Perioperative Cefazolin for Total Joint Arthroplasty Patients Who Have a Penicillin Allergy: Is It Safe?

BACKGROUND: Cefazolin is the standard of care for perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in total joint arthroplasty (TJA) in the United States. The potential allergic cross-reactivity between cefazolin and penicillin causes uncertainty regarding optimal antibiotic choice in patients who have a reported penicillin allergy (rPCNA). The purpose of this study was to determine the safety of perioperative cefazolin in PCNA patients undergoing primary TJA. METHODS: We identified all patients (n = 49,842) undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty (n = 25,659) or total knee arthroplasty (n = 24,183) from 2016 to 2022 who received perioperative intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis. Patients who had an rPCNA (n = 5,508) who received cefazolin (n = 4,938, 89.7%) were compared to rPCNA patients who did not (n = 570, 10.3%), and to patients who did not have an rPCNA (n = 43,359). The primary outcome was the rate of allergic reactions within 72 hours postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included the rates of superficial infections, deep infections, and Clostridioides difficile infections within 90 days. RESULTS: The rate of allergic reactions was 0.1% (n = 5) in rPCNA patients who received cefazolin, compared to 0.2% (n = 1) in rPCNA patients who did not (P = .48) and 0.02% (n = 11) in patients who have no rPCNA (P = .02). Allergic reactions were mild in all 5 rPCNA patients who received cefazolin and were characterized by cutaneous symptoms (n = 4) or dyspnea in the absence of respiratory distress (n = 1) that resolved promptly with antibiotic discontinuation and administration of antihistamines and/or corticosteroids. We observed no differences in the rates of superficial infections (0.1 versus 0.2%, P = .58), deep infections (0.3 versus 0.4%, P = .68), or C difficile infections (0.04% versus 0%, P = .99) within 90 days in rPCNA patients who received cefazolin versus alternative perioperative antibiotics. CONCLUSIONS: In this series of more than 5,500 patients who had an rPCNA undergoing primary TJA, perioperative prophylaxis with cefazolin resulted in a 0.1% incidence of allergic reactions that were clinically indolent. Cefazolin can be safely administered to most patients, independent of rPCNA severity. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

What Is the Role of a Periarticular Injection for Knee Arthroplasty Patients Receiving a Multimodal Analgesia Regimen Incorporating Adductor Canal and Infiltration Between the Popliteal Artery and Capsule of the Knee Blocks? A Randomized Blinded Placebo-Controlled Noninferiority Trial.

BACKGROUND: Optimal analgesic protocols for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients remain controversial. Multimodal analgesia is advocated, often including peripheral nerve blocks and/or periarticular injections (PAIs). If 2 blocks (adductor canal block [ACB] plus infiltration between the popliteal artery and capsule of the knee [IPACK]) are used, also performing PAI may not be necessary. This noninferiority trial hypothesized that TKA patients with ACB + IPACK + saline PAI (sham infiltration) would have pain scores that were no worse than those of patients with ACB + IPACK + active PAI with local anesthetic. METHODS: A multimodal analgesic protocol of spinal anesthesia, ACB and IPACK blocks, intraoperative ketamine and ketorolac, postoperative ketorolac followed by meloxicam, acetaminophen, duloxetine, and oral opioids was used. Patients undergoing primary unilateral TKA were randomized to receive either active PAI or control PAI. The active PAI included a deep injection, performed before cementation, of bupivacaine 0.25% with epinephrine, 30 mL; morphine; methylprednisolone; cefazolin; with normal saline to bring total volume to 64 mL. A superficial injection of 20 mL bupivacaine, 0.25%, was administered before closure. Control injections were normal saline injected with the same injection technique and volumes. The primary outcome was numeric rating scale pain with ambulation on postoperative day 1. A noninferiority margin of 1.0 was used. RESULTS: Ninety-four patients were randomized. NRS pain with ambulation at POD1 in the ACB + IPACK + saline PAI group was not found to be noninferior to that of the ACB + IPACK + active PAI group (difference = 0.3, 95% confidence interval [CI], [-0.9 to 1.5], P = .120). Pain scores at rest did not differ significantly among groups. No significant difference was observed in opioid consumption between groups. Cumulative oral morphine equivalents through postoperative day 2 were 89 ± 40 mg (mean ± standard deviation), saline PAI, vs 73 ± 52, active PAI, P = .1. No significant differences were observed for worst pain, fraction of time in severe pain, pain interference, side-effects (nausea, drowsiness, itching, dizziness), quality of recovery, satisfaction, length of stay, chronic pain, and orthopedic outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: For TKA patients given a comprehensive analgesic protocol, use of saline PAI did not demonstrate noninferiority compared to active PAI. Neither the primary nor any secondary outcomes demonstrated superiority for active PAI, however. As we cannot claim either technique to be better or worse, there remains flexibility for use of either technique.

