Ultrasound-guided genitofemoral nerve block for femoral arterial access gain and closure: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare the analgesic efficacy and safety of the femoral branch block of the genitofemoral nerve (FBB) versus local infiltration anesthesia (LIA) for femoral arterial access gain and closure. METHODS: Eighty-two patients (age, 64.8 ± 10.9 years; female, 30.5%) undergoing endovascular procedures using 5-Fr femoral sheath were assigned to either FBB (n = 41) or LIA (n = 41). In both groups, 2% lidocaine HCL with 1:100,000 epinephrine was used as an anesthetic solution. Pain scores during access gain and closure were evaluated using a visual analog scale (score 0-10), patient satisfaction levels with the quality of anesthesia were scored on a 7-point Likert scale, and adverse events were recorded. RESULTS: The primary endpoint, pain scores during access closure, was significantly lower in the FBB group than in the LIA group (0.1 ± 0.37 vs 1.73 ± 0.92; p < 0.001). The FBB group also had significantly lower pain scores during access gain compared to the LIA group (0.83 ± 0.83 vs 2.78 ± 1.26; p < 0.001). There was an inverse relationship between pain scores and FBB after adjustment for age, gender, and body mass index (p < 0.001). FBB group reported significantly higher satisfaction with anesthesia quality compared to the LIA group (6.49 ± 0.64 vs 4.05 ± 1.05; p < 0.001). No complications were recognized in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound-guided genitofemoral nerve blocks offered better acute pain relief and higher patient satisfaction than LIA during femoral arterial access gain and closure. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: In this prospective randomized controlled trial, ultrasound-guided genitofemoral nerve blocks offered better acute pain relief than local infiltration anesthesia, resulting in enhanced patient satisfaction. KEY POINTS: • FBB provided better pain relief during access gain and closure than LIA. • FBB offered higher patient satisfaction with the quality of anesthesia than LIA. • No anesthesia-related or access site complications were recognized in either treatment group.

Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial to investigate the effectiveness of thoracic epidural and paravertebral blockade in reducing chronic post-thoracotomy pain: 2 (TOPIC 2).

BACKGROUND: Thoracotomy is considered one of the most painful surgical procedures and can cause debilitating chronic post-surgical pain lasting months or years postoperatively. Aggressive management of acute pain resulting from thoracotomy may reduce the likelihood of developing chronic pain. This trial compares the two most commonly used modes of acute analgesia provision at the time of thoracotomy (thoracic epidural blockade (TEB) and paravertebral blockade (PVB)) in terms of their clinical and cost-effectiveness in preventing chronic post-thoracotomy pain. METHODS: TOPIC 2 is a multi-centre, open-label, parallel group, superiority, randomised controlled trial, with an internal pilot investigating the use of TEB and PVB in 1026 adult (≥ 18 years old) patients undergoing thoracotomy in up to 20 thoracic centres throughout the UK. Patients (N = 1026) will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive either TEB or PVB. During the first year, the trial will include an integrated QuinteT (Qualitative Research Integrated into Trials) Recruitment Intervention (QRI) with the aim of optimising recruitment and informed consent. The primary outcome is the incidence of chronic post-surgical pain at 6 months post-randomisation defined as 'worst chest pain over the last week' equating to a visual analogue score greater than or equal to 40 mm indicating at least a moderate level of pain. Secondary outcomes include acute pain, complications of regional analgesia and surgery, health-related quality of life, mortality and a health economic analysis. DISCUSSION: Both TEB and PVB have been demonstrated to be effective in the prevention of acute pain following thoracotomy and nationally practice is divided. Identification of which mode of analgesia is both clinically and cost-effective in preventing chronic post-thoracotomy pain could ameliorate the debilitating effects of chronic pain, improving health-related quality of life, facilitating return to work and caring responsibilities and resulting in a cost saving to the NHS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03677856 [ClinicalTrials.gov] registered September 19, 2018. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03677856 . First patient recruited 8 January 2019.

A pilot randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study of omega-3 fatty acids to prevent paclitaxel-associated acute pain syndrome in breast cancer patients: Alliance A22_Pilot2.

PURPOSE: Paclitaxel is associated with an acute pain syndrome (P-APS- and chronic chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN). P-APS is associated with higher risk of CIPN. Omega-3 fatty acids have well-established anti-inflammatory and neuroprotective properties. The primary purpose of this pilot study was to assess whether omega-3 fatty acids could decrease P-APS and thus CIPN. METHODS: Patients scheduled to receive weekly paclitaxel for breast cancer were randomized to receive 4 g of omega-3 acid ethyl esters (Lovaza) or placebo, beginning 1 week prior and continued until paclitaxel was stopped. Patients completed acute pain questionnaires at baseline, daily after each treatment, and 1 month after completion of therapy. RESULTS: Sixty patients (49 evaluable) were randomized to treatment versus placebo. Seventeen (68.0%) patients receiving the omega-3 fatty acids intervention experienced P-APS, compared to 15 (62.5%) of those receiving placebo during the first week of treatment (p = 0.77). Over the full 12-week study, 21 (84.0%) patients receiving the omega-3 fatty acid intervention experienced P-APS, compared to 21 (87.5%) of those receiving placebo (p = 1.0). Secondary outcomes suggested that those in the intervention arm used more over-the-counter analgesics (OR: 1.65, 95% CI: 0.72-3.78, p = 0.23), used more opiates (OR: 2.06, 95% CI: 0.55-7.75, p = 0.28), and experienced higher levels of CIPN (12.8, 95% CI: 7.6-19.4 vs. 8.4, 95% CI: 4.6-13.2, p = 0.21). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this pilot study do not support further study of the use of omega-3 fatty acids for the prevention of the P-APS and CIPN. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Number: NCT01821833.

