Intrathecal Morphine in the Presence of a Syrinx in Pediatric Spinal Deformity Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Intrathecal morphine (IM) is a popular adjunct for pain relief during pediatric spinal deformity surgery. There is no literature regarding its usefulness and safety in the presence of a spinal cord syrinx for patients undergoing spinal instrumentation. Anesthesiologists have previously been reluctant to use IM in the presence of any syrinx. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all patients with a preoperatively diagnosed spinal cord syrinx undergoing spinal deformity surgery who received IM and did not receive IM (non-IM). We recorded location of the syrinx, surgical time, length of stay, unexpected pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) admission, IM related complications (neurological, respiratory depression, or pruritus, nausea/vomiting), and reason for no IM administration. Patients with a syrinx and myelodysplasia (8), tethered spinal cord (4), paraplegia (1), holocord (1), neuroblastoma (1), and spinal cord glioma (1) were not given IM. Other reasons included a failed attempt (1), expectedly short surgical time (1), and anesthesiologist declined (2). RESULTS: There were 42 patients who met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-two patients received IM, while 20 patients did not. Patients receiving IM had 4 cervical, 5 cervicothoracic, 12 thoracic syrinxes, and 1 holocord syrinx. The non-IM group had 8 cervicothoracic, 6 thoracic, 4 holocord syrinxes, and 2 had unclassified locations. There were no neurological complications in the IM group, and 1 patient experienced respiratory depression following a shorter than expected surgery and was observed overnight in the PICU. One patient in the non-IM group with a holocord syrinx had temporary lower extremity weakness postoperatively that completely resolved and 4 patients were unexpectedly admitted to the PICU. Pruritus and nausea/vomiting was mild and similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that with careful preoperative evaluation, most patients with a spinal cord syrinx can safely be given IM. Certain patients, such as those with a spinal holocord syrinx may have anatomic reasons to avoid IM, but those who are deemed appropriate for IM can receive it safely. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III-therapeutic study; retrospective comparative study.

The cost impact of a quality-assured mechanical assessment in primary low back pain care.

Objectives: The escalating cost of low back pain (LBP) care has not improved outcomes. Our purpose: to compare costs between LBP care guided by a quality-assured mechanical assessment (MC) and usual community care (CC).Study Design: Administrative claims data analysis.Methods: Employees and dependents of a large self-insured manufacturer seeking care for LBP in 2013 chose between the company's primary care clinic (where MC was delivered) and community care.The claims of 5,036 were analyzed for one year following subjects' initial evaluation excluding only those with diagnostic codes for fractures, dislocations, or infections. MC included an advanced form of Mechanical Diagnosis & Therapy (MDT). CC varied based on each subjects' selection of providers. Primary outcome measure: one-year cost of each subject's care. Secondary: number of MRIs, spinal injections, and lumbar surgeries undertaken. The payer's proprietary risk-adjustment algorithm was utilized.Results: After risk adjustment, the average cost per MC subject was 51.48% lower than the CC average cost (p < .0279). The utilization of MRIs, injections, and surgeries was lower with MC by 49.75%, 39.44%, 78.38% with relative risks of 1.99, 1.64, and 4.73, respectively.Conclusions: This 51.5% cost-savings reflects the substantial reduction in downstream care-seeking with MC, including lower utilization of MRIs, injections, surgeries, and downstream care after six months from the initial visit. It is well documented that the MDT clinical examination typically elicit patterns of pain response that in turn identify how most can rapidly recover with self-care with no need for other intervention.Level of Evidence: 1b.

Practice Variation Among Surgeons Treating Lumbar Spinal Stenosis in a Single Institution.