Effect of Duloxetine on Opioid Use and Pain After Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Triple-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Duloxetine, a serotonin-norepinephrine dual reuptake inhibitor, may improve analgesia after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Previous studies had one primary outcome, did not consistently use multimodal analgesia, and used patient-controlled analgesia devices, potentially delaying discharge. We investigated whether duloxetine would reduce opioid consumption or pain with ambulation. METHODS: A total of 160 patients received 60 mg duloxetine or placebo daily, starting from the day of surgery and continuing 14 days postoperatively. Patients received neuraxial anesthesia, peripheral nerve blocks, acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and oral opioids as needed. The dual primary outcomes were Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) scores with movement on postoperative days 1, 2, and 14, and cumulative opioid consumption surgery through postoperative day 14. RESULTS: Duloxetine was noninferior to placebo for both primary outcomes and was superior to placebo for opioid consumption. Opioid consumption (mean ± SD) was 288 ± 226 mg OME [94, 385] vs 432 ± 374 [210, 540] (duloxetine vs placebo) P = .0039. Pain scores on POD14 were 4.2 ± 2.0 vs 4.8 ± 2.2 (duloxetine vs placebo) P = .018. Median satisfaction with pain management was 10 (8, 10) and 8 (7, 10) (duloxetine vs placebo) P = .046. Duloxetine reduced interference by pain with walking, normal work, and sleep. CONCLUSION: The 29% reduction in opioid use corresponds to 17 fewer pills of oxycodone, 5 mg, and was achieved without increasing pain scores. Considering the ongoing opioid epidemic, duloxetine can be used to reduce opioid usage after knee arthroplasty in selected patients that can be appropriately monitored for potential side effects of the medication.

Peripheral nerve block anesthesia/analgesia for patients undergoing primary hip and knee arthroplasty: recommendations from the International Consensus on Anesthesia-Related Outcomes after Surgery (ICAROS) group based on a systematic review and meta-analysis of current literature.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based international expert consensus regarding the impact of peripheral nerve block (PNB) use in total hip/knee arthroplasty surgery. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis: randomized controlled and observational studies investigating the impact of PNB utilization on major complications, including mortality, cardiac, pulmonary, gastrointestinal, renal, thromboembolic, neurologic, infectious, and bleeding complications.Medline, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library including Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, were queried from 1946 to August 4, 2020.The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach was used to assess evidence quality and for the development of recommendations. RESULTS: Analysis of 122 studies revealed that PNB use (compared with no use) was associated with lower ORs for (OR with 95% CIs) for numerous complications (total hip and knee arthroplasties (THA/TKA), respectively): cognitive dysfunction (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.53/OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.80), respiratory failure (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.74/OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.75), cardiac complications (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.93/OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.86), surgical site infections (OR 0.55 95% CI 0.47 to 0.64/OR 0.86 95% CI 0.80 to 0.91), thromboembolism (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.96/OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.96) and blood transfusion (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.86/OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.90 to 0.92). CONCLUSIONS: Based on the current body of evidence, the consensus group recommends PNB use in THA/TKA for improved outcomes. RECOMMENDATION: PNB use is recommended for patients undergoing THA and TKA except when contraindications preclude their use. Furthermore, the alignment of provider skills and practice location resources needs to be ensured. Evidence level: moderate; recommendation: strong.

Manipulation under anaesthesia after primary total knee arthroplasty : minimal differences in intravenous sedation alone versus neuraxial anaesthesia.

