treatment. Analyses performed according to the ITT principle preserve the benefits of randomization and are recommended by regulators and statisticians for analyses of RCTs. The objective of this study was to determine the frequency with which publications of analgesic RCTs in 3 major pain journals report an ITT analysis and the percentage of the author-declared ITT analyses that include all randomized subjects and thereby fulfill the most common interpretation of the ITT principle. RCTs investigating noninvasive, pharmacologic and interventional (eg, nerve blocks, implantable pumps, spinal cord stimulators, surgery) treatments for pain, published between January 2006 and June 2013 (n=173), were included. None of the trials using experimental pain models reported an ITT analysis; 47% of trials investigating clinical pain conditions reported an ITT analysis, and 5% reported a modified ITT analysis. Of the analyses reported as ITT, 67% reported reasons for excluding subjects from the analysis, and 18% of those listing reasons for exclusion did not do so in the Methods section. Such mislabeling can make it difficult to identify traditional ITT analyses for inclusion in meta-analyses. We hope that deficiencies in reporting identified in this study will encourage authors, reviewers, and editors to promote more consistent use of the term "intention to treat" for more accurate reporting of RCT-based evidence for pain treatments.