Pain management after total knee arthroplasty: PROcedure SPEcific Postoperative Pain ManagemenT recommendations.

BACKGROUND: The PROSPECT (PROcedure SPEcific Postoperative Pain ManagemenT) Working Group is a global collaboration of surgeons and anaesthesiologists formulating procedure-specific recommendations for pain management after common operations. Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is associated with significant postoperative pain that is difficult to treat. Nevertheless, pain control is essential for rehabilitation and to enhance recovery. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the available literature and develop recommendations for optimal pain management after unilateral primary TKA. DESIGN: A narrative review based on published systematic reviews, using modified PROSPECT methodology. DATA SOURCES: A literature search was performed in EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed and Cochrane Databases, between January 2014 and December 2020, for systematic reviews and meta-analyses evaluating analgesic interventions for pain management in patients undergoing TKA. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Each randomised controlled trial (RCT) included in the selected systematic reviews was critically evaluated and included only if met the PROSPECT requirements. Included studies were evaluated for clinically relevant differences in pain scores, use of nonopioid analgesics, such as paracetamol and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and current clinical relevance. RESULTS: A total of 151 systematic reviews were analysed, 106 RCTs met PROSPECT criteria. Paracetamol and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory or cyclo-oxygenase-2-specific inhibitors are recommended. This should be combined with a single shot adductor canal block and peri-articular local infiltration analgesia together with a single intra-operative dose of intravenous dexamethasone. Intrathecal morphine (100 µg) may be considered in hospitalised patients only in rare situations when both adductor canal block and local infiltration analgesia are not possible. Opioids should be reserved as rescue analgesics in the postoperative period. Analgesic interventions that could not be recommended were also identified. CONCLUSION: The present review identified an optimal analgesic regimen for unilateral primary TKA. Future studies to evaluate enhanced recovery programs and specific challenging patient groups are needed.

Thirty-five Years of Acute Pain Services: Where Do We Go From Here?

Acute pain services (APS) have developed over the past 35 years. Originally implemented solely to care for patients with regional catheters or patient-controlled analgesia after surgery, APS have become providers of care throughout the perioperative period, with some institutions even taking the additional step toward providing outpatient services for patients with acute pain. Models vary considerably in terms of tasks and responsibilities, staffing, education, protocols, quality, and financing. Many challenges face today's APS, including the increasing number of patients with preexisting chronic pain, intake of analgesics and opioids before surgery, substance-dependent patients needing special care, shorter hospital stays, early discharge of patients in need of further analgesic treatment, prevention and treatment of chronic postsurgical pain, minimization of adverse events, and side effects of treatment. However, many APS lack a clear-cut definition of their structures, tasks, and quality. Development of APS in the future will require us to face urgent questions, such as, "What are meaningful outcome variables?" and, "How do we define high quality?" It is obvious that focusing exclusively on pain scores does not reflect the complexity of pain and recovery. A broader approach is needed-a common concept of surgical and anesthesiological services within a hospital (eg, procedure-specific patient pathways as indicated by the programs "enhanced recovery after surgery" or the "perioperative surgical home"), with patient-reported outcome measures as one central quality criterion. Pain-related functional impairment, treatment-induced side effects, speed of mobilization, as well as return to normal function and everyday activities are key.

Current issues in postoperative pain management.

Postoperative pain has been poorly managed for decades. Recent surveys from USA and Europe do not show any major improvement. Persistent postoperative pain is common after most surgical procedures, and after thoracotomy and mastectomy, about 50% of patients may experience it. Opioids remain the mainstay of postoperative pain treatment in spite of strong evidence of their drawbacks. Multimodal analgesic techniques are widely used but new evidence is disappointing. Regional anaesthetic techniques are the most effective methods to treat postoperative pain. Current evidence suggests that epidural analgesia can no longer be considered the 'gold standard'. Perineural techniques are good alternatives for major orthopaedic surgery but remain underused. Infiltrative techniques with or without catheters are useful for almost all types of surgery. Simple surgeon-delivered local anaesthetic techniques such as wound infiltration, preperitoneal/intraperitoneal administration, transversus abdominis plane block and local infiltration analgesia can play a significant role in improvement of postoperative care, and the last of these has changed orthopaedic practice in many institutions. Current postoperative pain management guidelines are generally 'one size fits all'. It is well known that pain characteristics such as type, location, intensity and duration vary considerably after different surgical procedures. Procedure-specific postoperative pain management recommendations are evidence based, and also take into consideration the role of anaesthetic and surgical techniques, clinical routines and risk-benefit aspects. The role of acute pain services to improve pain management and outcome is well accepted but implementation seems challenging. The need for upgrading the role of surgical ward nurses and collaboration with surgeons to implement enhanced recovery after surgery protocols with regular audits to improve postoperative outcome cannot be overstated.