AIMS: Manipulation under anaesthesia (MUA) remains an effective intervention to address restricted range of motion (ROM) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and occurs in 2% to 3% of primary TKAs at our institution. Since there are few data on the outcomes of MUA with different anaesthetic methods, we sought to compare the outcomes of patients undergoing MUA with intravenous (IV) sedation and neuraxial anaesthesia. METHODS: We identified 548 MUAs after primary TKA (136 IV sedation, 412 neuraxial anaesthesia plus IV sedation) from March 2016 to July 2019. The mean age of this cohort was 62 years (35 to 88) with a mean body mass index of 31 kg/m2 (18 to 49). The mean time from primary TKA to MUA was 10.2 weeks (6.2 to 24.3). Pre-MUA ROM was similar between groups; overall mean pre-MUA extension was 4.2° (p = 0.452) and mean pre-MUA flexion was 77° (p = 0.372). We compared orthopaedic complications, visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores, length of stay (LOS), and immediate and three-month follow-up knee ROM between these groups. RESULTS: Following MUA, patients with IV sedation had higher mean VAS pain scores of 5.2 (SD 1.8) compared to 4.1 (SD = 1.5) in the neuraxial group (p < 0.001). The mean LOS was shorter in patients that received IV sedation (9.5 hours (4 to 31)) compared to neuraxial anaesthesia (11.9 hours (4 to 51)) (p = 0.009), but an unexpected overnight stay was similar in each group (8.6%). Immediate-post MUA ROM was 1° to 121° in the IV sedation group and 0.9° to 123° in the neuraxial group (p = 0.313). Three-month follow-up ROM was 2° to 108° in the IV sedation group and 1.9° to 110° in the neuraxial anaesthesia group (p = 0.325) with a mean loss of 13° (ranging from 5° gain to 60° loss), in both groups by three months. No patients in either group sustained a complication. CONCLUSION: IV sedation alone and neuraxial anaesthesia are both effective anaesthetic methods for MUA after primary TKA. Surgeons and anaesthetists should offer these anaesthetic techniques to match patient-specific needs as the orthopaedic outcomes are similar. Also, patients should be counselled that ROM following MUA may decrease over time. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6 Supple A):126-130.

The Effect of Hypotensive Anesthesia on Hemoglobin Levels during Total Knee Arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION: Hypotensive epidural anesthesia (HEA) is used in total joint arthroplasty as a safe and effective blood-saving modality. In order to maintain the blood pressure and heart rate patients, receive 1000 to 1500 mL of lactated Ringer's solution during surgery. While HEA reduces the intraoperative blood loss, the effect of intravenous fluid loading on hemoglobin levels is not fully understood. The current study investigates the effect of HEA on perioperative hemoglobin levels. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study included 35 patients operated on by a single surgeon undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty under HEA. Intraoperatively, at least 300 mL of intravenous fluid were given every 15 min over the first 60 min after HEA. Blood samples were drawn before entering the operating room, after HEA, as well as after inflation of the tourniquet, every 15 min thereafter, as well as in the recovery room and on postoperative days one and two. In addition, fluid in- and outtake was recorded. RESULTS: Patients received a mean 1275 mL during the 60 min of tourniquet time. The mean arterial pressure (MAP) 5 min after HEA dropped to 60 mmHg and reached a constant level of around 58 mmHg 15 min after HEA. The average hemoglobin level dropped from 13.9 g/dL prior to HEA, to 12.5 g/dL immediately after HEA (p < 0.001). Intraoperatively the hemoglobin level dropped further and reached 11.8 g/dL at 60 min in the absence of blood loss. CONCLUSIONS: Hypotensive epidural anesthesia and the resulting fluid substitution resulted in an average hemoglobin drop of 2.1 g/dL within the first 60 min. This needs to be taken into account when evaluating the need for blood transfusions after primary joint replacement surgery under HEA.

Cerebral Oxygenation in the Sitting Position Is Not Compromised During Spontaneous or Positive-Pressure Ventilation.

BACKGROUND: General anesthesia with neuromuscular blockade may facilitate total shoulder arthroplasty but appears to increase risk of cerebral oxygen desaturation. Cerebral desaturation is undesirable and is a proxy for risk of stroke. PURPOSES/QUESTIONS: This study tested the hypothesis that cerebral oxygen desaturation occurs frequently during general anesthesia with neuromuscular blockade and positive-pressure ventilation but does not occur with spontaneous ventilation. Correlations were sought among cerebral oxygen saturation, blood pressure, and cardiac index. METHODS: We designed a prospective, observational, cohort study to measure cerebral oxygenation in 25 patients during general anesthesia, both with and without positive-pressure ventilation. Patients undergoing elective shoulder arthroplasty in the sitting position received an arterial catheter, near-infrared spectroscopic measurement of cerebral oxygenation, and non-invasive cardiac output measurement. Moderate hypotension was allowed. Blood pressure was supported as needed with ephedrine or low-dose epinephrine (but avoiding phenylephrine). Hypercapnia (45 to 55 mmHg) was targeted during positive-pressure ventilation. RESULTS: No cerebral oxygen desaturations occurred, regardless of ventilation mode. Under positive-pressure ventilation, the median (interquartile range: Q1, Q3) cerebral oxygenation was 110% of baseline (104, 113), the mean arterial pressure was 62% of baseline (59, 69), and the cardiac index was 82% of baseline (71, 104). Cerebral oxygenation did not correlate with blood pressure or cardiac index but had moderate correlation with end-tidal carbon dioxide. No strokes occurred. CONCLUSIONS: There were no signs of inadequate brain perfusion during general anesthesia using paralytic agents. Positive-pressure ventilation with moderate hypotension in the sitting position does not endanger patients, in the context of moderate hypercapnia and hemodynamic support using ephedrine or epinephrine.