Comparison of the effects of one-level and bi-level pre-incisional erector spinae plane block on postoperative acute pain in video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery; a prospective, randomized, double-blind trial.

BACKGROUND: This prospective, randomized, double-blind trial aimed to compare the postoperative analgesic efficacy of One-Level pre-incisional erector spinae plane block (ESPB) and Bi-Level pre-incisional ESPB in patients undergoing video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS). METHODS: This pilot trial was conducted between April 2022 and February 2023 with sixty patients. The patients were randomly divided into two groups. In One-Level ESPB Group (n = 30) block was performed at the thoracal(T)5 level with the 30 ml 0.25% bupivacaine. In the Bi-Level ESPB Group (n = 30) block was performed at T4 and T6 levels by using 15 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine for each level. In the postoperative period, 50 mg dexketoprofen every 12 h and 1 g paracetamol every 8 h were given intravenously (IV). Patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) prepared with morphine was applied to the patients. 0.5 mg/kg of tramadol was administered via IV for rescue analgesia. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores were recorded in the postoperative 1st, 2nd, 4th, 12th, 24th, and 48th -hours. The need for additional analgesics and side effects were recorded. In two groups, patients' demographics and postoperative hemodynamic data were recorded. RESULTS: VAS scores at resting were statistically significantly higher at the 1st (p: 0.002) and 4th -hour (p: 0.001) in the One-Level ESPB. When the groups were evaluated in terms of VAS coughing scores, the 4th -hour (p: 0.001) VAS coughing scores results were found to be statistically significantly higher in the One-Level ESPB group. In terms of VAS values evaluated during follow-up, the rates of VAS coughing score > 3 values were found to be statistically significantly lower in the Bi-Level ESPB group (p: 0.011). There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of side effects, morphine consumption, and additional analgesic use (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Adequate analgesia was achieved in the early postoperative period in the group treated with Bi-Level ESPB with similar morphine consumption and side effects. This may be an advantage, especially in the early postoperative period when the pain is quite intense.

Use of regional analgesia to prevent the conversion from acute to chronic pain.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Chronic post-surgical pain (CPSP) prevalence has not changed over the past decades what questions the efficacy of preventive strategies. Regional analgesia is used to control acute pain, but preventive effect on CPSP remains debated. Failures and future application of regional analgesia to prevent transition from acute to chronic pain will be discussed. RECENT FINDINGS: After thoracotomy, perioperative regional analgesia does not seem to prevent CPSP. After breast cancer surgery, paravertebral block might prevent CPSP intensity and impact on daily life up to 12 months, particularly in high catastrophizing patients. In knee arthroplasty, perioperative regional analgesia or preoperative genicular nerve neuroablation do not prevent CPSP, although current studies present several bias. The protective role of effective regional analgesia and early pain relief in trauma patients deserves further studies. SUMMARY: Regional analgesia failure to prevent CPSP development should prompt us to reconsider its perioperative utilization. Patients' stratification, for example high-pain responders, might help to target those who will most benefit of regional analgesia. The impact of regional analgesia on secondary pain-related outcomes such as intensity and neuropathic character despite no difference on CPSP incidence requires more studies. Finally, the preventive effect of regional analgesia targeted interventions on CPSP in patients suffering from severe subacute pain deserves to be assessed.