Evaluation of etoricoxib in patients undergoing total knee replacement surgery in a double-blind, randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Optimal postoperative pain management is important to ensure patient comfort and early mobilization. METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled, randomized clinical trial, we evaluated postoperative pain following knee replacement in patients receiving placebo, etoricoxib (90 or 120 mg), or ibuprofen 1800 mg daily for 7 days. Patients ≥18 years of age who had pain at rest ≥5 (0-10 Numerical Rating Scale [NRS]) after unilateral total knee replacement were randomly assigned to placebo (N = 98), etoricoxib 90 mg (N = 224), etoricoxib 120 mg (N = 230), or ibuprofen 1800 mg (N = 224) postoperatively. Co-primary endpoints included Average Pain Intensity Difference at Rest over Days 1-3 (0- to 10-point NRS) and Average Total Daily Dose of Morphine over Days 1-3. Pain upon movement was evaluated using Average Pain Intensity Difference upon Knee Flexion (0- to 10-point NRS). The primary objective was to demonstrate analgesic superiority for the etoricoxib doses vs. placebo; the secondary objective was to demonstrate that the analgesic effect of the etoricoxib doses was non-inferior to ibuprofen. Adverse experiences (AEs) including opioid-related AEs were evaluated. RESULTS: The least squares (LS) mean (95% CI) differences from placebo for Pain Intensity Difference at Rest over Days 1-3 were -0.54 (-0.95, -0.14); -0.49 (-0.89, -0.08); and -0.45 (-0.85, -0.04) for etoricoxib 90 mg, etoricoxib 120 mg, and ibuprofen, respectively (p < 0.05 for etoricoxib vs. placebo). Differences in LS Geometric Mean Ratio morphine use over Days 1-3 from placebo were 0.66 (0.54, 0.82); 0.69 (0.56, 0.85); and 0.66 (0.53, 0.81) for etoricoxib 90 mg, etoricoxib 120 mg, and ibuprofen, respectively (p < 0.001 for etoricoxib vs. placebo). Differences in LS Mean Pain Intensity upon Knee Flexion were -0.37 (-0.85, 0.11); -0.46 (-0.94, 0.01); and -0.42 (-0.90, 0.06) for etoricoxib 90 mg, etoricoxib 120 mg, and ibuprofen, respectively. Opioid-related AEs occurred in 41.8%, 34.7%, 36.5%, and 36.3% of patients on placebo, etoricoxib 90 mg, etoricoxib 120 mg, and ibuprofen, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative use of etoricoxib 90 and 120 mg in patients undergoing total knee replacement is both superior to placebo and non-inferior to ibuprofen in reducing pain at rest and also reduces opioid (morphine) consumption. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00820027.

Intrathecal opioids for the management of post-operative pain.