Anaesthetic care of patients undergoing primary hip and knee arthroplasty: consensus recommendations from the International Consensus on Anaesthesia-Related Outcomes after Surgery group (ICAROS) based on a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based international expert consensus regarding anaesthetic practice in hip/knee arthroplasty surgery is needed for improved healthcare outcomes. METHODS: The International Consensus on Anaesthesia-Related Outcomes after Surgery group (ICAROS) systematic review, including randomised controlled and observational studies comparing neuraxial to general anaesthesia regarding major complications, including mortality, cardiac, pulmonary, gastrointestinal, renal, genitourinary, thromboembolic, neurological, infectious, and bleeding complications. Medline, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library including Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, from 1946 to May 17, 2018 were queried. Meta-analysis and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was utilised to assess evidence quality and to develop recommendations. RESULTS: The analysis of 94 studies revealed that neuraxial anaesthesia was associated with lower odds or no difference in virtually all reported complications, except for urinary retention. Excerpt of complications for neuraxial vs general anaesthesia in hip/knee arthroplasty, respectively: mortality odds ratio (OR): 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.57-0.80/OR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.60-1.15; pulmonary OR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.52-0.80/OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.58-0.81; acute renal failure OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.59-0.81/OR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.65-0.82; deep venous thrombosis OR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.42-0.65/OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.64-0.93; infections OR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.67-0.79/OR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.76-0.85; and blood transfusion OR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.82-0.89/OR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.82-0.87. CONCLUSIONS: Recommendation: primary neuraxial anaesthesia is preferred for knee arthroplasty, given several positive postoperative outcome benefits; evidence level: low, weak recommendation. RECOMMENDATION: neuraxial anaesthesia is recommended for hip arthroplasty given associated outcome benefits; evidence level: moderate-low, strong recommendation. Based on current evidence, the consensus group recommends neuraxial over general anaesthesia for hip/knee arthroplasty. TRIAL REGISTRY NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42018099935.

Addition of Adductor Canal Block to Periarticular Injection for Total Knee Replacement: A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Periarticular injection is a popular method to control postoperative pain after total knee replacement. An adductor canal block is a sensory block that can also help to alleviate pain after total knee replacement. We hypothesized that the combination of adductor canal block and periarticular injection would allow patients to reach discharge criteria 0.5 day faster than with periarticular injection alone. METHODS: This prospective trial enrolled 56 patients to receive a periarticular injection and 55 patients to receive an adductor canal block and periarticular injection. Both groups received intraoperative neuraxial anesthesia and multiple different types of pharmaceutical analgesics. The primary outcome was time to reach discharge criteria. Secondary outcomes, collected on postoperative days 1 and 2, included numeric rating scale pain scores, the PAIN OUT questionnaire, opioid consumption, and opioid-related side effects. RESULTS: There was no difference in time to reach discharge criteria between the groups with and without an adductor canal block. The Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney odds ratio was 0.87 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55 to 1.33; p = 0.518). The median time to achieve discharge criteria (and interquartile range) was 25.8 hours (23.4 hours, 44.3 hours) in the adductor canal block and periarticular injection group compared with 26.4 hours (22.9 hours, 46.2 hours) in the periarticular injection group. Patients who received an adductor canal block and periarticular injection reported lower worst pain (difference in means, -1.4 [99% CI, -2.7 to 0]; adjusted p = 0.041) and more pain relief (difference in means, 12% [99% CI, 0% to 24%]; adjusted p = 0.048) at 24 hours after anesthesia. There was no difference in any other secondary outcome measure (e.g., opioid consumption, opioid-related side effects, numeric rating scale pain scores). CONCLUSIONS: The time to meet the discharge criteria was not significantly different between the groups. In the adductor canal block and periarticular injection group, the patients had lower worst pain and greater pain relief at 24 hours after anesthesia. No difference was noted in any other secondary outcome measure (e.g., opioid consumption, opioid-related side effects, numeric rating scale pain scores). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Intravenous vs Oral Acetaminophen as a Component of Multimodal Analgesia After Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Randomized, Blinded Trial.