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective study. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine practice variation in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis and identify targets for reducing variation. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Lumbar spinal stenosis is a degenerative condition susceptible to practice variation. Reducing variation aims to improve quality, increase safety, and lower costs. Establishing differences in surgeons' practices from a single institution can help identify personalized variation. METHODS: We identified adult patients first diagnosed with lumbar spinal stenosis between 2003 and 2015 in three hospitals of the same institution with ICD-9 codes.We extracted number of office visits, imaging procedures, injections, electromyographies (EMGs), and surgery within the first year after diagnosis; physical therapy within the first 3 months after diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with surgery. The coefficient of variation (CV) was calculated to compare the variation in practice. RESULTS: The 10,858 patients we included had an average of 2.5 visits (±1.9), 1.5 imaging procedures (±2.0), 0.03 EMGs (±0.22), and 0.16 injections (±0.53); 36% had at least one surgical procedure and 32% had physical therapy as part of their care. The CV was smallest for number of visits (19%) and largest for EMG (140%).Male sex [odds ratio (OR): 1.23, P < 0.001], seeing an additional surgeon (OR: 2.82, P < 0.001), and having an additional spine diagnosis (OR: 3.71, P < 0.001) were independently associated with surgery. Visiting an orthopedic clinic (OR: 0.46, P < 0.001) was independently associated with less surgical interventions than visiting a neurosurgical clinic. CONCLUSION: There is widespread variation in the entire spectrum of diagnosis and therapy for lumbar spinal stenosis among surgeons in the same institution. Male gender, seeing an additional surgeon, having an additional spine diagnosis, and visiting a neurosurgery clinic were independently associated with increased surgical intervention. The main target we identified for decreasing variability was the use of diagnostic EMG. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Continuing Anti-thrombotic Medication During Low-to-Intermediate Risk Spinal Procedures: A Retrospective Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: The current American Society of Regional Anesthesia (ASRA) guidelines recommend discontinuing anti-thrombotic therapy prior to any interventional spine procedures to decrease the incidence of bleeding complications. However, discontinuing anti-thrombotics may pose considerable danger in terms of cerebrovascular and cardiovascular events. Recent evidence suggests that some spinal interventions may still be performed safely with anti-thrombotics on board and some practitioners thus elect to continue certain anti-thrombotics for these procedures. OBJECTIVE: To assess the rate of adverse events in patients undergoing spine procedures that are currently classified by the ASRA guidelines as "low-to-intermediate bleeding risk," while being on continued anti-thrombotic therapy. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Interventional pain management practice. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed on patients who underwent low-to-intermediate risk spine procedures with variable anti-thrombotic medications continued throughout the course of treatment. RESULTS: Between October 2015 and May 2016, out of 2,204 patients who underwent low-to-intermediate risk spine procedures, we identified 490 patients on anti-thrombotic medications. These included aspirin (N = 275), P2Y12 inhibitors (N = 129), warfarin (N = 62), heparin (N = 10), factor Xa inhibitors (N = 55), and dipyridamole (N = 1). Forty-two patients were on multiple anti-thrombotics. Anti-thrombotics were continued throughout the procedure for 467 of 490 patients (88%). One bleeding complication (injection site bleeding) occurred in a patient that continued clopidogrel and aspirin during a lumbar radiofrequency ablation. We encountered no bleeding complications attributable to anti-thrombotics in the other 466 procedures in which anti-thrombotics were continued during lumbar (N = 260), thoracic (N = 18), and cervical (N = 40) medial branch injections, sacroiliac injections (N = 47), and during lumbar (N = 87) thoracic (N = 2), and cervical (N = 12) medial branch radiofrequency ablations. LIMITATIONS: The retrospective nature of the study and its reliance on electronic medical records are potential limitations. CONCLUSIONS: Continuing anti-thrombotic medication during medial branch and sacroiliac injections may be possible. KEY WORDS: Interventional pain management, thrombotic complications, hemostasis, anti-coagulation, bleeding complications.

Eficacia analgésica y seguridad de dosis única de morfina intratecal / Analgesic effectiveness and safety of single-dose intrathecal morphine

Introducción: el dolor posoperatorio del hemiabdomen superior es intenso y su control es imprescindible para evitar complicaciones. Objetivos: evaluar la eficacia analgésica y seguridad de dosis única de morfina intratecal en el posoperatorio de la cirugía de hemiabdomen superior de gran envergadura. Método: ensayo clínico aleatorizado a simple ciegas en 40 pacientes, tras intervenciones de hemiabdomen superior. Se emplearon dosis única de morfina intratecal (MIT) de 1 o 2 µg/kg de peso del paciente de acuerdo al grupo de tratamiento. Análisis estadístico con las pruebas Chi cuadrado (c2), exacta de Fisher, análisis de varianza univariado, la prueba de W de Mauchly y la prueba F univariada; nivel de significación de 0,05. Resultados: la administración de opioides durante el acto quirúrgico fue similar en ambos grupos (3,1 ± 2,2 mL vs 4,1 ± 2,7 mL). En el grupo de dosis de 2 µg/kg de peso de MIT a las 12 y 24 h los pacientes no refirieron dolor; existieron diferencias entre los tratamientos en cuanto al alivio del dolor (p< 0,001) y también entre los momentos en que se midió el mismo (p= 0,001). Se utilizó analgesia de rescate en 25 por ciento de los pacientes. Sólo se presentó como complicación la depresión respiratoria. Conclusiones: la dosis única de 2 μg /kg de morfina intratecal es un método eficaz para la analgesia posoperatoria en la cirugía de hemiabdomen superior, la incidencia de complicaciones fue baja y se demostró que ambas dosis son seguras(AU)