Intrathecal opioids are highly effective in the management of post-operative pain. The technique is simple with a very low risk of technical failure or complications, and it does not require additional training or expensive equipment such as ultrasound machines and, therefore, is widely practised around the world. The high-quality pain relief is not associated with sensory, motor or autonomic deficits. This study focuses on intrathecal morphine (ITM) which is the only US Food and Drug Administration-approved opioid for intrathecal administration and remains the most commonly used as well as extensively studied. The use of ITM is associated with prolonged analgesia lasting 20-48 h after a variety of surgical procedures. ITM has a well-established role in thoracic, abdominal, spinal, urological and orthopaedic surgeries. It is considered the 'gold standard' analgesia technique for caesarean delivery which is generally performed under spinal anaesthesia. As the role of epidural technique in post-operative pain management continues to decrease, ITM has emerged as the neuraxial technique of choice for pain management after a major surgery as a component of multimodal analgesia in Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols. ITM is recommended by many scientific groups and societies such as ERAS, PROSPECT, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and the Society of Obstetric Anesthesiology and Perinatology. The doses of ITM have decreased successively; today they are a fraction of those used in the early 1980s. With these dose reductions, the risks have decreased; current evidence shows that the risk of the much-feared respiratory depression with low-dose ITM (up to 150 mcg) is no greater than that with systemic opioids used in routine clinical practice. Patients receiving low-dose ITM can be nursed in regular surgical wards. The monitoring recommendations from societies such as the European Society of Regional Anaesthesia and Pain Therapy (ESRA), the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine and the American Society of Anesthesiologists need to be updated so that the requirements for extended or continuous monitoring at postoperative care units (PACUs), step-down units, high-dependency units, and intensive care units can be eliminated, thereby reducing additional costs and inconvenience and making this simple, versatile and highly effective analgesia technique available to a wider patient population in resource-limited settings.

Current status of the combined spinal-epidural technique in obstetrics and surgery.

Epidural and spinal blocks are well-accepted neuraxial techniques but both have several disadvantages. Combined spinal-epidural (CSE) can combine the best features of both techniques and reduce or eliminate these disadvantages. It provides the rapidity, density, and reliability of subarachnoid block with the flexibility of catheter epidural technique to extend the duration of anesthesia/analgesia (and to improve spinal block). It is an excellent technique for determining minimum intrathecal drug doses. Although most commonly employed in obstetric practice, CSE is also used in a wide variety of non-obstetric surgical procedures including orthopedic, vascular, gynecological, urological, and general surgical procedures. The needle-through-needle technique remains the most commonly used method to perform CSE. Several technical variations including Sequential CSE and Epidural Volume Extention (EVE) are commonly used particularly in obstetric and high-risk patients such as those with cardiac disease where a slower onset of sympathetic block is desirable. The risks of complications such as epidural catheter migration through the dural hole, neurological complications, and subarachnoid spread of epidurally administered drugs are possible but have not been a clinically relevant problem in the 40+ years of their existence. In obstetrics, CSE is used for labor pain because it produces rapid-onset analgesia with reduced local anesthetic consumption and less motor block. The epidural catheter placed as part of a CSE is more reliable than a catheter placed as part of a conventional epidural. Less breakthrough pain throughout labor is noted and fewer catheters require replacing. Side effects of CSE include greater potential for hypotension and more fetal heart rate abnormalities. CSE is also used for cesarean delivery. The main purpose is to decrease the spinal dose so that spinal-induced hypotension can be reduced. However, reducing the spinal dose requires an epidural catheter to avoid intra-operative pain when surgery is prolonged.

Advances in the Management of Acute Postsurgical Pain: A Review.

Despite the millions of surgeries performed every year around the world, postoperative pain remains prevalent and is often addressed with inadequate or suboptimal treatments. Chronic postsurgical pain is surprisingly prevalent, and its rate varies with the type of surgery, as well as with certain patient characteristics. Thus, better clinical training is needed as well as patient education. As pain can be caused by more than one mechanism, multimodal or balanced postsurgical analgesia is appropriate. Pharmacological agents such as opioid and nonopioid pain relievers, as well as adjuvants and nonpharmacologic approaches, can be combined to provide better and opioid-sparing pain relief. Many specialty societies have guidelines for postoperative pain management that emphasize multimodal postoperative analgesia. These guidelines are particularly helpful when dealing with special populations such as pregnant patients or infants and children. Pediatric pain control, in particular, can be challenging as patients may be unable to communicate their pain levels. A variety of validated assessment tools are available for diagnosis. Related to therapy, most guidelines agree on the fact that codeine should be used with extreme caution in pediatric patients as some may be "rapid metabolizers" and its use may be life-threatening. Prehabilitation is a preoperative approach that prepares patients in advance of elective surgery with conditioning exercises and other interventions to optimize their health. Prehabilitation may have aerobic, strength-training, nutritional, and counseling components. Logistical considerations and degree of patient adherence represent barriers to effective prehabilitation programs. Notwithstanding all this, acute postoperative pain represents a clinical challenge that has not yet been well addressed.