BACKGROUND: Multimodal analgesia including acetaminophen is increasingly popular for analgesia after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Intravenous (IV) administration of acetaminophen has pharmacokinetic benefits, but unclear clinical advantages. The authors hypothesized that IV acetaminophen would reduce pain with activity, opioid usage, or opioid-related side effects, compared to oral acetaminophen. METHODS: In this double-blinded, randomized, controlled trial, 154 THA patients received either IV or oral acetaminophen as part of a comprehensive opioid-sparing multimodal analgesia strategy. Primary outcomes were pain with physical therapy on postoperative day (POD) 1, opioid side effects (POD 1), and cumulative opioid use. RESULTS: There was no difference in opioid side effects, pain scores, or opioid use between the groups. CONCLUSION: Patients in both groups had low pain scores, minimal opioid side effects, and limited opioid usage (corresponding to 6 doses of tramadol 100 mg over 3 days). This highlights multimodal analgesia as an effective method of pain control for THA.

What Pain Levels Do TSA Patients Experience When Given a Long-acting Nerve Block and Multimodal Analgesia?

BACKGROUND: The pain experience for total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) patients in the first 2 weeks after surgery has not been well described. Many approaches to pain management have been used, with none emerging as clearly superior; it is important that any approach minimizes postoperative opioid use. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) With a long-acting nerve block and comprehensive multimodal analgesia, what are the pain levels after TSA from day of surgery until postoperative day (POD) 14? (2) How many opioids do TSA patients take from the day of surgery until POD 14? (3) What are the PainOUT responses at POD 1 and POD 14, focusing on side effects from opioids usage? METHODS: From January 27, 2017 to December 6, 2017, 154 TSA patients were identified as potentially eligible for this prospective, institutional review board-approved observational study. Of those, 46 patients (30%) were excluded (either because they were deemed not appropriate for the study, research staff were not available, patients were not eligible, or they declined to participate), and another six (4%) had incomplete followup data and could not be studied, leaving 102 patients (66%) for analysis here. Median preoperative pain with movement was 7 (interquartile range [IQR], 5-9) and 13 of 102 patients used preoperative opioids. All patients received a single-injection bupivacaine interscalene block with adjuvant clonidine, dexamethasone, and buprenorphine. Multimodal analgesia included acetaminophen, NSAIDs, and opioids. The primary outcome was the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) pain score with movement on POD 14. The NRS pain score ranges from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain possible). Secondary outcomes included NRS pain scores at rest and with movement (day of surgery, and PODs 1, 3, 7 and 14), daily analgesic use from day of surgery to POD 14 (both oral and intravenous), Opioid-Related Symptom Distress Scale (which assesses 12 symptoms ranging from 0 to 4, with 4 being the most distressing; the composite score is the mean of the 12 symptom-specific scores) on POD 1, and the PainOut questionnaire on POD 1 and POD 14. The PainOut questionnaire includes questions rating nausea, drowsiness, itching from 0 (none) to 10 (severe), as well as rating difficulty staying asleep from 0 (does not interfere) to 10 (completely interferes). RESULTS: The median NRS pain scores with movement were 2 (IQR, 0-5) on POD 1, 5 (IQR, 3-6) on POD 3, and the pain score was 3 (IQR, 1-5) on POD 14. Median total opioid use (converted to oral morphine equivalents) was 16 mg (4-50 mg) for the first 24 hours, 30 mg (8-63 mg) for the third, and 0 mg (0-20 mg) by the eighth 24-hour period, while the most frequent number of activations of the intravenous patient-controlled analgesia device was 0. Median PainOut scores on POD 1 and POD 14 for sleep interference, nausea, drowsiness and itching were 0, and the median composite Opioid-Related Symptom Distress Scale score on day 1 was 0.3 (IQR, 0.1-0.5). CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians using this protocol, which combines a long-acting, single-injection nerve block with multimodal analgesia, can inform TSA patients that their postoperative pain will likely be less than their preoperative pain, and that on average they will stop using opioids after 7 days. Future research could investigate what the individual components of this protocol contribute. Larger cohort studies or registries would document the incidence of rare complications. Randomized controlled trials could directly compare analgesic effectiveness and cost-benefits for this protocol versus alternative strategies, such as perineural catheters or liposomal bupivacaine. Perhaps most importantly, future studies could seek ways to further reduce peak pain and opioid usage on POD 2 and POD 3. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study.