Introduction: The superior hemiabdomen postoperative pain is severe and essential to be managed in order to avoid complications. Objectives: To assess the analgesic effectiveness and safety of single-dose intrathecal morphine in the postoperative period of the upper hemiabdomen major surgery. Method: Single-blind randomized clinical trial in 40 patients, after upper hemiabdomen interventions. We used single doses of intrathecal morphine (ITM) of 1 or 2 mg/kg per patient weight according to the treatment group. The statistical analysis used the Chi-square test, Fisher's exact test, univariate analysis of variance, Mauchly's test and Univariate F-test; the significance level was 0.05. Results: Opioids administration during surgery was similar in both groups (3.1 ± 2.2 mL vs 4.1 ± 2.7 mL). In the 2 mg/kg of ITM dose group, the patients reported no pain after 12 and 14 hours; there were differences between treatments regarding pain relief (p< 0.001) and also between the time when it was measured (p= 0.001). Rescue analgesia was used in 25 percent of the patients. Respiratory depression was the only onset complication. Conclusions: ITM at a single dose of 2 μg/kg is an effective method for postoperative analgesia in upper hemiabdomen surgery, the incidence of complications was low and both doses proved safe(AU)

The need for and provision of intrathecal baclofen therapy for the management of spasticity in England: an assessment of the Hospital Episode Statistics database.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate changes in the uptake of intrathecal baclofen (ITB) following commissioning of this therapy by the National Health Service (NHS) England in April 2013. The specific objectives of this study were: (i) to explore the gap between the need for and the actual provision of ITB services; and (ii) to compare England figures with other European countries with comparable data available. SETTING: Data for ITB -related procedures were obtained from the Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) database from 2009/2010 to 2013/2014. PARTICIPANTS: Patients receiving ITB for the management of spasticity. RESULTS: The available data for implantation of ITB from 2009/2010 to 2013/2014 for the treatment of spasticity due to varied aetiologies show that there has not been an increase in uptake of this therapy. The estimated need for this treatment based on the incidence and prevalence of conditions susceptible to ITB therapy is between 4.6 and 5.7 per million population. Our analysis of the data available from the HES database showed that the actual number of implants is around 3.0 per million population. The same period 2009-2014 has seen an increase in the delivery of other neuromodulation techniques including spinal cord stimulation, deep brain stimulation and sacral nerve stimulation. CONCLUSIONS: There is a considerable gap between the need for and provision of ITB figures nationally. Additionally, within the same area, we have observed important differences in the ITB service delivery between the various trusts. The reasons for this can be multifactorial, including individual experience and opinions, organisational structures, resource and financial limitations. Further research analysing the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of this treatment in the UK might inform the development of Technology Appraisal Guidance for ITB, potentially leading to an improvement in service provision.

Nausea, vomiting and pruritus induced by intrathecal morphine.

BACKGROUND: Presently, in Siriraj Hospital, intrathecal morphine is routinely used in spinal anesthesia for postoperative pain control in more than 600 cases per month with doses lower than 0.3 mg. However, the incidence of side effects is high. This retrospective data review was performed to identify incidence and risk factors of postoperative nausea, vomiting, and pruritus. MATERIAL AND METHOD: One thousand three hundred six anesthetic records were analyzed for incidence of nausea, vomiting, and pruritus after spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine in Siriraj Hospital between October 2010 and April 2011. Data extracted were age, gender, type of operations, dosage of spinal morphine, and frequency, and severity of adverse effects (nausea, vomiting, and pruritus). Odd ratios and multiple logistic regression analysis were used. RESULTS: Incidence of nausea, vomiting, and pruritus were 21.5, 14.8, and 59.5% respectively. No respiratory depression and urinary retention was reported There was statistically significant correlation in the incidence of nausea, vomiting, and pruritus with female gender, cesarean section, and intrathecal morphine dose (p < 0.001). Intrathecal morphine more than 0.2 mg resulted in an increase in severity of side effects. CONCLUSION: The intrathecal morphine is effective in postoperative pain control. However it induces high incidence of nausea, vomiting, and pruritus. Prevention of side effects and alternatives to intrathecal morphine need further research.

