Effect of esketamine on postoperative analgesia and postoperative delirium in elderly patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the analgesic effect of esketamine combined with low-dose sufentanil in elderly patients after gastrointestinal surgery, and whether the anti-inflammatory effect of esketamine is involved in the mechanism of postoperative delirium. METHOD: We enrolled sixty elderly patients (age ≥ 65 years old, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade I-III) who underwent gastrointestinal surgery. Patients were randomly assigned to Group C (control group) who received sufentanil 2 ug/kg, and Group E (experimental group) who received sufentanil 1.5 ug/kg + esketamine 1 mg/kg, with 30 patients in each group. All patients underwent total intravenous anesthesia during the surgery and were connected to a patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) pump after surgery. The primary outcome was the evaluation of pain at 4, 24, 48 h after surgery which was evaluated by NRS scores. In secondary outcomes, inflammation was assessed by measuring IL-6 levels using ELISA. The postoperative delirium and the occurrence of adverse reactions were observed on the 1st and 3rd day after surgery. RESULTS: The NRS scores at 4, 24, and 48 h after surgery in the experimental group [(4.53 ± 1.22), (3.46 ± 0.73), (1.37 ± 0.99)] were lower than that in the control group [(5.23 ± 1.16), (4.46 ± 0.77), (2.13 ± 0.78)] (P < 0.05). The concentration of serum IL-6 in the experimental group at 24 and 48 h after operation [(15.96 ± 4.65), (11.8 ± 3.24)] were lower than that in the control group [(23.07 ± 4.86), (15.41 ± 4.01)] (P < 0.05); the incidence of postoperative delirium in the experimental group was less than that in the control group (P < 0.05); there was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting between the two groups (P > 0.05), and neither group had nightmares or delirium. CONCLUSION: Esketamine may enhance postoperative pain management compare with sufentanil, and esketamine has anti-inflammatory effects that reduce the incidence of postoperative delirium. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Full name of the registry: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR2300072374. Date of registration:2023/06/12.

The median effective concentration of ropivacaine for ultrasound-guided caudal block in children: a dose-finding study.

PURPOSE: To determine the 50% minimum effective concentration (MEC50) and the 95% effective concentration (MEC95) of ropivacaine for ultrasound-guided caudal block during hypospadias repair surgery of pediatric patients. METHODS: Children were enrolled with the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I-II undergoing elective hypospadias repair surgery. Children were grouped into two age groups: toddlerhood (1-3 years old) and preschool (3-6 years old). We measured The MEC50 using Dixon's up-and-down method. The first children received the caudal block with 1.0 mL/kg of 0.15% ropivacaine. We determined each subsequent patient's concentration based on the previous patient's response and adjusted the concentration in intervals of 0.015%. Meanwhile, the probit regression analysis obtains 95% effective concentration (MEC95). In addition, we recorded the general condition, adverse events, and postoperative pain of each child. RESULTS: 46 children undergoing elective hypospadias repair surgery were included in this study, 22 in the toddlerhood group and 24 in the preschool group. Of the total number of patients, the caudal block was successful in 25 (54%) and failed in 21 (46%). The MEC50 of 1 ml/kg ropivacaine was 0.102% (95% CI 0.099%, 0.138%) in the toddlerhood group and 0.129% (95% CI 0.124%, 0.138%) in the preschool group. The MEC95 of 1 ml/kg ropivacaine was 0.148% (95% CI 0.131%, 0.149%) in the toddlerhood group and 0.162% (95% CI 0.134%, 0.164%) in the preschool group. Our results showed that ropivacaine concentration was statistically different between preschool children and toddlers (P < 0.001). None of the adverse events occurred. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that children in the preschool group required higher concentrations of ropivacaine than children in the toddler group during ultrasound-guided sacral block combined with non-intubated general anesthesia. At the same time, this method of anesthesia is safe and effective for children undergoing surgery for hypospadias.