Assessment of Intercostal Nerve Block Analgesia for Thoracic Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: The use of intercostal nerve block (ICNB) analgesia with local anesthesia is common in thoracic surgery. However, the benefits and safety of ICNB among adult patients undergoing surgery is unknown. Objective: To evaluate the analgesic benefits and safety of ICNB among adults undergoing thoracic surgery. Data Sources: A systematic search was performed in Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library databases using terms for ICNB and thoracic surgery (including thoracic surgery, thoracoscopy, thoracotomy, nerve block, intercostal nerves). The search and results were not limited by date, with the last search conducted on July 24, 2020. Study Selection: Selected studies were experimental or observational and included adult patients undergoing cardiothoracic surgery in which ICNB was administered with local anesthesia via single injection, continuous infusion, or a combination of both techniques in at least 1 group of patients. For comparison with ICNB, studies that examined systemic analgesia and different forms of regional analgesia (such as thoracic epidural analgesia [TEA], paravertebral block [PVB], and other techniques) were included. These criteria were applied independently by 2 authors, and discrepancies were resolved by consensus. A total of 694 records were selected for screening. Data Extraction and Synthesis: This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. Data including patient characteristics, type of surgery, intervention analgesia, comparison analgesia, and primary and secondary outcomes were extracted independently by 3 authors. Synthesis was performed using a fixed-effects model. Main Outcomes and Measures: The coprimary outcomes were postoperative pain intensity (measured as the worst static or dynamic pain using a validated 10-point scale, with 0 indicating no pain and 10 indicating severe pain) and opioid consumption (measured in morphine milligram equivalents [MMEs]) at prespecified intervals (0-6 hours, 7-24 hours, 25-48 hours, 49-72 hours, and >72 hours). Clinically relevant analgesia was defined as a 1-point or greater difference in pain intensity score at any interval. Secondary outcomes included 30-day postoperative complications and pulmonary function. Results: Of 694 records screened, 608 were excluded based on prespecified exclusion criteria. The remaining 86 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, and 20 of those articles were excluded. All of the 66 remaining studies (5184 patients; mean [SD] age, 53.9 [10.2] years; approximately 59% men and 41% women) were included in the qualitative analysis, and 59 studies (3325 patients) that provided data for at least 1 outcome were included in the quantitative meta-analysis. Experimental studies had a high risk of bias in multiple domains, including allocation concealment, blinding of participants and personnel, and blinding of outcome assessors. Marked differences (eg, crossover studies, timing of the intervention [intraoperative vs postoperative], blinding, and type of control group) were observed in the design and implementation of studies. The use of ICNB vs systemic analgesia was associated with lower static pain (0-6 hours after surgery: mean score difference, -1.40 points [95% CI, -1.46 to -1.33 points]; 7-24 hours after surgery: mean score difference, -1.27 points [95% CI, -1.40 to -1.13 points]) and lower dynamic pain (0-6 hours after surgery: mean score difference, -1.66 points [95% CI, -1.90 to -1.41 points]; 7-24 hours after surgery: mean score difference, -1.43 points [95% CI, -1.70 to -1.17 points]). Intercostal nerve block analgesia was noninferior to TEA (mean score difference in worst dynamic panic at 7-24 hours after surgery: 0.79 points; 95% CI, 0.28-1.29 points) and marginally inferior to PVB (mean score difference in worst dynamic pain at 7-24 hours after surgery: 1.29 points; 95% CI, 1.16 to 1.41 points). The largest opioid-sparing effect of ICNB vs systemic analgesia occurred at 48 hours after surgery (mean difference, -10.97 MMEs; 95% CI, -12.92 to -9.02 MMEs). The use of ICNB was associated with higher MME values compared with TEA (eg, 48 hours after surgery: mean difference, 48.31 MMEs; 95% CI, 36.11-60.52 MMEs) and PVB (eg, 48 hours after surgery: mean difference, 3.87 MMEs; 95% CI, 2.59-5.15 MMEs). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, single-injection ICNB was associated with a reduction in pain during the first 24 hours after thoracic surgery and was clinically noninferior to TEA or PVB. Intercostal nerve block analgesia had opioid-sparing effects; however, TEA and PVB were associated with larger decreases in postoperative MMEs, suggesting that ICNB may be most beneficial for cases in which TEA and PVB are not indicated.

Acute Visceral Pain in Rats: Vagal Nerve Block Compared to Bupivacaine Administered Intramuscularly.

BACKGROUND: Visceral and parietal peritoneum layers have different sensory innervations. Most visceral peritoneum sensory information is conveyed via the vagus nerve to the nucleus of the solitary tract (NTS). We already showed in animal models that intramuscular (i.m.) injection of local anesthetics decreases acute somatic and visceral pain and general inflammation induced by aseptic peritonitis. The goal of the study was to compare the effects of parietal block, i.m. bupivacaine, and vagotomy on spinal cord and NTS stimulation induced by a chemical peritonitis. METHODS: We induced peritonitis in rats using carrageenan and measured cellular activation in spinal cord and NTS under the following conditions, that is, a parietal nerve block with bupivacaine, a chemical right vagotomy, and i.m. microspheres loaded with bupivacaine. Proto-oncogene c-Fos (c-Fos), cluster of differentiation protein 11b (CD11b), and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) expression in cord and NTS were studied. RESULTS: c-Fos activation in the cord was inhibited by nerve block 2 hours after peritoneal insult. Vagotomy and i.m. bupivacaine similarly inhibited c-Fos activation in NTS. Forty-eight hours after peritoneal insult, the number of cells expressing CD11b significantly increased in the cord (P = .010). The median difference in the effect of peritonitis compared to control was 30 cells (CI95, 13.5-55). TNF-α colocalized with CD11b. Vagotomy inhibited this microglial activation in the NTS, but not in the cord. This activation was inhibited by i.m. bupivacaine both in cord and in NTS. The median difference in the effect of i.m. bupivacaine added to peritonitis was 29 cells (80% increase) in the cord and 18 cells (75% increase) in the NTS. Our study underlines the role of the vagus nerve in the transmission of an acute visceral pain message and confirmed that systemic bupivacaine prevents noxious stimuli by inhibiting c-Fos and microglia activation. CONCLUSIONS: In rats receiving intraperitoneal carrageenan, i.m. bupivacaine similarly inhibited c-Fos and microglial activation both in cord and in the NTS. Vagal block inhibited activation only in the NTS. Our study underlines the role of the vagus nerve in the transmission of an acute visceral pain message and confirmed that systemic bupivacaine prevents noxious stimuli. This emphasizes the effects of systemic local anesthetics on inflammation and visceral pain.