The utility of intrathecal fluorescein in cerebrospinal fluid leak repair.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the utility of intrathecal fluorescein (IF) for intraoperative localization and successful repair of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leaks. STUDY DESIGN: Case series with chart review. SETTING: Tertiary-care medical center. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Subjects included those undergoing endoscopic CSF leak repair with or without the use of IF. Informed consent was obtained from all patients undergoing the administration of IF (total dose 10 mg). RESULTS: A total of 103 patients underwent CSF leak repair, and in 47 cases (45.6%), IF was used. Patients who were administered IF were more likely to have spontaneous CSF leak etiology (61.7% vs 16.1%; P < 0.001). Of the 47 cases with IF use, fluorescein was visualized at the skull base in 31 cases (66.0%), 11 (23.4%) had visible CSF leak without fluorescein coloration, and five (10.6%) had neither clear nor fluorescein-colored CSF visualized. Sensitivity and specificity for fluorescein detection was 73.8 percent (95% confidence interval [CI] 57.7%-85.6%) and 100 percent (95% CI 46.3%-100%), respectively. The false-negative rate was 26.2 percent (95% CI 15.8%-43.5%). Localization of the leak site was greater when fluorescein-colored CSF was visualized (100% vs 81.3%; P = 0.035). When fluorescein-colored CSF was not visualized intraoperatively, recurrence rates were 31.3 percent versus 9.7 percent when fluorescein coloration was seen, although this finding was not statistically significant (P = 0.10). CONCLUSION: The use of IF facilitates the accurate localization of CSF leaks and may assist the surgeon in confirming a watertight closure. The lack of intraoperative fluorescein visualization should not rule out the presence of CSF leak, as evidenced by a false-negative rate of 26.2 percent.

Patient-physician communication: informed consent for imaging-guided spinal injections.

PURPOSE: Historically, informed-consent forms have been developed for the purpose of educating patients. However, informed-consent forms can be very difficult to understand. The hypothesis of this study was that a method using diagrams would improve patient-physician communication without increasing the time required to obtain informed consent over the teach-the-teacher method, as well as over current standard informed-consent protocol. METHODS: Ninety-nine of 109 patients undergoing spinal injections agreed to participate and completed this prospective, randomized, controlled study. The patients were randomly assigned to the control group (informed consent obtained in the customary manner at the investigators' institution, with 12 key points of consent and home care discussed conversationally), the teach-the-teacher group (patients had to repeat the 12 key points to the physicians before informed consent was complete), and the diagram group (patients viewed a set of diagrams illustrating the 12 key points before signing the informed-consent form). After the procedure, the patients completed a survey to test knowledge recall, anxiety, and pain during the procedure. RESULTS: Statistically significant results included a lower survey score for the control group, longer time required for the teach-the-teacher group than the control group, and a negative correlation between age and survey score in the teach-the-teacher group. CONCLUSIONS: The diagram method required less time than the teach-the-teacher method, had no negative correlation in survey score results with age, and had improved patient-physician communication over the control group.

Survey of intrathecal opioid usage in the UK.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Intrathecal opioids are now used routinely in the UK for intra- and postoperative analgesia. The opioids of choice have altered over recent years and the dosage regimens used can vary between institutions. Concerns over safety have been reduced probably because much lower doses of opioids are now being used. This survey explored the practice of intrathecal opioid usage in the UK. METHODS: We sent a questionnaire survey to 270 anaesthetic departments and received 199 replies, a response rate of 73.7%. RESULTS: Intrathecal opioids were used in 175 (88.4%) departments. Of these departments, 107 (61.1%) had local guidelines or protocols in place. Opioids such as diamorphine (used in 136 (78.2%) of departments) and fentanyl (129 (74.1%)) with a shorter duration of action are now more commonly used than morphine (37 (21.3%)) for intrathecal analgesia. In 96 (54.5%) departments, patients were nursed on regular surgical wards following administration of spinal opioids. CONCLUSIONS: The use of low-dose lipophilic intrathecal opioids for postoperative analgesia is widespread in the UK. Patients are commonly nursed in low-dependency post-anaesthetic care areas. The low incidence of adverse events reported by the respondents along with the popularity of the technique suggests that low-dose spinal opioid administration is safe.

Selective dorsal rhizotomy and postoperative pain management. A worldwide survey.