Effect of auditory evoked potential-guided anaesthesia on consumption of anaesthetics and early postoperative cognitive dysfunction: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Post-operative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) after non-cardiac surgery is a well known problem in some categories of patients. This study aims to evaluate the influence of auditory evoked potential (AEP)-guided anaesthesia on the requirement for anaesthetic drugs and their influence on POCD. METHODS: Four hundred and fifty patients aged between 18 and 92 years scheduled for ophthalmic surgery under general anaesthesia were assigned randomly to one of two groups. In group A (AEP group), the depth of anaesthesia (DoA) was aimed at an AEP index (AAI) between 15 and 25. In group C (control group), DoA was guided by clinical signs. Hypotension was treated with fluids and vasopressors using a standardised algorithm. A mini-mental test and the Cognitive Failure Questionnaire were used to evaluate cognitive function. RESULTS: Anaesthetic drug requirements were significantly lower in group A than in group C: propofol 92.5 ± 26.5 vs. 103.8 ± 39.5 mg (P = <0.001) and desflurane end-tidal concentration 2.5 ± 0.58 vs. 3.3 ± 0.79% (P < 0.001). In group A, 36 patients (16%) received additional fluids and vasopressors compared to 65 patients (29%) in group C (P < 0.01). AAI values differed significantly between the groups: 18 (11-21) in group A vs. 12 (10-19) in group C (P < 0.001). The number of patients with POCD was 16 in group C compared to two in group A (P < 0.001) at day 1 post-operation. CONCLUSION: AEP monitoring allows dose reduction of anaesthetic agents, leading to better cardiovascular stability and decreased requirements for intra-operative fluids and vasopressors. Cognitive decline seen following minor ophthalmic surgery, even when anaesthesia is assessed clinically, is short-lived with no long-term sequelae.

Epidural analgesia for postoperative pain: Improving outcomes or adding risks?

Current evidence shows that the benefits of epidural analgesia (EA) are not as impressive as believed in the past, while the risks of adverse effects and serious complications are greater than previously estimated. There are many reasons for the decreasing role of epidural technique in clinical practice (table). Indeed, EA can cause harm and hinder early mobilization in enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programmes. Some ERAS interventions are complex, confusing, sometimes contradictory and apparently unimplementable. In spite of much hype and after almost 25 years, the originator of the concept has described the current status of ERAS as 'far from good'. Outpatient surgery setup has been a remarkable success for many major surgical procedures, and it predates ERAS and appears to be a simpler and better model for reducing postoperative morbidity and hospitalization times. Systematic reviews of comparative studies have shown that less invasive and safer but equally effective alternatives to EA are available for almost all major surgical procedures. These include: paravertebral block, peripheral nerve blocks, catheter wound infusion, periarticular local infiltration analgesia, preperitoneal catheters and transversus abdominis plane block. Increasingly, these non-EA methods are being used as surgeon-delivered regional analgesia (RA) techniques. This encouraging trend of active surgeon participation, with anaesthesiologist collaboration, will undoubtedly improve the decades-old twin problems of underused RA techniques and undertreated postoperative pain. The continued use of EA at any institution can only be justified by results from its own audits; however, regrettably only very few institutions perform such regular audits.

Composition of the anaesthesia team: a European survey.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The anaesthesia workforce in Europe is understaffed and may not meet the growing demands of surgery. In many European countries where responsibilities can be identified and a varying degree of task substitution occurs, the anaesthesia service is provided by a team of physician and nonphysician anaesthesia members. This study assesses the availability, as well as the roles and functions, of nonphysician anaesthesia team members in European countries. METHODS: A survey was carried out to examine differences in anaesthesia practices and the strength of the anaesthesia workforce in Europe. A questionnaire, seeking information about perioperative anaesthesia input by nonphysician anaesthesia team members, was sent to all the national representatives of the Union of European Medical Specialists Anaesthesiology section and the International Federation of Nurse Anaesthetists. RESULTS: The responses to the questionnaire revealed that each European country has its own unique type of nonphysician anaesthesia team member and the roles of these vary substantially. Their levels of organisation vary from country to country and whereas nurse anaesthetists are often well organised, circulation nurses are not. CONCLUSION: The present study demonstrated the heterogeneity and variety of anaesthesia practices throughout Europe. Standardisation of the training and practice of European nurse anaesthetists is desirable for patient safety and quality of care if they seek to work in more than one European country. Those countries that anticipate a shortfall in the supply of anaesthesiologists should examine working models from other countries that currently work with fewer physicians and more nurse anaesthetists.