Effect of two different doses of nalbuphine for postoperative analgesia in children with cleft palate: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cleft palate repair surgery may result in severe pain in the immediate postoperative period. The aim of this study is to compare the effects of different doses of nalbuphine for postoperative analgesia in children with cleft palate. METHODS: From November 2019 to June 2021, 90 children (45 males and 45 females, age 9-20 months old, ASA class I-II) were selected for palatoplasty. They were randomly divided into three groups: the control group (Group C), the N1 group (postoperative analgesia with 0.05 mg/kg/h nalbuphine) and the N2 group (postoperative analgesia with 0.075 mg/kg/h nalbuphine). Each group had 30 cases. Nalbuphine was not continuously infused in Group C but was continuously infused in Groups N1 and N2 at rates of 0.05 mg/kg/h and 0.075 mg/kg/h, respectively, for 24 h for postoperative analgesia. The FLACC analgesia score and Ramsay Sedation score were recorded at 10 min (T1), 30 min (T2), 2 h (T3), 12 h (T4) and 24 h (T5) after the operation. Adverse reactions such as nausea, vomiting and respiratory depression were observed and recorded. RESULTS: Compared with those in Group C, the FLACC scores in the N1 and N2 groups decreased significantly at T1-T5 (p < 0.05); the Ramsay Sedation score in the N1 group was significantly higher at T3 and T4 (p < 0.05), and that in the N2 group was significantly higher at T1-T5 (p < 0.05). Compared with that in the N1 group, the FLACC score in the N2 group was not significantly different, and the Ramsay Sedation score increased significantly at T5 (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Using 0.05 mg/kg/h Nalbuphine continuously for 24 h for postoperative analgesia in children with cleft palate has a better effect and fewer adverse reactions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered at ChiCTR1900027385 (11/11/2019).

Trajectories of pain and opioid use up to one year after surgery: analysis of a European registry.

BACKGROUND: Long-term opioid use after surgery is a crucial healthcare problem in North America. Data from European hospitals are scarce and differentiation of chronic pain has rarely been considered. METHODS: In a mixed surgical cohort of the PAIN OUT registry, opioid use and chronic pain were evaluated before surgery, and 6 and 12 months after surgery (M6/M12). Subgroups with or without opioid medication and pre-existing chronic pain were analysed. M12-chronic pain was categorised as chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP) meeting the ICD-11 definition, chronic pain related to surgery not meeting the ICD-11 definition, and chronic pain unrelated to surgery. Primary endpoint was the rate of M12 opioid users. Variables associated with M12 opioid use and patient-reported outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: Of 2326 patients, 5.5% were preoperative opioid users; 4.4% and 3.5% took opioids at M6 and M12 (P<0.001). Chronic pain before operation and at M6/M12 was reported by 41.2%, 41.8%, and 34.7% of patients, respectively (P<0.001). The rate of M12 opioid users was highest in group unrelated (22.3%; related 8.3%, CPSP 1.5%; P<0.001). New opioid users were 1.1% (unrelated 7.1%, related 2.3%, CPSP 0.7%; P<0.001). M12 opioid users reported more pain, pain-related physical and affective interference, and needed more opioids than non-users. The predominant variable associated with M12 opioids was preoperative opioid use (estimated odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 28.3 [14.1-56.7], P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Opioid use was low in patients with CPSP, and more problematic in patients with chronic pain unrelated to surgery. A detailed assessment of chronic pain unrelated or related to surgery or CPSP is necessary. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02083835.

Comparison of dexmedetomidine and a dexmedetomidine-esketamine combination for reducing dental anxiety in preschool children undergoing dental treatment under general anesthesia: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Dental anxiety is a widespread complication occurring in pediatric patients during dental visits and may lead to undesirable complications. Esketamine may be effective in anxiety. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of premedication with a dexmedetomidine-esketamine combination compared with dexmedetomidine alone on dental anxiety in preschool children undergoing dental treatment under general anesthesia. METHODS: This is a prospective, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial. A total of 84 patients were scheduled for elective outpatient dental caries treatment under general anesthesia. Patients were randomly premedicated with intranasal dexmedetomidine (group D) or intranasal dexmedetomidine-esketamine (group DS). The primary outcome was the level of dental anxiety assessed by the Modified Child Dental Anxiety Scale (MCDAS) at 2 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes included level of dental anxiety at 1 day and 7 days after surgery, the incidence of dental anxiety at 2 h, 1 day, and 7 days after surgery, sedation onset time, overall success of sedation, acceptance of mask induction, postoperative pain intensity, incidence of emergence agitation in PACU, adverse reactions, HR, and SpO2 before premedication (baseline) and at 10, 20, and 30 min after the end of study drug delivery. RESULTS: The dental anxiety in group DS was lower than that in group D at 2 h, 1 day, and 7 days postoperatively (P = 0.04, 0.004, and 0.006, respectively). The incidences of dental anxiety in group DS were lower than those in group D at 2 h (53 % vs 76 %, P = 0.03), 1 day (47 % vs 71 %, P = 0.04), and 7 days (44 % vs 71 %, P = 0.02) after surgery. Group DS had a higher success rate of sedation (P = 0.03) but showed a lower MAS score (P = 0.005) and smoother hemodynamics (P < 0.01) after drug administration than group D. Group DS showed a significantly lower incidence rate of emergence agitation (P = 0.03) and postoperative pain intensity (P = 0.006) than that in group D during the anesthesia recovery time. The occurrence of adverse reactions was similar in both groups (P > 0.05). LIMITATIONS: We did not analyze and correct for the learning effect caused by repeated applications of the MCDAS and MCDAS scores on the 1 day after surgery were obtained by telephone follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to premedication with dexmedetomidine alone, premedication with intranasal dexmedetomidine combined with esketamine could significantly improve dental anxiety in preschool children undergoing dental treatment under general anesthesia.