Pre-emptive and preventive NSAIDs for postoperative pain in adults undergoing all types of surgery.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pain is a common consequence of surgery and can have many negative perioperative effects. It has been suggested that the administration of analgesia before a painful stimulus may improve pain control. We defined pre-emptive nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs) as those given before surgery but not continued afterwards and preventive NSAIDs as those given before surgery and continued afterwards. These were compared to a control group given the NSAIDs after surgery instead of before surgery. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of preventive and pre-emptive NSAIDs for reducing postoperative pain in adults undergoing all types of surgery. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following electronic databases: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, AMED and CINAHL (up to June 2020). In addition, we searched for unpublished studies in three clinical trial databases, conference proceedings, grey literature databases, and reference lists of retrieved articles. We did not apply any restrictions on language or date of publication. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included parallel-group randomized controlled trials (RCTs) only. We included adult participants undergoing any type of surgery. We defined pre-emptive NSAIDs as those given before surgery but not continued afterwards and preventive NSAIDs as those given before surgery and continued afterwards. These were compared to a control group given the NSAIDs after surgery instead of before surgery. We included studies that gave the medication by any route but not given on the skin. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the standard methods expected by Cochrane, as well as a novel publication bias test developed by our research group. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. Outcomes included acute postoperative pain (minimal clinically important difference (MCID): 1.5 on a 0-10 scale), adverse events of NSAIDs, nausea and vomiting, 24-hour morphine consumption (MCID: 10 mg reduction), time to analgesic request (MCID: one hour), pruritus, sedation, patient satisfaction, chronic pain and time to first bowel movement (MCID: 12 hours). MAIN RESULTS: We included 71 RCTs. Seven studies are awaiting classification. We included 45 studies that evaluated pre-emptive NSAIDs and 26 studies that evaluated preventive NSAIDs. We considered only four studies to be at low risk of bias for most domains. The operations and NSAIDs used varied, although most studies were conducted in abdominal, orthopaedic and dental surgery. Most studies were conducted in secondary care and in low-risk participants. Common exclusions were participants on analgesic medications prior to surgery and those with chronic pain. Pre-emptive NSAIDs compared to post-incision NSAIDs For pre-emptive NSAIDs, there is probably a decrease in early acute postoperative pain (MD -0.69, 95% CI -0.97 to -0.41; studies = 36; participants = 2032; I2 = 96%; moderate-certainty evidence). None of the included studies that reported on acute postoperative pain reported adverse events as an outcome. There may be little or no difference between the groups in short-term (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.34 to 2.94; studies = 2; participants = 100; I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence) or long-term nausea and vomiting (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.38; studies = 5; participants = 228; I2 = 29%; low-certainty evidence). There may be a reduction in late acute postoperative pain (MD -0.22, 95% CI -0.44 to 0.00; studies = 28; participants = 1645; I2 = 97%; low-certainty evidence). There may be a reduction in 24-hour morphine consumption with pre-emptive NSAIDs (MD -5.62 mg, 95% CI -9.00 mg to -2.24 mg; studies = 16; participants = 854; I2 = 99%; low-certainty evidence) and an increase in the time to analgesic request (MD 17.04 minutes, 95% CI 3.77 minutes to 30.31 minutes; studies = 18; participants = 975; I2 = 95%; low-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference in opioid adverse events such as pruritus (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.76; studies = 4; participants = 254; I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence) or sedation (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.68; studies = 4; participants = 281; I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence), although the number of included studies for these outcomes was small. No study reported patient satisfaction, chronic pain or time to first bowel movement for pre-emptive NSAIDs. Preventive NSAIDs compared to post-incision NSAIDs For preventive NSAIDs, there may be little or no difference in early acute postoperative pain (MD -0.14, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.12; studies = 18; participants = 1140; I2 = 75%; low-certainty evidence). One study reported adverse events from NSAIDs (reoperation for bleeding) although the events were low which did not allow any meaningful conclusions to be drawn (RR 1.95; 95% CI 0.18 to 20.68). There may be little or no difference in rates of short-term (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.49 to 3.30; studies = 1; participants = 76; low-certainty evidence) or long-term (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.38; studies = 5; participants = 456; I2 = 29%; low-certainty evidence) nausea and vomiting. There may be a reduction in late acute postoperative pain (MD -0.33, 95% CI -0.59 to -0.07; studies = 21; participants = 1441; I2 = 81%; low-certainty evidence). There is probably a reduction in 24-hour morphine consumption (MD -1.93 mg, 95% CI -3.55 mg to -0.32 mg; studies = 16; participants = 1323; I2 = 49%; moderate-certainty evidence). It is uncertain if there is any difference in time to analgesic request (MD 8.51 minutes, 95% CI -31.24 minutes to 48.27 minutes; studies = 8; participants = 410; I2 = 98%; very low-certainty evidence). As with pre-emptive NSAIDs, there may be little or no difference in other opioid adverse events such as pruritus (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.09 to 3.35; studies = 3; participants = 211; I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence) and sedation (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.63; studies = 5; participants = 497; I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference in patient satisfaction (MD -0.42; 95% CI -1.09 to 0.25; studies = 1; participants = 72; moderate-certainty evidence). No study reported on chronic pain. There is probably little or no difference in time to first bowel movement (MD 0.00; 95% CI -15.99 to 15.99; studies = 1; participants = 76; moderate-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There was some evidence that pre-emptive and preventive NSAIDs reduce both pain and morphine consumption, although this was not universal for all pain and morphine consumption outcomes. Any differences found were not clinically significant, although we cannot exclude this in more painful operations. Moreover, without any evidence of reductions in opioid adverse effects, the clinical significance of these results is questionable although few studies reported these outcomes. Only one study reported clinically significant adverse events from NSAIDs administered before surgery and, therefore, we have very few data to assess the safety of either pre-emptive or preventive NSAIDs. Therefore, future research should aim to adhere to the highest methodology and be adequately powered to assess serious adverse events of NSAIDs and reductions in opioid adverse events.