Safety of lornoxicam in the treatment of postoperative pain: a post-marketing study of analgesic regimens containing lornoxicam compared with standard analgesic treatment in 3752 day-case surgery patients.

BACKGROUND: Post-marketing surveillance studies can provide supplemental data on the safety of medications in the general population. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the safety of analgesic regimens including the NSAID lornoxicam in the short-term treatment of postoperative pain in a clinically relevant population. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized, open-label, multicentre, multinational, observational cohort study of 4 days' duration. SETTING: In-hospital postoperative setting, with discharge to home treatment within 24 hours of surgery. PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged > or =18 years expected to be in need of analgesic treatment after day-case surgery. INTERVENTION: Analgesic regimens containing lornoxicam were compared with a standard analgesic treatment, which was defined as the treatment that the patient would normally receive at the centre. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Following day-case surgery, patients were provided with appropriate analgesic medication, and adverse events (AEs; defined as all recorded events with symptoms) were recorded by the investigator during the in-hospital stay and by the patient for the next 3 days using entries recorded morning and evening in a patient diary. Statistical analyses tested for between-treatment differences in AEs, adverse drug reactions (ADRs; defined as events probably, possibly or unlikely to be related to treatment) and gastrointestinal AEs (GI-AEs). RESULTS: A total of 4152 patients were randomized to treatment. Since 400 patients did not take any analgesic, the safety population consisted of 1838 patients for lornoxicam and 1914 patients for standard analgesic treatment. Demographic and disease characteristics were similar between the two treatment groups, as were the type of surgery and the anaesthesia used in surgery. In the safety population, 16.9% of patients received no analgesic in hospital, and when analgesics were provided they were often administered in combination. Similarly, approximately 17% of patients did not take any analgesics at home. AEs were reported in 27.1% and 29.4% of patients in the lornoxicam and standard analgesic treatment groups, respectively, and ADRs constituted the majority of these events. No significant differences were demonstrated with regard to the incidence of AEs between the two groups. Most events were of mild or moderate intensity. Consistent with what may be expected for an NSAID, most AEs with lornoxicam were related to the GI system. GI-AEs were reported in 19.5% and 21.3% of patients in the lornoxicam and standard analgesic treatment groups, respectively, and most of these were considered ADRs. Most patients were satisfied with their pain treatment both in hospital and at home. CONCLUSION: Lornoxicam-containing regimens are as well tolerated as other analgesic regimens over 4 days in the treatment of postoperative pain.

Intra-articular patient-controlled analgesia improves early rehabilitation after knee surgery.

The influence of patient-controlled intra-articular analgesia with ropivacaine, morphine and ketorolac (RMK) on postoperative pain relief and early rehabilitation after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction was studied. Twenty six patients, randomized into two groups, were enrolled in a placebo-controlled, double-blind study. At the end of surgery a catheter was placed intra-articularly and connected to a patient-controlled pump, programmed to deliver 10 mL bolus and 60 min lockout interval. RMK group received 0.25% ropivacaine, morphine 0.2 mg/mL and ketorolac 1 mg/mL; P group saline. Pain was measured with 10 cm visual analog scale. At pain scores > 3 cm, all patients were instructed to self-administer morphine intravenously using a patient-controlled pump. Daily rescue morphine consumption was noted and 48 h rehabilitation programme was evaluated. Daily morphine consumption was significantly lower in the RMK group (p < 0.001). At 24h after surgery, the patients in the RMK group experienced significantly less pain (p < 0.05). The patients in the RMK group achieved higher maximum degree of knee flexion in supine (p < 0.001) and in prone position (p < 0.05) compared to placebo group and better pain free flexion with assistance on day 1 (p < 0.05) and 2 (p > 0.05). The results show that patient-controlled intra-articular analgesia with RMK combination provides effective pain relief following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and improves early physical rehabilitation.

PROSPECT guideline for hallux valgus repair surgery: a systematic review and procedure-specific postoperative pain management recommendations.