Comparison of the analgesic effects of single-dose 75 mg oral pregabalin versus single-dose 400 mg oral ibuprofen after impacted third mandibular molar surgery: A randomized, double-blind, split-mouth clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Pain is the most prevalent complication after dentoalveolar surgery. Failure in effective pain control could potentially lead to systemic sequels, such as tachycardia, hypertension, improper nutrition, and central sensitization. Pregabalin is a gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) analog with inhibitory and analgesic effects on the central nervous system (CNS). Prescribing gabapentinoids as complementary analgesics reduces the consumption of opioid and non-opioid analgesics, and consequently their side effects. OBJECTIVES: The main purpose of the present study was to compare the analgesic effects of pregabalin (single-dose 75 mg) vs. ibuprofen (single-dose 400 mg) on patients' pain levels after impacted third mandibular molar surgery. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, split-mouth clinical trial, 24 patients aged 19-34 years volunteered for 2 consecutive (1 month apart) third mandibular molar surgeries (the contralateral teeth). The patients were randomly placed into 2 groups: group G1 (n = 12) was prescribed pregabalin (single-dose 75 mg) after the 1st surgery and ibuprofen (single-dose 400 mg) after the 2nd surgery; and group G2 (n = 12) was prescribed the exact opposite of the G1 arrangement. During the first 24 h post-surgery, the patients recorded the number of complementary analgesics they took (single-dose 400 mg ibuprofen) and their level of pain on a visual analog scale (VAS) every 2 h. RESULTS: The average level of pain at 2 h post-surgery (T1) was significantly lower when pregabalin was prescribed (p < 0.05). Most patients needed complementary analgesics at 4 h post-surgery (T2). However, during the first 24 h post-surgery, the patients required significantly more complementary analgesics when ibuprofen was prescribed. CONCLUSIONS: In comparison with oral ibuprofen (single-dose 400 mg), oral pregabalin (single-dose 75 mg) had a stronger analgesic effect at 2 h after impacted third mandibular molar surgery (p < 0.05). Pregabalin resulted in a significantly lower consumption of complementary analgesics in the first 24 h post-surgery as compared to ibuprofen.

Changes in Surgical Opioid Prescribing and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Implementation of an Insurer Opioid Prescribing Limit.

Importance: Insurers are increasingly limiting the duration of opioid prescriptions for acute pain. Among patients undergoing surgery, it is unclear whether implementation of these limits is associated with changes in opioid prescribing and patient-reported outcomes, such as pain. Objective: To assess changes in surgical opioid prescribing and patient-reported outcomes after implementation of an opioid prescribing limit by a large commercial insurer in Michigan. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a cross-sectional study with an interrupted time series analysis. Data analyses were conducted from October 1, 2022, to February 28, 2023. The primary data source was the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative, a statewide registry containing data on opioid prescribing and patient-reported outcomes from adults undergoing common general surgical procedures. This registry is linked to Michigan's prescription drug monitoring program database, allowing observation of opioid dispensing. The study included 6045 adults who were covered by the commercial insurer and underwent surgery from January 1, 2017, to October 31, 2019. Exposure: Policy limiting opioid prescriptions to a 5-day supply in February 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: Among all patients, segmented regression models were used to assess for level or slope changes during February 2018 in 3 patient-reported outcomes: pain in the week after surgery (assessed on a scale of 1-4: 1 = none, 2 = minimal, 3 = moderate, and 4 = severe), satisfaction with surgical experience (scale of 0-10, with 10 being the highest satisfaction), and amount of regret regarding undergoing surgery (scale of 1-5, with 1 being the highest level of regret). Among patients with a discharge opioid prescription and a dispensed opioid prescription (prescription filled within 3 days of discharge), additional outcomes included total morphine milligram equivalents in these prescriptions, a standardized measure of opioid volume. Results: Among the 6045 patients included in the study, mean (SD) age was 48.7 (12.6) years and 3595 (59.5%) were female. Limit implementation was not associated with changes in patient-reported satisfaction or regret and was associated with only a slight level decrease in patient-reported pain score (-0.15 [95% CI, -0.26 to -0.03]). Among 4396 patients (72.7%) with a discharge and dispensed opioid prescription, limit implementation was associated with a -22.3 (95% CI, -32.8 to -11.9) and -26.1 (95% CI, -40.9 to -11.3) level decrease in monthly mean total morphine milligram equivalents of discharge and dispensed opioid prescriptions, respectively. These decreases corresponded approximately to 3 to 3.5 pills containing 5 mg of oxycodone. Conclusions: This cross-sectional analysis of data from adults undergoing general surgical procedures found that implementation of an insurer's limit was associated with modest reductions in opioid prescribing but not with worsened patient-reported outcomes. Whether these findings generalize to other procedures warrants further study.