BACKGROUND: Selective dorsal rhizotomy (SDR) is an operation method that decreases the degree of spasticity with long-lasting beneficial effects for children with spastic diplegia. Children undergoing SDR are postoperatively in severe pain, a pain related to both the extensive surgical exposure with multilevel laminectomy and the nerve root manipulation. Various pain management strategies for children undergoing SDR have been published. The postoperative pain treatment is a vital part of the management. The aim of this study was to estimate the number of centers performing SDR, the frequency of SDR surgery and to investigate pain management of the different centers. METHODS: A questionnaire comprising 7 questions was sent by mail and/or e-mail to a total of 59 potential centers performing SDR, centers that have published material concerning SDR or centers that have been recommended. Forty-seven (80%) centers responded to the questionnaire; 11 of them do not presently perform SDR surgery, and the remaining 36 centers constitute the material of the present study. RESULTS: 23 of the 36 centers use Peacock's operation technique and 8 centers use Park's technique. Continuous intravenous infusion of opioids for postoperative pain treatment is used by 17 (47%) of the centers. Seven (19%) centers use the epidural (ED) approach for treating postoperative pain and 6 (17%) centers use intrathecal (IT) pain treatment. The duration of intravenous ED or IT pain relief ranged from 24 h up to 7 days. To evaluate pain relief, 25 (70%) centers used some form of pain scale. CONCLUSION: The most common operation techniques in use today are described by Peacock or by Park, with an estimated number of procedures of more than 487/year in 36 centers. The majority of the centers seem to have a satisfactory pain management strategy. These centers administer continuous infusions of opioids, with an intravenous, ED or IT approach, and incorporate the use of a pain assessment tool to evaluate pain relief.

A survey: conscious sedation with epidural and zygapophyseal injections: is it necessary?

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Substantial variation exists regarding the use of sedation before interventional spine techniques. Patient preference should play an important role in decision making regarding the need for sedation. However, little is known about patients' anxiety levels before spinal injections and their perceptions about the necessity of sedation. PURPOSE: To determine patient perception for need for sedation before epidural steroid injections and zygapophyseal joint injections. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Survey of consecutive spinal injection patients in an outpatient spine center. PATIENT SAMPLE: 500 consecutive lumbar, thoracic, and cervical patients receiving spinal injections. OUTCOME MEASURES: A 12-item questionnaire assessing patients' perceived anxiety before to a spinal injection. METHODS: Subjects were given the questionnaire after their spinal injection. Percentages requesting sedation for a first and potential second procedure were assessed. Additionally, anxiety level and pain rating, location of injection, age, sex, and other medication use were analyzed to determine the effect on the request for sedation. RESULTS: 17% of patients questioned requested sedation before an injection, and 28% would request sedation if they were to have a second injection. CONCLUSIONS: Routine sedation before diagnostic and therapeutic injections is not necessary as the majority of patients would not request sedation before the procedure when given the option. However, in some patients sedation is indicated, and all patients would benefit from educational material on sedation before the injection.

Does a combination of intensive cognitive-behavioral pain management and a spinal implantable device confer any advantage? A preliminary examination.

Research suggests that a combination of a somatic and a psychosocial intervention for chronic noncancer pain should be associated with a better outcome than either alone. This study presents data on a series of 31 patients who underwent sequential treatment with an implantable device targeting pain relief and a cognitive-behavioral pain management program that targeted improved function. A combination of treatments was used as there was a suboptimal response to the initial treatment. There were improvements in a range of outcomes at a long-term follow-up. Significant improvements were found in disability, affective distress, self-efficacy, and catastrophizing, but not in average pain severity. Further analyses failed to demonstrate an order effect. These results support the view that combined somatic and psychosocial interventions can achieve better outcomes than either alone in selected chronic pain patients. This approach requires that psychological assessment is essential before the use of an implantable device. This may not only improve patient selection, but also identify psychosocial factors that may be modified to enhance the effectiveness of invasive interventions. In addition, consideration for an implantable device following a suboptimal response to treatment in a cognitive-behavioral pain management program should include a re-evaluation of the patients' beliefs and use of self-management (coping) strategies before deciding on further treatment options.

The present role of percutaneous cervical cordotomy for the treatment of cancer pain.