Addition of Infiltration Between the Popliteal Artery and the Capsule of the Posterior Knee and Adductor Canal Block to Periarticular Injection Enhances Postoperative Pain Control in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Periarticular injections (PAIs) are becoming a staple component of multimodal joint pathways. Motor-sparing peripheral nerve blocks, such as the infiltration between the popliteal artery and capsule of the posterior knee (IPACK) and the adductor canal block (ACB), may augment PAI in multimodal analgesic pathways for knee arthroplasty, but supporting literature remains rare. We hypothesized that the addition of ACB and IPACK to PAI would lower pain on ambulation on postoperative day (POD) 1 compared to PAI alone. METHODS: This triple-blinded randomized controlled trial included 86 patients undergoing unilateral total knee arthroplasty. Patients either received (1) a PAI (control group, n = 43) or (2) an IPACK with an ACB and modified PAI (intervention group, n = 43). The primary outcome was pain on ambulation on POD 1. Secondary outcomes included numeric rating scale (NRS) pain scores, patient satisfaction, and opioid consumption. RESULTS: The intervention group reported significantly lower NRS pain scores on ambulation than the control group on POD 1 (difference in means [95% confidence interval], -3.3 [-4.0 to -2.7]; P < .001). In addition, NRS pain scores on ambulation on POD 0 (-3.5 [-4.3 to -2.7]; P < .001) and POD 2 (-1.0 [-1.9 to -0.1]; P = .033) were significantly lower. Patients in the intervention group were more satisfied, had less opioid consumption (P = .005, postanesthesia care unit, P = .028, POD 0), less intravenous opioids (P < .001), and reduced need for intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (P = .037). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of IPACK and ACB to PAI significantly improves analgesia and reduces opioid consumption after total knee arthroplasty compared to PAI alone. This study strongly supports IPACK and ACB use within a multimodal analgesic pathway.

Duloxetine and Subacute Pain after Knee Arthroplasty when Added to a Multimodal Analgesic Regimen: A Randomized, Placebo-controlled, Triple-blinded Trial.

BACKGROUND: Duloxetine is effective for chronic musculoskeletal and neuropathic pain, but there are insufficient data to recommend the use of antidepressants for postoperative pain. The authors hypothesized that administration of duloxetine for 15 days would reduce pain with ambulation at 2 weeks after total knee arthroplasty. METHODS: In this triple-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, patients received either duloxetine or placebo for 15 days, starting from the day of surgery. Patients also received a comprehensive multimodal analgesic regimen including neuraxial anesthesia, epidural analgesia, an adductor canal block, meloxicam, and oxycodone/acetaminophen as needed. The primary outcome was the pain score (0 to 10 numeric rating scale) with ambulation on postoperative day 14. RESULTS: One hundred six patients were randomized and analyzed. On day 14, duloxetine had no effect on pain with ambulation; mean pain was 3.8 (SD, 2.3) for placebo versus 3.5 (SD, 2.1) for duloxetine (difference in means [95% CI], 0.4 [-0.5 to 1.2]; P = 0.386). Symptoms potentially attributable to duloxetine discontinuation at study drug completion (nausea, anxiety) occurred among nine patients (duloxetine) and five patients (placebo); this was not statistically significant (P = 0.247). Statistically significant secondary outcomes included opioid consumption (difference in mean milligram oral morphine equivalents [95% CI], 8.7 [3.3 to 14.1], P = 0.002 by generalized estimating equation) over the postoperative period and nausea on day 1 (P = 0.040). There was no difference in other side effects or in anxiety and depression scores. CONCLUSIONS: When included as a part of a multimodal analgesic regimen for knee arthroplasty, duloxetine does not reduce subacute pain with ambulation.

The Effect of Regional Analgesia on Vascular Tone in Hip Arthroplasty Patients.