Therapeutic efficacy of intravenous lidocaine infusion compared with thoracic epidural analgesia in major abdominal surgery: a noninferiority randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Open major abdominal surgery is one of the most risky surgical procedures for acute postoperative pain. Thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) has been considered the standard analgesic approach. In different reports, lidocaine i.v. has been shown to have an analgesic efficacy comparable with TEA. We compared the analgesic efficacy of i.v. lidocaine with thoracic epidural analgesia using bupivacaine in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. METHODS: In this noninferiority clinical trial, 210 patients were randomised to thoracic epidural bupivacaine with morphine or i.v. lidocaine. Dynamic pain at 24 h after surgery was measured using a numerical pain rating scale (NPR), and morphine consumption was also measured. A difference in i.v. the lidocaine-epidural bupivacaine NPR of ≤1 for dynamic pain was considered a noninferiority margin. RESULTS: The NPR for dynamic pain in the lidocaine group at 24 h was between 5.7 (1.8) and 5.2 (1.9) in the epidural group, with a difference of 0.53 (95% confidence interval 0.0-1.0). In the first 24 h, the average difference in morphine consumption was 1.8 mg between the i.v. lidocaine and epidural groups (95% confidence interval 1-3 mg). No differences were found in adverse events or complications associated with the procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous lidocaine is noninferior to thoracic epidural analgesia for acute postoperative pain control in major abdomial surgery at 24 h postoperatively. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT04017013.

Outcomes of dexmedetomidine as adjuvant drug in patients undergoing videolaparoscopic cholecystectomy: A randomized and prospective clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: The repercussions of ischemia-reperfusion and inflammatory response to surgical injury may compromise the return of physiologic processes in video-laparoscopic surgeries. Dexmedetomidine, as an adjuvant drug in general anesthesia, alters the neuroinflammatory reaction, provides better clinical outcomes in the perioperative period, and may reduce the excessive use of chronic medication in patients with a history of addiction. This study evaluated the immunomodulatory potential of dexmedetomidine on perioperative organ function in video-laparoscopic cholecystectomy patients. METHODS: There were two groups: Sevoflurane and Dexmedetomidine A (26 patients) vs. Sevoflurane and Saline 0.9% B (26 patients). Three blood samples were collected three times: 1) before surgery, 2) 4-6h after surgery, and 3) 24h postoperatively. Inflammatory and endocrine mediators were protocolized for analysis. Finally, hemodynamic outcomes, quality upon awakening, pain, postoperative nausea and vomiting, and opioid use were compared between groups. RESULTS: We have demonstrated a reduction of Interleukin 6 six hours after surgery in group A: 34.10 (IQR 13.88-56.15) vs. 65.79 (IQR 23.13-104.97; p = 0.0425) in group B. Systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and mean arterial pressure was attenuated in group A in their measurement intervals (p < 0.0001). There was a lower incidence of pain and opioid consumption in the first postoperative hour favoring this group (p < 0.0001). We noticed better quality upon awakening after the intervention when comparing the values of peripheral oxygen saturation and respiratory rate. CONCLUSIONS: Dexmedetomidine provided anti-inflammatory benefits and contributed to postoperative analgesia without the depressive side effects on the respiratory and cardiovascular systems commonly observed with opioids. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Immunomodulatory Effect of Dexmedetomidine as an Adjuvant Drug in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomies, NCT05489900, Registered 5 August 2022-Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05489900?term=NCT05489900&draw=2&rank=1.