Recurrent and acute abdominal pain as the main clinical manifestation in patients with hereditary angioedema.

Background: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a rare disease that often leads to misdiagnosis. The delay of diagnosis is > 10 years in China. Recurrent and acute abdominal pain is one of the common symptoms of HAE. Because of the high misdiagnosis rate, it usually results in unnecessary surgical procedures. This study focused on the clinical symptoms and management of HAE-related abdominal attacks in Chinese patients to provide some new insight for the emergency department (ED) physicians and gastroenterologists. Methods: A Web-based survey was conducted among 107 patients with HAE from 94 unrelated families. Detailed questions with respect to the abdominal attacks were asked, including the frequency, symptoms, and duration before and after confirmed diagnosis. The demographic characteristics, diagnosis process, and treatment outcomes were also included. Results: Approximately 70% of the patients with HAE presented with abdominal symptoms during the onset of edema, mostly characterized by pain (94.8%), nausea (83.1%), vomiting (83.1%), diarrhea (59.7%), and constipation (23.4%). The patients were easily misdiagnosed as having gastroenteritis (35.1%) and appendicitis (10.4%), and 24.7% of them received unnecessary appendectomy or laparotomy. Danazol, a widely used drug for long-term prophylaxis of HAE in China, can reduce the attack frequency and alleviate the abdominal symptoms, but the adverse effects are also significant and more severe in women. Conclusions: Abdominal symptoms are common and important clinical features of HAE but are easily confused with other gastrointestinal diseases. ED physicians and gastroenterologists should consider HAE when patients experience recurrent and unexplained abdominal pain. Proper medical treatment should be administered in a timely manner if an HAE diagnosis is confirmed and efforts are required to increase access in China to medications both for on-demand treatment and long-term prophylaxis.

Ultra-purified alginate gel implantation decreases inflammatory cytokine levels, prevents intervertebral disc degeneration, and reduces acute pain after discectomy.

Lumbar intervertebral disc (IVD) herniation causes severe low back pain (LBP), which results in substantial financial and emotional strains. Despite the effectiveness of discectomy, there is no existing treatment for post-operative LBP induced by progressive IVD degeneration. Two key factors of LBP are intradiscal inflammation, indicated by tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) and interleukin-6 (IL-6), and sensory nerve ingrowth into the inner layer of the annulus fibrosus, triggered by nerve growth factor/high-affinity tyrosine kinase A (TrkA) signalling. In an animal models of discectomy, the bioresorbable ultra-purified alginate (UPAL) gel with an extremely low-toxicity has been effective in acellular tissue repair. We aimed to investigate whether UPAL gel can alleviate LBP using a rat nucleus pulposus (NP) punch model and a rabbit NP aspirate model. In both models, we assessed TNF-α and IL-6 production and TrkA expression within the IVD by immunohistochemistry. Further, histological analysis and behavioural nociception assay were conducted in the rat model. UPAL gel implantation suppressed TNF-α and IL-6 production, downregulated TrkA expression, inhibited IVD degeneration, and reduced nociceptive behaviour. Our results suggest the potential of UPAL gel implantation as an innovative treatment for IVD herniation by reducing LBP and preventing IVD degeneration after discectomy.