BACKGROUND: While it is assumed that neuraxial analgesia and pain management may beneficially influence perioperative hemodynamics, few studies provided data quantifying such effects and none have assessed the potential contribution of the addition of a nerve block. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: This clinical trial compared the visual analog scale (VAS) scores and measurement of arterial tone using augmentation index of patients who received combined spinal-epidural (CSE) only to patients who received both CSE and lumbar plexus block. METHODS: After obtaining written consent, 92 patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty were randomized to receive either CSE or CSE with lumbar plexus block (LPB). Perioperative pain and arterial tone were measured using VAS scores and augmentation index (AI) respectively, at baseline and at various times postoperatively. RESULTS: After the exclusion of 2 patients, 44 patients received CSE alone and 46 patients received CSE and LPB. Patient demographics and perioperative characteristics were similar in both groups. AI continuously decreased after placement of a CSE with or without LBP, beyond full resolution of neuraxial and peripheral blockade. Although the LPB group demonstrated a statistically significant reduction of VAS pain scores in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU; P < 0.05), overall, the addition of a LPB did not significantly reduce the AI when compared to the control group. CONCLUSION: The addition of a LPB provided better pain control in the PACU but did not reduce the AI, compared to the control group. We conclude that the addition of a LPB may have limited ability to affect arterial tone in the presence of a continuous infusion of epidural analgesics. In summary, the addition of a LPB in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty is clinically effective and provided better pain control, especially in the immediate postoperative period. The continuous decrease on the AI in both groups beyond the full resolution of the neuroaxial and LPB will require further studies.

Prospective, Randomized Double-Blind Study: Does Decreasing Interscalene Nerve Block Volume for Surgical Anesthesia in Ambulatory Shoulder Surgery Offer Same-Day Patient Recovery Advantages?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In this randomized double-blind prospective study in patients undergoing shoulder arthroscopy, we compared the effects of ultrasound-guided interscalene nerve block using 20 mL (intervention group) and 40 mL (control group) of a mepivacaine 1.5% and bupivacaine 0.5% mixture (1:1 volume) on ipsilateral handgrip strength and other postoperative end points. METHODS: One hundred fifty-four patients scheduled for ambulatory shoulder arthroscopy were randomly assigned to receive a single-injection interscalene block under ultrasound guidance with either 40 mL (control) or 20 mL (intervention) and intravenous sedation. The primary outcome was the change in ipsilateral handgrip strength in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) measured with a dynamometer. Secondary end points were recorded, including negative inspiratory force, incidences of hoarseness and Horner syndrome, time to readiness for discharge from PACU, time to discharge from PACU, patient satisfaction, time to block resolution, and pain scores. RESULTS: Postoperative handgrip strength was greater in the 20-mL group compared with the 40-mL group (difference in means, 2.3 kg [95% confidence interval, 0.6-4.0 kg]; P = 0.009). A smaller proportion of patients in the intervention group experienced hoarseness postoperatively compared with the control group (odds ratio, 0.26 [95% confidence interval, 0.08-0.82]; P = 0.015). Patient satisfaction and duration of analgesia were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: When used for surgical anesthesia for shoulder arthroscopies in the ambulatory setting, a 20-mL volume in an ultrasound-guided interscalene block preserves greater handgrip strength on the ipsilateral side in the PACU compared with 40 mL without significant decrease in block success, duration of analgesia, and patient satisfaction.

Buprenorphine, Clonidine, Dexamethasone, and Ropivacaine for Interscalene Nerve Blockade: A Prospective, Randomized, Blinded, Ropivacaine Dose-Response Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated interscalene block for shoulder arthroplasty with various ropivacaine concentrations in the presence of clonidine, dexamethasone, and buprenorphine. The goal was prolonged analgesia with minimal motor blockade. DESIGN: Prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial. SETTING: University-affiliated orthopedic hospital. METHODS: Patients (20/group) received acetaminophen, ketorolac, pregabalin, opioids, and "Control"; interscalene block, 0.375% ropivacaine, intravenous additives (buprenorphine, clonidine, dexamethasone); "High Dose"; 0.375% ropivacaine, perineural additives; "Medium Dose"; 0.2% ropivacaine, perineural additives; and "Low Dose"; 0.1% ropivacaine, perineural additives. RESULTS: Pain with movement at 24 hours was 4.9 ± 2.5 (mean ± standard deviation [SD]) (Control), 4.5 ± 3.0 (High Dose), 3.4 ± 1.8 (Medium Dose), 4.2 ± 2.4 (Low Dose). The difference between Medium Dose and Control was -1.5 (95% CI: -2.9, -0.1) (P = 0.040). Median time until need for opioids was 16.1 hours (Control) vs 23.7 hours (High Dose); hazard ratio 0.37 [95% CI: 0.17, 0.79]. High Dose had less pain with movement the morning after surgery, vs Control; 2.9 ± 2.5 vs 4.9 ± 2.7; P = 0.027. Pain with movement in the Post-Anesthesia Care Unit was higher in Low Dose, vs Control; 0.9 ± 1.4 vs 0 ± 0, P = 0.009. Low Dose had superior hand strength in the Post-Anesthesia Care Unit (mean ± SD of pre-operative strength: 44.0 ± 20.3%) compared to Control (27.5 ± 24.5%) (P = 0.031). CONCLUSIONS: For maximum pain reduction, combining perineural additives with ropivacaine 0.375% or 0.2% is suggested. To minimize motor blockade, perineural additives can be combined with ropivacaine, 0.1%.