Hallux valgus repair is associated with moderate-to-severe postoperative pain. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the available literature and develop recommendations for optimal pain management after hallux valgus repair. A systematic review using PROcedure SPECific Postoperative Pain ManagemenT (PROSPECT) methodology was undertaken. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in the English language from inception of database to December 2019 assessing postoperative pain using analgesic, anesthetic, and surgical interventions were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Database, among others. Of the 836 RCTs identified, 55 RCTs and 1 systematic review met our inclusion criteria. Interventions that improved postoperative pain relief included paracetamol and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or cyclo-oxygenase-2 selective inhibitors, systemic steroids, ankle block, and local anesthetic wound infiltration. Insufficient evidence was found for the use of gabapentinoids or wound infiltration with extended release bupivacaine or dexamethasone. Conflicting evidence was found for percutaneous chevron osteotomy. No evidence was found for homeopathic preparation, continuous local anesthetic wound infusion, clonidine and fentanyl as sciatic perineural adjuncts, bioabsorbable magnesium screws, and plaster slippers. No studies of sciatic nerve block met the inclusion criteria for PROSPECT methodology due to a wider scope of included surgical procedures or the lack of a control (no block) group. The analgesic regimen for hallux valgus repair should include, in the absence of contraindication, paracetamol and a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug or cyclo-oxygenase-2 selective inhibitor administered preoperatively or intraoperatively and continued postoperatively, along with systemic steroids, and postoperative opioids for rescue analgesia.

Is smaller necessarily better? A systematic review comparing the effects of minilaparoscopic and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy on patient outcomes.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy (MLC; total size of trocar incision < 25 mm) has been increasingly advocated for the removal of the gallbladder, due to potentially better surgical outcomes (e.g., better cosmetic result, reduced pain, shorter hospital stay, quicker return to activity), but an evidence-based approach has been lacking. The current systematic review was undertaken to evaluate the importance of total size of trocar incision in improving surgical outcomes in adult laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). METHODS: The literature was systematically reviewed using MEDLINE and EmBASE. Only randomized controlled trials in English, investigating minilaparoscopic versus conventional LC (total size of trocar incision > or = 25 mm) and reporting pain scores were included. Quantitative analyses (meta-analyses) were performed on postoperative pain scores and other patient outcomes from more than one study where feasible and appropriate. Qualitative analyses consisted of assessing the number of studies showing a significant difference between the techniques. RESULTS: Thirteen trials met the inclusion criteria. There was a trend towards reduced pain with MLC compared with conventional LC, without reduction in opioid use. Patients in the MLC group had slightly reduced length of hospital stay, but there were no significant differences for return to activity. The two interventions were also similar in terms of operating times and adverse events, but MLC was associated with better cosmetic result (largely patient rated). There was a significantly greater likelihood of conversion to conventional LC or to open cholecystectomy in the MLC group than there was of conversion to open cholecystectomy in the conventional LC group [OR 4.71 (95% confidence interval 2.67-8.31), p < 0.00001]. CONCLUSIONS: The data included in this review suggest that reducing the size of trocar incision results in some limited improvements in surgical outcomes after LC. However, it carries a higher risk of conversion to conventional LC or open cholecystectomy.

Intraarticular administration of ketorolac, morphine, and ropivacaine combined with intraarticular patient-controlled regional analgesia for pain relief after shoulder surgery: a randomized, double-blind study.

