Functional recovery of wrist surgery with regional versus general anesthesia: a prospective observational study.

PURPOSE: Regional anesthesia may favour postoperative rehabilitation by inhibiting peripheral sensitization and secondary hyperalgesia. The literature on this subject is limited. In the present FUNCTION study, we sought to compare the functional recovery post orthopedic wrist surgery with regional versus general anesthesia. METHODS: We conducted a single-centre prospective observational cohort study in adult patients with a distal radial fracture. Functional recovery was assessed with validated psychometrics questionnaires (Quick Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand [QuickDASH] and Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation [PRWE]), range of motion, and grip strength. We used a linear mixed regression model to assess the impact of the anesthesia technique on functional recovery. Postoperative pain and patient satisfaction were evaluated using a visual analog scale. RESULTS: We recruited 76 patients. At 12 weeks post surgery, there was no difference between the type of anesthesia and functional recovery with the QuickDASH (higher scores worse; regional anesthesia [RA], 22.7 vs general anesthesia [GA], 19.3; adjusted mean difference [aMD], -0.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], -9.6 to 9.0; P = 0.9) and PRWE (higher scores worse; RA group, 21.0 vs GA group, 20.5; aMD, -3.3; 95% CI, -12.1 to 5.6; P = 0.93) questionnaires. Range of motion, satisfaction, and postoperative pain were similar between groups. Right-hand grip strength was higher in the GA group. CONCLUSION: Regional anesthesia was not associated with improved functional recovery compared with general anesthesia. The dominance of the operated limb was a confusion factor in all evaluation modalities. Further research taking into account the dominance of the hand is necessary to establish the effects of regional anesthesia on functional recovery. STUDY REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04541745); registered 9 September 2020.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: L'anesthésie régionale pourrait favoriser la rééducation postopératoire en inhibant la sensibilisation périphérique et l'hyperalgésie secondaire. La littérature à ce sujet est limitée. Dans la présente étude nommée FUNCTION, nous avons cherché à comparer la récupération fonctionnelle après une chirurgie orthopédique du poignet réalisée sous anesthésie régionale vs sous anesthésie générale. MéTHODE: Nous avons réalisé une étude de cohorte observationnelle prospective monocentrique auprès de patient·es adultes présentant une fracture radiale distale. La récupération fonctionnelle a été évaluée à l'aide de questionnaires psychométriques validés (questionnaires QuickDASH [Quick Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand] et PRWE [Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation]), de l'amplitude des mouvements et de la force de préhension. Nous avons utilisé un modèle de régression linéaire mixte pour évaluer l'impact de la technique d'anesthésie sur la récupération fonctionnelle. La douleur postopératoire et la satisfaction des patient·es ont été évaluées à l'aide d'une échelle visuelle analogique. RéSULTATS: Nous avons recruté 76 personnes. Douze semaines après la chirurgie, il n'y avait aucune différence entre le type d'anesthésie et la récupération fonctionnelle selon le questionnaire QuickDASH (scores plus élevés les pires; anesthésie régionale [AR], 22,7 vs anesthésie générale [AG], 19,3; différence moyenne ajustée [DMa], −0,3; intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 %, −9,6 à 9,0; P = 0,9) et PRWE (scores plus élevés les pires; groupe AR, 21,0 vs groupe AG, 20,5; DMa, −3,3; IC 95 %, −12,1 à 5,6; P = 0,93). L'amplitude des mouvements, la satisfaction et la douleur postopératoire étaient similaires entre les groupes. La force de préhension de la main droite était plus élevée dans le groupe AG. CONCLUSION: L'anesthésie régionale n'a pas été associée à une amélioration de la récupération fonctionnelle par rapport à l'anesthésie générale. La prédominance du membre opéré était un facteur de confusion dans toutes les modalités d'évaluation. D'autres recherches tenant compte du côté dominant au niveau des mains sont nécessaires pour déterminer les effets de l'anesthésie régionale sur la récupération fonctionnelle. ENREGISTREMENT DE L'éTUDE: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04541745); enregistrée le 9 septembre 2020.