Development and evaluation of an educational video for families on the relief of acute pain in babies / Desarrollo y evaluación de un video educativo familiar sobre el alivio del dolor agudo del bebé / Desenvolvimento e avaliação de vídeo educativo para família sobre alívio da dor aguda do bebê

ABSTRACT Objective To develop and evaluate an educational video for active family participation in the relief of acute pain in babies. Methods A methodological and experimental study produced at the University of São Paulo at Ribeirão Preto School of Nursing and at a university hospital in southeastern Brazil, conducted in three operational stages, from January to July 2017. Results The video lasts nine minutes and 31 seconds, and it was validated by 19 expert judges with a 90% agreement among them for content and appearance items. Regarding the evaluation, 16 family members and pregnant women did it and were favorable to its use as an educational technology for learning. Conclusions Both the experts and the target population positively evaluated the video, which can be used as a health education strategy to empower families to engage in the baby pain relief with more autonomy and proactivity.

RESUMEN Objetivo Desarrollar y evaluar un video educativo para la participación activa de la familia en el alivio del dolor agudo en el bebé. Métodos Un estudio metodológico y experimental, producido en la Universidad de San Pablo en la Facultad de Enfermería Ribeirão Preto y en un hospital universitario del sudeste de Brasil, realizado en tres etapas operativas, de enero a julio de 2017. Resultados El video dura nueve minutos y 31 segundos, fue validado por 19 jueces expertos con un 90% de acuerdo entre ellos en cuanto contenido y elementos de aspecto. Con respecto a la evaluación, estuvo a cargo de 16 familiares y mujeres embarazadas, quienes se mostraron favorables a su uso como tecnología educativa para el aprendizaje. Conclusiones Tanto los expertos como el público evaluaron el video de manera positiva, que puede usarse como una estrategia educativa para la salud a fin de empoderar a la familia para que participe en una atención más autónoma y proactiva para el alivio del dolor del bebé.

RESUMO Objetivo Desenvolver e avaliar um vídeo educativo para participação ativa da família no alívio da dor aguda do bebê. Métodos Estudo metodológico, experimental, produzido na Escola de Enfermagem de Ribeirão Preto da Universidade de São Paulo e em um hospital universitário do sudeste do Brasil, conduzido em três etapas operacionais, no período de janeiro a julho de 2017. Resultados O vídeo tem duração de nove minutos e 31 segundos, foi validado por 19 juízes especialistas com concordância de 90% entre eles para os itens de conteúdo e aparência. Quanto a avaliação, 16 familiares e gestantes fizeram-na e foram favoráveis ao uso deste enquanto tecnologia educativa para aprendizagem. Conclusões Tanto os especialistas quanto o público-alvo avaliaram positivamente o vídeo, que pode ser utilizado como estratégia de educação em saúde para empoderar a família a se envolver nos cuidados de alívio da dor aguda do bebê com mais autonomia e proatividade.

Pre-emptive epidural analgesia for acute and chronic post-thoracotomy pain in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Epidural analgesia is the gold standard for post-thoracotomy pain management and can be started before or after surgical incision. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated whether pre-emptive epidural analgesia before thoracotomy incision reduces acute and chronic post-thoracotomy pain in adults compared with epidural analgesia after incision. METHODS: We searched databases including MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL for randomized controlled trials comparing epidural analgesia initiated before (pre-emptive group) and after (control group) thoracotomy incision in adults. The primary outcomes were the pain intensity during rest and coughing within 72 hours after surgery and the incidence of pain 1 to 6 months after surgery. Data were combined with random-effects meta-analyses. We rated the quality of evidence as high, moderate, low, and very low using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) method. RESULTS: We included 19 trials with 1062 participants involving 529 in the pre-emptive group and 533 in the control group. The pain intensity was significantly lower at rest within 72 hours after surgery (19 studies, n=1062) and during coughing within 48 hours after surgery (11 studies, n=638), and the incidence of pain was significantly lower 1 to 6 months after surgery (6 studies, n=276) in the pre-emptive group than in the control group. The quality of evidence was moderate or low in the primary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Our review provides low-quality evidence that pre-emptive epidural analgesia reduces the intensity of acute pain and the incidence of chronic pain after thoracotomy in adults. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019131620.

Impact of preoperative pectoralis plane nerve blocks for mastectomy on perioperative opioid consumption: a retrospective study.

Aim: To compare perioperative opioid consumption for patients undergoing mastectomy surgery with or without pectoralis nerve (PECS) plane blocks. Patients & methods: Retrospective study evaluating 152 adult females with mastectomies. Demographics, postanesthesia care unit stay duration and opioid consumption data at three time points were collected and analyzed for statistical significance. Results: 98 patients were included in the PECS block group, 54 patients were in the general anesthesia only group. Age and BMI were comparable. Total perioperative intravenous opioid consumption was less in the PECS block group (50.88 mg) compared with the general anesthesia only group (67.83 mg), p < 0.001. Conclusion: Acute pain after mastectomy is often severe. PECS plane block may decrease perioperative opioid consumption after mastectomy surgery compared with general anesthesia alone.