Discharge of postoperative patients with an opioid prescription is associated with increased persistent opioid use, healthcare expenditures and mortality: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The risk factors for persistent opioid use after surgical discharge and the association between opioid prescription at discharge and postoperative emergency department visits, readmission, and mortality are unclear. METHODS: This population-based retrospective cohort study involved opioid-naive patients who underwent surgical procedures from January 1, 2000 to November 30, 2020. The data source was Hong Kong Hospital Authority Clinical Management System electronic health record. The primary outcome was the incidence of new persistent opioid use. Other study outcomes included 30-day emergency department visits, 30-day readmission, and 30-day all-cause mortality. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to estimate the association between opioid prescription at discharge and persistent opioid use, emergency department visits, readmission, and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Over a median follow-up of 1 month with 36 104 person-years, 438 128 patients (opioid prescription: 32 932, no opioid prescription: 405 196) who underwent surgical procedures were analysed, of whom 15 112 (3.45%) had persistent opioid use after discharge. Prescribing opioids on discharge was associated with increased risks of developing persistent opioid use (odds ratio [OR]: 2.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.19-2.40, P<0.001), 30-day emergency department visits (OR: 1.28, 95% CI: 1.23-1.33, P<0.001), 30-day readmission (OR: 1.17, 95% CI: 1.13-1.20, P<0.001), and 30-day all-cause mortality (OR: 1.68, 95% CI: 1.53-1.86, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort of patients undergoing surgery, an opioid prescription on discharge was associated with a higher chance of persistent opioid use and increased risks of postoperative emergency department visits, readmission, and mortality. Minimising opioid prescriptions on discharge could improve perioperative patient outcomes.

Intraoperative Methadone in Next-day Discharge Outpatient Surgery: A Randomized, Double-blinded, Dose-finding Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: Contemporary perioperative practice seeks to use less intraoperative opioid, diminish postoperative pain and opioid use, and enable less postdischarge opioid prescribing. For inpatient surgery, anesthesia with intraoperative methadone, compared with short-duration opioids, results in less pain, less postoperative opioid use, and greater patient satisfaction. This pilot investigation aimed to determine single-dose intraoperative methadone feasibility for next-day discharge outpatient surgery, determine an optimally analgesic and well-tolerated dose, and explore whether methadone would result in less postoperative opioid use compared with conventional short-duration opioids. METHODS: This double-blind, randomized, dose-escalation feasibility and pilot study in next-day discharge surgery compared intraoperative single-dose IV methadone (0.1 then 0.2, 0.25 and 0.3 mg/kg ideal body weight) versus as-needed short-duration opioid (fentanyl, hydromorphone) controls. Perioperative opioid use, pain, and side effects were assessed before discharge. Patients recorded pain, opioid use, and side effects for 30 days postoperatively using take-home diaries. Primary clinical outcome was in-hospital (intraoperative and postoperative) opioid use. Secondary outcomes were 30-day opioid consumption, pain, opioid side effects, and leftover opioid counts. RESULTS: Median (interquartile range) intraoperative methadone doses were 6 (5 to 7), 11 (10 to 12), 14 (13 to 16), and 18 (15 to 19) mg in 0.1, 0.2, 0.25, and 0.3 mg/kg ideal body weight groups, respectively. Anesthesia with single-dose methadone and propofol or volatile anesthetic was effective. Total in-hospital opioid use (IV milligram morphine equivalents [MME]) was 25 (20 to 37), 20 (13 to 30), 27 (18 to 32), and 25 (20 to 36) mg, respectively, in patients receiving 0.1, 0.2, 0.25 and 0.3 mg/kg methadone, compared to 46 (33 to 59) mg in short-duration opioid controls. Opioid-related side effects were not numerically different. Home pain and opioid use were numerically lower in patients receiving methadone. CONCLUSIONS: The most effective and well-tolerated single intraoperative induction dose of methadone for next-day discharge surgery was 0.25 mg/kg ideal body weight (median, 14 mg). Single-dose intraoperative methadone was analgesic and opioid-sparing in next-day discharge outpatient surgery.

The Influence of Intravenous Lidocaine Infusion on Postoperative Outcome and Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio in Colorectal Cancer Patients. A Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: In the last years increasing scientific evidence drew attention on the potential effects of anesthetic drugs on postoperative outcome in cancer patients. Local anesthetics, especially lidocaine, have been intensively studied in relation with postoperative outcome in colorectal cancer patients. Our study objectives were to investigate the effects of perioperative intravenous lidocaine infusion on neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and short-term postoperative outcome. Additionally, we also looked at 1 year outcome after intended radical colorectal cancer surgery. METHODS: 150 patients scheduled for colorectal cancer surgery were randomized to receive sevoflurane anaesthesia with or without 48 hours lidocaine infusion. RESULTS: 73 patients were included in the group A (sevoflurane) and 77 in the group B (sevoflurane with lidocaine). Lidocaine infusion did not modify neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio at 24 hours after surgery (p=0.58). Patients receiving intravenous lidocaine had significantly lower morphine consumption (p=0.04), faster mobilization time (p=0.001) and fewer days spent in the hospital (p=0.04). Moreover, at 1 year follow- up, patients in group B had a significant decreased rate of recurrences (p=0.03). There was no significant difference in 1 year survival (p=0.22). CONCLUSIONS: In our study, intravenous lidocaine infusion hastened the postoperative recovery of patients in terms of mobilization, hospital discharge and opioid consumption and reduced 1 year recurrence rate. Further studies on larger groups of patients are needed.