BACKGROUND: In this study we assessed the efficacy of intraarticular regional analgesia on postoperative pain and analgesic requirements. METHODS: Fifty-one patients undergoing shoulder surgery (Bankart) were recruited into this double-blind study. At the end of the operation, patients were randomized to three groups to receive intraarticularly via a catheter: Group 1: ropivacaine 90 mg (9 mL), morphine 4 mg (10 mL), and ketorolac 30 mg (1 mL) (total volume 20 mL); Groups 2 and 3: saline (20 mL). In addition, Groups 1 and 3 received 1 mL saline IV while Group 2 received ketorolac 30 mg (1 mL) IV. Postoperatively, Group 1 received pain relief using 10 mL 0.5% ropivacaine on demand via the intraarticular catheter while Groups 2 and 3 received 10 mL of saline intraarticularly. Group 3 was the Control group. RESULTS: Postoperative pain at rest and on movement were lower in Group 1 than in Groups 2 and 3 during the first 30 and 120 min, respectively. The time to first request for local anesthetic infusion was longer in Group 1 than in Groups 2 and 3 (P < 0.001). The median morphine consumption during the first 24 postoperative hours was less in Groups 1 and 2 than in Group 3 (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in analgesic consumption between Group 1 and Group 2. The median satisfaction score was higher in Group 1 compared with Groups 2 (P < 0.05) and 3 (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A combination of intraarticular ropivacaine, morphine, and ketorolac followed by intermittent injections of ropivacaine as needed provided better pain relief, less morphine consumption, and improved patient satisfaction compared with the control group. The group that received IV ketorolac consumed less morphine and was more satisfied with treatment than patients in the control group.

A systematic review of randomized trials evaluating regional techniques for postthoracotomy analgesia.

BACKGROUND: Thoracotomy induces severe postoperative pain and impairment of pulmonary function, and therefore regional analgesia has been intensively studied in this procedure. Thoracic epidural analgesia is commonly considered the "gold standard" in this setting; however, evaluation of the evidence is needed to assess the comparative benefits of alternative techniques, guide clinical practice and identify areas requiring further research. METHODS: In this systematic review of randomized trials we evaluated thoracic epidural, paravertebral, intrathecal, intercostal, and interpleural analgesic techniques, compared to each other and to systemic opioid analgesia, in adult thoracotomy. Postoperative pain, analgesic use, and complications were analyzed. RESULTS: Continuous paravertebral block was as effective as thoracic epidural analgesia with local anesthetic (LA) but was associated with a reduced incidence of hypotension. Paravertebral block reduced the incidence of pulmonary complications compared with systemic analgesia, whereas thoracic epidural analgesia did not. Thoracic epidural analgesia was superior to intrathecal and intercostal techniques, although these were superior to systemic analgesia; interpleural analgesia was inadequate. CONCLUSIONS: Either thoracic epidural analgesia with LA plus opioid or continuous paravertebral block with LA can be recommended. Where these techniques are not possible, or are contraindicated, intrathecal opioid or intercostal nerve block are recommended despite insufficient duration of analgesia, which requires the use of supplementary systemic analgesia. Quantitative meta-analyses were limited by heterogeneity in study design, and subject numbers were small. Further well designed studies are required to investigate the optimum components of the epidural solution and to rigorously evaluate the risks/benefits of continuous infusion paravertebral and intercostal techniques compared with thoracic epidural analgesia.

Postdischarge complications and rehabilitation after ambulatory surgery.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To present the literature on recent developments in anesthetic and analgesic techniques in ambulatory surgery. RECENT FINDINGS: Studies published during the past 12 months have provided results for several 'take home messages', which include use of perioperative celecoxib improves short-term and long-term postoperative outcome; perineural catheter analgesia is feasible and safe at home; small incision cholecystectomy is quicker to perform and has no disadvantages when compared with laparoscopic technique; 2-chloroprocaine appears to be the drug of choice for spinal anesthesia; simple regional anesthesia techniques such as wound infiltration and intraarticular local anesthetics are safe and effective; Society of Ambulatory Anesthesia guidelines for managing postoperative nausea and vomiting recommend use of regional anesthesia techniques and use of certain drugs (and avoidance of others) if general anesthesia is chosen. SUMMARY: During the last year, several studies have demonstrated the benefits of regional anesthesia techniques in reducing postdischarge complications and improving rehabilitation. Perioperative use of the COX-2 selective inhibitor celecoxib seems to provide short-term and long-term postoperative advantages.

Anesthesia and Analgesia Practice Pathway Options for Total Knee Arthroplasty: An Evidence-Based Review by the American and European Societies of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine.

In 2014, the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine in collaboration with the European Society of Regional Anaesthesia and Pain Therapy convened a group of experts to compare pathways for anesthetic and analgesic management for patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty in North America and Europe and to develop a practice pathway. This review is intended to be an analysis of the current literature to assist individuals and institutions in designing a pathway for total knee arthroplasty that is based on existing evidence and expert recommendation and may be customized according to individual settings.