Is Supraclavicular Block as Good as Interscalene Block for Acute Pain Control Following Shoulder Surgery? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Interscalene block (ISB) is the acute pain management technique of choice for shoulder surgery, but its undesirable respiratory side effects have prompted seeking alternatives. Supraclavicular block (SCB) is proposed as an ISB alternative, but evidence of comparative analgesic and respiratory-sparing effects is inconsistent. We compared the analgesic and respiratory effects of SCB and ISB for shoulder surgery. METHODS: Trials comparing ISB to SCB for shoulder surgery were sought. We decided a priori that SCB would be an acceptable alternative if it were noninferior for (1) postoperative 24-hour cumulative oral morphine equivalent consumption (primary outcome, noninferiority margin Δ = -25 mg) and (2) postoperative pain (secondary outcome, noninferiority margin Δ = 4.0 cm·hour); and superior for (3) postblock respiratory dysfunction (primary outcome). Opioid-related side effects and block-related complications were also evaluated. RESULTS: Fifteen studies (1065 patients) were analyzed. In single-injection blocks, SCB was noninferior to ISB for 24-hour morphine consumption (mean difference for SCB-ISB, MD [95% confidence interval {CI}] = -3.11 mg [-9.42 to 3.19], Δ = -25 mg); it was also noninferior for 24-hour pain scores (MD = 0.78 cm·hour [0.07-1.49], Δ = 4.0 cm·hour); and decreased the odds of respiratory dysfunction (odds ratio [OR] [95% CI] = 0.08 [0.01-0.68]). Similarly, in continuous blocks, SCB was noninferior to ISB for 24-hour morphine consumption (MD = 0.46 mg [-6.08 to 5.15], Δ = -25 mg), and decreased the odds of respiratory dysfunction (OR = 0.22 [0.08-0.57]). SCB also decreased odds of minor block-related complications (OR = 0.36 [0.20-0.68] and OR = 0.25 [0.15-0.41] for single-injection and continuous blocks, respectively). Consequently, the null joint-hypothesis was rejected, and SCB can be considered an acceptable alternative to ISB. CONCLUSIONS: For acute pain control following shoulder surgery, high-quality evidence indicates that SCB can be used as an effective ISB alternative. SCB is noninferior for postoperative opioid consumption and acute pain, and it reduces the odds of postblock respiratory dysfunction.

Oxicodona para analgesia de pacientes com dor aguda no período pós-operatório: revisão sistemática de ensaios clínicos randomizados / Oxycodone for postoperative analgesia in patients with acute pain: systematic review of randomized controlled trials / Oxicodona para la analgesia postoperatoria en pacientes con dolor agudo: revisión sistemática de ensayos controlados aleatorios

Objetivo: avaliar o uso da oxicodona em pacientes com dor aguda no período pós-operatório em comparação aos outros opioides. Método: Trata-se de uma revisão sistemática de ensaios clínicos randomizados (ECR's). Foram consultadas as bases de dados PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane e LILACS até setembro de 2018. Revisores rastrearam ECR's elegíveis; extraíram os dados e avaliaram o risco de viés. Houve análise de conteúdo descritiva dos achados. Resultados: Em 8 ERC's incluídos a ação da oxicodona comparada morfina foi considerada superior em três estudos e igual em dois estudos. A oxicodona comparada ao fentanil foi considerada melhor em dois estudos. Na comparação com o placebo, a oxicodona também se sobressaiu positivamente. Entretanto não foram encontradas evidências robustas e convergentes que indiquem a superioridade da oxicodona. Conclusão: A oxicodona é um analgésico eficaz na dor pós-operatória aguda, entretanto, mais estudos devem ser realizados bem como a realização de avaliações econômicas.(AU)

Objective: Evaluate the use of oxycodone in patients with acute postoperative pain compared to other opioids. Method: This is a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and LILACS databases were consulted until September 2018. Reviewers screened eligible RCTs; extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. There was descriptive content analysis of the findings. Results: In 8 RCTs included the action of oxycodone compared morphine was considered superior in three studies and equal in two studies. Oxycodone compared to fentanyl was considered better in two studies. Compared to placebo, oxycodone also stood out positively. However, no robust and converging evidence was found to indicate the superiority of oxycodone. Conclusion: Oxycodone is an effective analgesic for acute postoperative pain; however, further studies should be performed as well as economic evaluations.(AU)