Effect of perioperative high-dose transdermal nicotine patch on pain sensitivity among male abstinent tobacco smokers undergoing abdominal surgery: A randomized controlled pilot study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Previous studies have focused on the role of perioperative nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) in improving the success rate of long-term smoking cessation in tobacco smokers. This study aimed to measure the effectiveness of high-dose NRT in alleviating postoperative pain for male abstinent smokers receiving abdominal surgery. DESIGN: This was a parallel-group, randomized, double-blind and controlled pilot trial. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: In total, 101 male smoking-abstinent patients from the Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, Shanghai, China, from 8 October 2018 to 10 December 2021. INTERVENTIONS: Patients started smoking cessation on admission to the hospital ward. Patients received 24-hour transdermal nicotine patches (n = 50) or placebo (n = 51) every day from admission until 48 hours after surgery. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcomes were pre-surgery pain thresholds and total consumption of analgesics within the first 48 hours after surgery. Secondary outcomes included postoperative pain and sedation scores, nausea, vomiting and fever frequency within the treatment period. FINDINGS: Both pre-surgery electrical and mechanical pain thresholds in the NRT group were higher than those in the placebo group (P = 0.004 and P = 0.020, respectively). The 48-hour postoperative analgesic consumption was significantly lower for smoking-abstinent patients receiving NRT than those receiving placebo (standardized morphine equivalent requirement, median [interquartile range], 1.80 [1.47, 2.32] mg/kg vs 2.22 [1.62, 2.82] mg/kg, P = 0.011). Postoperative pain intensity was significantly lower in the NRT group than that in the placebo group at 1st hour and 24th hour post-surgery (P < 0.001 and P = 0.012, respectively). The incidence of treatment-related adverse events was not significantly different between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative high-dose nicotine replacement therapy may help to relieve postoperative pain among male smoking-abstinent patients undergoing abdominal surgery.

Analgesic efficacy of systemic lidocaine using lean body mass based dosing regime versus placebo in bariatric surgery: a prospective, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-centre study.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous lidocaine is used as an adjuvant analgesic agent in perioperative settings. It has been investigated in various patient populations and surgical interventions, but there are limited data on its efficacy, particularly for patients undergoing bariatric surgery. Obese patients are at high risk of postoperative respiratory complications and can be expected to benefit from anaesthetic techniques that minimise opioid administration. METHODS: We studied administration of lidocaine hydrochloride 1% i.v. to general anaesthesia at a dose of 1.5 mg kg-1 (lean body mass×1.28) or placebo in patients undergoing bariatric surgery. Subjects randomly assigned to each group were surveyed for 48 h after surgery for experienced pain (primary outcome), and administered opioids, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), resumption of bowel function, and length of hospital stay (secondary outcomes). RESULTS: We recruited and randomised 140 subjects to either the lidocaine or placebo group; 137 completed the study. Subjects with pain numeric rating scale (NRS) >3 within the first 4 h postoperatively were similar in both groups (proportion of any NRS >3 within first 4 h lidocaine group: 47/68 (69%) vs placebo group: 44/69 (63%), P=0.507; within first h P=0.177, within second h P=0.513, within third h P=0.145, within fourth h P=0.510). There was no difference in maximal pain score, opioid consumption, recovery of bowel function, incidence of PONV, or length of hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS: Lidocaine does not improve postoperative pain scores, analgesia, or any secondary outcomes in patients undergoing bariatric surgery. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03667001.

An individualised tapering protocol reduces opioid use 1 year after spine surgery: A randomised controlled trial of patients with preoperative opioid use.

BACKGROUND: Persistent opioid use following surgery is common especially in patients with preoperative opioid use. This study aims to determine the long-term effect of an individualised opioid tapering plan versus standard of care in patients with a preoperative opioid use undergoing spine surgery at Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark. METHODS: This is the 1-year follow-up of a prospective, single-centre, randomised trial of 110 patients who underwent elective spine surgery for degenerative disease. The intervention was an individualised tapering plan at discharge and telephone counselling 1 week after discharge, compared to standard of care. Postoperative outcomes after 1 year include opioid use, reasons for opioid use and pain intensity. RESULTS: The overall response rate to the 1-year follow-up questionnaire was 94% (intervention group 52/55 patients and control group 51/55 patients). Forty-two patients (proportion = 0.81, 95% CI 0.67-0.89) in the intervention group compared to 31 (0.61, 95% CI 0.47-0.73; p = .026) patients in the control group succeeded in tapering to zero 1 year after discharge (p = .026). One patient (0.02, 95% CI 0.01-0.13) in the intervention group compared to seven patients (0.14, 95% CI 0.07-0.26) in the control group were unable to taper to their preoperative dose 1 year after discharge (p = .025). Back/neck and radicular pain intensity was similar between study groups. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that an individualised tapering plan at discharge combined with telephone counselling 1 week after discharge can reduce opioid use 1 year after spine surgery.