The Fibromyalgia Survey Score Correlates With Preoperative Pain Phenotypes But Does Not Predict Pain Outcomes After Shoulder Arthroscopy.

OBJECTIVES: Fibromyalgia (FM) characteristics can be evaluated using a simple, self-reported measure that correlates with postoperative opioid consumption after lower-extremity joint arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to determine whether preoperative pain history and the FM survey score can predict postoperative outcomes after shoulder arthroscopy, which may cause moderate to severe pain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this prospective study, 100 shoulder arthroscopy patients completed preoperative validated self-report measures to assess baseline quality of recovery score, physical functioning, depression, anxiety, and neuropathic pain. FM characteristics were evaluated using a validated measure of widespread pain and comorbid symptoms on a 0 to 31 scale. Outcomes were assessed on postoperative day 2 (opioid consumption [primary], pain, physical functioning, quality of recovery score), and day 14 (opioid consumption, pain). RESULTS: FM survey scores ranged from 0 to 13. The cohort was divided into tertiles for univariate analyses. Preoperative depression and anxiety (P<0.001) and neuropathic pain (P=0.008) were higher, and physical functioning was lower (P<0.001), in higher FM survey score groups. The fibromyalgia survey score was not associated with postoperative pain or opioid consumption; however, it was independently associated with poorer quality of recovery scores (P=0.001). The only independent predictor of postoperative opioid use was preoperative opioid use (P=0.038). DISCUSSION: FM survey scores were lower than those in a previous study of joint arthroplasty. Although they distinguished a negative preoperative pain phenotype, FM scores were not independently associated with postoperative opioid consumption. Further research is needed to elucidate the impact of a FM-like phenotype on postoperative analgesic outcomes.

Patient-controlled epidural analgesia or multimodal pain regimen with periarticular injection after total hip arthroplasty: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: The optimal postoperative analgesia after primary total hip arthroplasty remains in question. This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study compared the use of patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) with use of a multimodal pain regimen including periarticular injection (PAI). We hypothesized that PAI would lead to earlier readiness for discharge, decreased opioid consumption, and lower pain scores. METHODS: Forty-one patients received PAI, and forty-three patients received PCEA. Preoperatively, both groups were administered dexamethasone (6 mg, orally). The PAI group received a clonidine patch and sustained-release oxycodone (10 mg), while the PCEA group had placebo. Both groups received combined spinal-epidural anesthesia and used an epidural pain pump postoperatively; the PAI group had normal saline solution, while the PCEA group had bupivacaine and hydromorphone. The primary outcome, readiness for discharge, required the discontinuation of the epidural, a pain score of <4 (numeric rating scale) without parenteral narcotics, normal eating, minimal nausea, urination without a catheter, a dry surgical wound, no acute medical problems, and the ability to independently transfer and walk 12.2 m (40 ft). RESULTS: The mean time to readiness for discharge (and standard deviation) was 2.4 ± 0.7 days (PAI) compared with 2.3 ± 0.8 days (PCEA) (p = 0.86). The mean length of stay was 3.0 ± 0.8 days (PAI) compared with 3.1 ± 0.7 days (PCEA) (p = 0.46). A significant mean difference in pain score of 0.74 with ambulation (p = 0.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.18 to 1.31) and 0.80 during physical therapy (p = 0.03; 95% CI, 0.09 to 1.51) favored the PCEA group. The mean opioid consumption (oral morphine equivalents in milligrams) was significantly higher in the PAI group on postoperative day 0 (43 ± 21 compared with 28 ± 23; p = 0.002) and postoperative days 0 through 2 (136 ± 59 compared with 90 ± 79; p = 0.004). Opioid-Related Symptom Distress Scale (ORSDS) composite scores for severity and bothersomeness as well as scores for nausea, vomiting, and itchiness were significantly higher in the PCEA group (p < 0.05). Quality of Recovery-40 scores and patient satisfaction were similar. CONCLUSIONS: PAI did not decrease the time to discharge and was associated with higher pain scores and greater opioid consumption but lower ORSDS scores compared with PCEA. The choice for analgesic regimen may depend on a particular patient's threshold for pain and the potential side effects.