Objetivo: Evaluar el uso de oxicodona en pacientes con dolor postoperatorio agudo en comparación con otros opioides. Método: esta es una revisión sistemática de ensayos controlados aleatorios (ECA). Las bases de datos PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane y LILACS fueron consultadas hasta septiembre de 2018. Los revisores seleccionaron los ECA elegibles; extrajo datos y evaluó el riesgo de sesgo. Hubo un análisis de contenido descriptivo de los hallazgos. Resultados: en 8 ECA incluidos, la acción de la oxicodona en comparación con la morfina se consideró superior en tres estudios e igual en dos estudios. La oxicodona en comparación con el fentanilo se consideró mejor en dos estudios. En comparación con el placebo, la oxicodona también se destacó positivamente. Sin embargo, no se encontró evidencia sólida y convergente que indique la superioridad de la oxicodona. Conclusión: la oxicodona es un analgésico eficaz para el dolor postoperatorio agudo; sin embargo, se deben realizar más estudios, así como evaluaciones económicas.(AU)

Preemptive and Preventive Pain Psychoeducation and Its Potential Application as a Multimodal Perioperative Pain Control Option: A Systematic Review.

The common treatment for postoperative pain is prescription opioids. Yet, these drugs have limited effect in preventing chronic pain from surgical intervention and have in part contributed to the opioid epidemic. Recently, preemptive analgesia and multimodal analgesia have been proposed with widely gained acceptance in addressing the pain issues. However, both analgesic approaches have been focused on pharmacological means while completely neglecting the psychological aspect. To address this epidemic, we have conducted a systematic review of preoperative educational methods to explore its application as both a preemptive and a preventive psychological approach to decrease postsurgical pain and improve outcome. Preemptive psychoeducation occurs before surgery and would include information about regional or neuraxial analgesia, while preventive psychoeducation occurs throughout the perioperative period. The content and presentation of preemptive psychoeducation can help patients form accurate expectations and address their concerns of surgical outcome, leading to a significant decrease in patients' anxiety levels. By addressing the psychological needs of patients through preoperative education, one can decrease postoperative recovery time and postsurgical acute pain. Reduced postsurgical acute pain results in fewer opioid prescriptions, which theoretically lowers the patient's risk of developing chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP), and potentially offers a novel concept using preemptive pain psychoeducation as a part of multimodal pain management solution to the opioid epidemic.

Efficacy of additional dexamethasone administration for the attenuation of paclitaxel-associated acute pain syndrome.

PURPOSE: Paclitaxel-associated acute pain syndrome (P-APS) affects 80% of patients undergoing therapy. Although it has been shown that prednisone administration for 5 days relieves P-APS, detailed results have not been reported thus far. Therefore, in this study, we evaluated the preventive effect of dexamethasone (DEX) administration against P-APS. METHODS: A total of 60 patients who received carboplatin (area under the curve; AUC = 5-6) plus paclitaxel (200 mg/m2) (plus bevacizumab 15 mg/kg, if non-squamous carcinoma of lung) were enrolled. Eight milligrams of DEX was orally administered on days 2 and 3 to the DEX group patients, and the frequency, severity, duration of P-APS, and other adverse effects in the first cycle were retrospectively evaluated and compared to those observed in control group patients, who were not administered DEX on days 2 and 3. RESULTS: No difference in terms of patient characteristics, except for type of cancer, was observed between groups. The results showed that the frequency of all grade P-APS was approximately 70% and there was no difference between groups. Frequency of ≥ G2 P-APS was 40% in the control group and 14% in the DEX group, demonstrating a significant reduction. Duration of P-APS was 5.8 days in the control group and 4.3 days in the DEX group, which tended to become shorter following additional DEX administration, although this was not significant. Adverse effects other than P-APS induced by chemotherapy were similar between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Additional DEX administration is safe and useful for the attenuation of the severity of P-APS.

A comparative study evaluating the role of adductor canal block catheter versus intraarticular analgesic infusion on knee pain and range of motion in the immediate postoperative period: a prospective multicenter trial.

Postoperative pain after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is an important determinant of hospital stay and rehabilitation and thereby functional outcome. Adductor canal block (ACB) and intraarticular analgesic infiltration through catheters (IAC) are techniques of multimodal analgesia which have shown to control postoperative pain satisfactorily. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of ACB versus IAC in reducing immediate postoperative pain and thereby allow early rehabilitation. A multicenter quasi-experimental study was conducted on 511 patients undergoing unilateral primary TKA from March 2016 to April 2017 who either received ACB with catheter (Group I, n = 350 patients) or IAC (Group II, n = 172 patients) for postoperative pain control. All the patients were assessed for severity of pain by Visual Analogue Scale at 8, 24, 48, 72 h postoperatively and knee range of motion (ROM) on the day of discharge. There was no significant difference in pain scores on postoperative day (POD) 0 (1.09 ± 0.30 vs. 0.98 ± 0.46, p = 0.45) and POD 1 (1.21 ± 0.45 vs. 1.00 ± 0.00, p = 0.11) and in mean ROM on the day of discharge between ACB and IAC (88.40° ± 7.96° vs. 88.34° ± 5.74°; p = 0.93) groups. This study shows that both ACB and IAC provide satisfactory postoperative analgesia with sparing of quadriceps function and good knee ROM leading to early rehabilitation and reduced hospital with no advantage of one technique over another.