Comparison of two doses of intrathecal morphine in laparoscopic donor hepatectomy: A randomized double-blinded non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Intrathecal morphine (ITM) injection is an effective postoperative analgesic strategy in open or laparoscopic donor hepatectomy; however, the optimal dose has not been determined. In this trial, we compared the post-operative analgesic effects of two doses (300 vs. 400 µg) of ITM injections. METHODS: In this prospective randomized non-inferiority trial, 56 donors were divided into either the 300 µg or 400 µg ITM group (n = 28, each). The primary outcome was the resting pain score at 24 h postoperatively. Pain scores, cumulative opioid consumption, and side effects (postoperative nausea and vomiting [PONV]) were compared up to 48 h postoperatively. RESULTS: Fifty-five donors participated in the entire study. The mean resting pain scores at 24 h after surgery were 1.7 ± 1.6 and 1.7 ± 1.1 in the ITM 300 and ITM 400 groups, respectively (mean difference, 0 [95% CI, -.8 to .7], p = .978). The upper limit of the 95% CI was lower than the prespecified non-inferiority margin (δ = 1), indicating that non-inferiority had been established. The incidence of PONV was lower in the ITM 300 group than in the ITM 400 group at 18 (p = .035) and 24 h postoperatively (p = .015). There were no significant differences in the resting and coughing pain scores and cumulative opioid consumption at any time point. CONCLUSION: For laparoscopic donor hepatectomy, preoperative ITM 300 µg exhibited non-inferior postoperative analgesic effects compared to ITM 400 µg, with a lower incidence of PONV.

The analgesic effect of total intravenous anaesthesia with propofol versus inhalational anaesthesia for acute postoperative pain after hepatectomy: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pain control can be challenging in patients undergoing hepatectomy. A previous retrospective study on hepatobiliary/ pancreatic surgeries showed better postoperative pain control in patients who received propofol TIVA. The aim of this study was to determine the analgesic effect of propofol TIVA for hepatectomy. This clinical study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03597997). METHODS: A prospective randomized controlled trial was performed to compare the analgesic effect of propofol TIVA versus inhalational anaesthesia. Patients aged between 18 and 80 years old with an American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) physical status of I-III scheduled for elective hepatectomy were recruited. Ninety patients were randomly allocated to receive either propofol TIVA (TIVA group) or inhalational anaesthesia with sevoflurane (SEVO group). Perioperative anaesthetic/analgesic management was the same for both groups. Numerical rating scale (NRS) pain scores, postoperative morphine consumption, quality of recovery, patient satisfaction and adverse effects were evaluated during the acute postoperative period and at 3 and 6 months after surgery. RESULTS: No significant differences were found for acute postoperative pain scores (both at rest and during coughing) and postoperative morphine consumption between TIVA and SEVO groups. Patients given TIVA had lower pain scores with coughing at 3 months after surgery (p = 0.014, and FDR < 0.1). TIVA group was associated with better quality of recovery on postoperative day (POD) 3 (p = 0.038, and FDR < 0.1), less nausea (p = 0.011, and FDR < 0.1 on POD 2; p = 0.013, and FDR < 0.1 on POD 3) and constipation (p = 0.013, and FDR < 0.1 on POD 3). CONCLUSION: Propofol TIVA did not improve acute postoperative pain control compared to inhalational anaesthesia in patients who underwent hepatectomy. Our results do not support the use of propofol TIVA for reducing acute postoperative pain after hepatectomy.

Comparison of postoperative nausea and vomiting between Remimazolam and Propofol in Patients undergoing oral and maxillofacial surgery: a prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Remimazolam is a recently approved, ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine. However, few studies have investigated remimazolam in relation to postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). This study aimed to compare the effects of remimazolam and propofol on PONV in patients undergoing oral and maxillofacial surgery. METHODS: Patients (n = 206) aged 19-65 years who were scheduled for oral and maxillofacial surgery were randomized into two groups, the remimazolam (R) and propofol group (P). In the R group (n = 94), remimazolam was used to induce anesthesia at 12 mg/kg/h and to maintain anesthesia at 1-2 mg/kg/h. In the P group (n = 95), anesthesia was induced and maintained with propofol (target effect-site concentration: 3-5 µg/ml). In both groups, remifentanil was administered at a target effect-site concentration of 2.5-4 ng/ml. The primary outcome was the overall incidence of PONV during the first 24 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes included the severity of nausea, use of rescue antiemetics, severity of postoperative pain, use of rescue analgesia, and quality of recovery. RESULTS: The incidence of PONV during the first 24 h after surgery was 11.7% and 10.5% in the R group and P group, respectively, and there was no significant difference in the severity of nausea (P > 0.05). Ten patients in the R group and ten patients in the P group required rescue antiemetics during the first 24 h after surgery (P = 0.98). No inter-group differences were observed in terms of postoperative pain score, use of rescue analgesia, and quality of recovery (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, remimazolam did not increase the incidence and severity of PONV compared with propofol. TRIAL REGISTRATION: KCT0006965, Clinical Research Information Service (CRIS), Republic of Korea. Registration date: 26/01/2022.