Functional recovery with peripheral nerve block versus general anesthesia for upper limb surgery: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral nerve block is a common anesthetic technique used during orthopedic upper limb surgery. Injection of local anesthetics around the target nerve inhibits the action of voltage-dependent sodium channels, inhibiting neurotransmission of pain impulses and providing motor immobility. Compared to general anesthesia, it could improve functional recovery by inhibiting nociceptive impulses and inflammation, thus reducing postoperative pain and immobilization and improving postoperative rehabilitation. This systematic review evaluates the impact of peripheral nerve block versus general anesthesia on postoperative functional recovery following orthopedic upper limb surgery. METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, CINHAL, EMBASE, and Scopus trial databases from inception until September 2021 for studies comparing peripheral nerve block to general anesthesia. We collected data on functional recovery, range of motion, patient satisfaction, quality of life, and return to work. We pooled studies using a random-effects model and summarized the quality of evidence with the GRADE approach. RESULTS: We assessed 373 citations and 19 full-text articles for eligibility, and included six studies. Six studies reported on functional recovery, but failed to detect a significant superiority of peripheral nerve block over general anesthesia (3 RCT studies, N = 160; SMD -0.15; CI at 95% -0.60-0.3; I2 = 45%; p = 0.07; low quality of evidence and 3 observational studies, N = 377; SMD -0.35; CI at 95% -0.71-0.01; I2 = 64%; p = 0.06; very low quality of evidence). CONCLUSIONS: Current literature is limited and fails to identify the benefit of peripheral nerve block on functional recovery. More studies are needed to assess the impact on long-term recovery. Considering the potential impact on clinical practice and training, a prospective study on functional recovery is ongoing (NCT04541745). TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO ID CRD42018116298. Registered on December 4, 2018.

Functional recovery with peripheral nerve block versus general anesthesia for upper limb surgery: a systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral nerve block is a single injection that inhibits the transmission of peripheral nerve impulses to the central nervous system. The inhibition of the nociceptive impulse may decrease the occurrence of muscle spasm following mobilization postoperatively. This mechanism may contribute to a better functional recovery following upper limb surgery. This systematic review will investigate the impact of peripheral nerve block on functional recovery after an upper limb surgery. METHODS: We will search studies comparing peripheral nerve block to general anesthesia for upper limb surgery in the following databases: CENTRAL, MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL, EMBASE, and Scopus. In duplicate, independent reviewers will assess eligibility, evaluate risk of bias, and abstract data on type of peripheral nerve block and functional outcome. Where possible, we will pool results using a random effects model. For each outcome, we will assess the quality of evidence using GRADE methodology. DISCUSSION: We aim to summarize the available evidence comparing functional recovery with peripheral nerve block versus general anesthesia for upper limb surgery. These data will inform the design of a trial on the topic. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018116298.

Optimization of Mesenchymal Stem Cells to Increase Their Therapeutic Potential.

The heart which has limited renewal and regenerative capacity is a prime target for cellular therapy. Stem cell transplantation has emerged as a promising therapeutic strategy to improve healing of the ischemic heart, repopulate the injured myocardium, and restore cardiac function. However, clinical usefulness is impacted by the quality and quantity of delivered cells, the suboptimal manipulations prior to transplantation, and the general poor viability of the cells transferred particularly to an ischemic microenvironment. Focus is now on developing new ways to enhance stem cell renewal and survival capacity before transplant. This can be done by physical, chemical, pharmacological, or genetic manipulation of cells followed by accurate evaluation of conditioning methods by validated tests.This chapter covers the proper handling of mesenchymal stem cells (human and rat lines) and methodologies to evaluate efficacy and the translational potential of conditioning methods. Specifically, we will cover stem cell culture methods, preconditioning protocols, viability assessment in hypoxic and oxidative challenges as encountered in an ischemic microenvironment, and the proliferative capacity of cells.