Effect of butorphanol on visceral pain in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Butorphanol slightly influences the respiratory and circulatory systems, has a better effect on relieving the discomfort caused by mechanical traction, and has a low incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Combined butorphanol and propofol may suppress postoperative visceral pain, which is avoidable in gastrointestinal endoscopy. Thus, we hypothesized that butorphanol could decrease the incidence of postoperative visceral pain in patients undergoing gastroscopy and colonoscopy. METHODS: This was a randomized, placebo-controlled, and double-blinded trial. Patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy were randomized to intravenously receive either butorphanol (Group I) or normal saline (Group II). The primary outcome was visceral pain after the procedure 10 min after recovery. The secondary outcomes included the rate of safety outcomes and adverse events. Postoperative visceral pain was defined as a visual analog scale (VAS) score ≥ 1. RESULTS: A total of 206 patients were enrolled in the trial. Ultimately, 203 patients were randomly assigned to Group I (n = 102) or Group II (n = 101). In total, 194 patients were included in the analysis: 95 in Group I and 99 in Group II. The incidence of visceral pain at 10 min after recovery was found to be statistically lower with butorphanol than with the placebo (31.5% vs. 68.5%, respectively; RR: 2.738, 95% CI [1.409-5.319], P = 0.002), and the notable difference was in pain level or distribution of visceral pain (P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: The trial indicated that adding butorphanol to propofol results in a lower incidence of visceral pain after surgery without noticeable fluctuations in circulatory and respiratory functions for gastrointestinal endoscopy patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04477733 (PI: Ruquan Han; date of registration: 20/07/2020).

Glucocorticoids added to paracetamol and NSAIDs for post-operative pain: A systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.

BACKGROUND: Paracetamol and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are recommended as the basic pain treatment regimen for most surgeries. Glucocorticoids have well-known anti-inflammatory and anti-emetic properties and may also demonstrate analgesic effects. We assessed benefit and harm of adding glucocorticoids to a combination of paracetamol and NSAIDs for post-operative pain management. METHODS: We searched Embase, Medline and CENTRAL for randomised clinical trials investigating the addition of glucocorticoids versus placebo/no intervention to paracetamol and an NSAID in adults undergoing any type of surgery. We assessed three primary outcomes: cumulative opioid consumption at 24 h postoperatively, serious adverse events and pain at rest at 24 h postoperatively. We performed meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA), assessed risk of bias using the Risk of Bias 2 tool and used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach to evaluate the certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: We identified 12 relevant trials of which nine trials randomising 804 participants were included in quantitative analysis. When added to paracetamol and NSAIDs, we found no evidence of a difference of glucocorticoids versus placebo/no intervention in cumulative opioid consumption at 24 h postoperatively (mean difference [MD] -0.28, TSA-adjusted 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.90 to 1.33, p = .68, moderate certainty of evidence), serious adverse events (risk ratio (RR) 0.99, TSA-adjusted 95% CI 0.27-3.63, p = .93, very low certainty of evidence) or pain on the Numeric Rating Scale at 24 h postoperatively (MD -0.39, TSA-adjusted 95% CI -0.84 to 0.17, p = .10, moderate certainty of evidence). All outcomes were assessed to be at high risk of bias and TSA showed that we had insufficient information for most outcomes. CONCLUSION: Glucocorticoids added to a baseline therapy of paracetamol and an NSAID likely result in little to no difference in cumulative opioid consumption and pain at rest at 24 h postoperatively. In addition, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect on serious adverse events. For most outcomes we did not have sufficient information to draw firm conclusions and the certainty of the evidence varied from moderate to very low. EDITORIAL COMMENT: Multimodal approaches for post-operative analgesia are favoured, including paracetamol and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. In this meta-analysis, pooled results from clinical trials are assessed to describe possible benefit of addition of glucocorticoid treatment for analgesia. The findings did not identify additional benefit, though the certainty of the evidence was not high.