The results obtained by percutaneous cervical cordotomy (PCC) were analysed in 43 terminally ill cancer patients treated in our institution from 1998 to 2001. We wished to determine whether there is still a place for PCC in the actual clinical situation with its wide choice of pain therapies. All patients had severe unilateral pain due to cancer, resistant to opioids and co-analgesics. Following PCC, mean pain intensity was reduced from Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) 7.2 to 1.1. At the end of life, pain had increased to NRS 2.9. Initially following PCC a good result (NRS<3) was obtained in 95% of patients. At the end of life, a good result was still present in 69% of patients. Mean duration of survival after the intervention was 118 days (2-1460). In general, complications were mild and mostly subsided within 3-4 days. There was one case of partial paresis of the ipsilateral leg. PCC remains a valuable treatment in patients with treatment-resistant cancer pain and still deserves a place in the treatment of terminal cancer patients with severe unilateral neuropathic or incidence pain.

[Side effects and complications of injection therapy for degenerative spinal disorders]. / Nebenwirkungen und Komplikationen der Injektionsbehandlung bei degenerativen Erkrankungen der Wirbelsäule.

AIM: The type and frequency of side effects due to treatment of vertebral pain syndromes with local injections were examined. Risks and complications were evaluated and precautions are presented in order to avoid these problems. METHODS: The medical records of 453 patients who had undergone injection therapy in hospital for spinal pain syndromes were investigated retrospectively. RESULTS: Paravertebral injections with cervical and lumbar spinal nerve analgesia, facet joint injections, lumbar epidural-perineural injections, epidural-dorsal and epidural-sacral injections, and injections next to the ileosacral joint were administered, amounting to a total of 7 963 injections. In 25 cases (0.3 %) unfavourable side effects were observed. Epidural-perineural injections led to headache in 10 cases and paravertebral lumbar nerve analgesia in 3 cases. Five times after epidural-perineural injections circulatory dysregulation with vertigo, nausea and decreased blood pressure was observed. One patient fell after an epidural-perineural injection, and one patient developed a sensory block up to the thoracic segment 6. Five patients showed local allergic reactions at the injection site after Mepivacain. All complications could be treated with simple symptomatic measures and had no severe effects. CONCLUSION: Compared to other studies, only few side effects were observed. The injections described above may thus be regarded as low-risk therapy.

Unintentional vascular uptake in fluoroscopically guided, contrast-confirmed spinal injections: a 1-yr clinical experience and discussion of findings.

OBJECTIVE: Documentation of vascular uptake on spinal injection in the context of negative aspiration and negative passive filling of blood into the hub of the needle. DESIGN: A total of 1,295 consecutive outpatients receiving fluoroscopically guided, contrast-confirmed injection in a multispecialty practice over a 1-yr time frame were retrospectively reviewed with passive observation for inadvertent vascular uptake, passive filling, and required repositioning. RESULTS: Positive vascular uptake was seen in 2-13% of cases with variable degrees of aspiration, passive filling, and required needle repositionings to avoid vascular uptake. CONCLUSION: Negative aspiration and allotment for passive filling is inadequate to confirm the absence of vascular injection. Spinal injection will never be risk free. The safest method is fluoroscopically guided, contrast-confirmed injection, which should be considered the current standard of care.

Epidural and intrathecal analgesia is effective in treating refractory cancer pain.

The use of neuraxial (intrathecal and epidural) analgesia has been suggested in treatment guidelines put forth for the treatment of refractory cancer pain. We review the literature and present our algorithm for using neuraxial analgesia. We also present our outcomes using this algorithm over a 28-month period. We used neuraxial analgesia in 87 of 4,107 patients, approximately 2% of those seen for pain consultation. Evaluation of those patients at an 8-week follow-up revealed improved pain control. After institution of neuraxial analgesia, there was a significant reduction in the proportion of patients with severe pain (defined as a "pain worst" score in the severe range of 7-10), from 86% to 17%, noted to be highly statistically significant. At follow-up, numerical pain scores decreased significantly from 7.9 +/- 1.6 to 4.1 +/- 2.3. No difference was noted between the intrathecal and epidural groups. Oral opioid intake after instituting neuraxial analgesia revealed a significant decrease from 588 mg/day oral morphine equivalents to 294 mg/day. At follow-up, self-reported drowsiness and mental clouding (0-10) also significantly decreased from 6.2 +/- 3.0 and 5.4 +/- 3.4 to 3.2 +/- 3.0 and 3.1 +/- 3.0, respectively. This retrospective review shows promising efficacy of neuraxial analgesia in the context of failing medical management.

Intrathecal + PCA morphine improves analgesia during the first 24 hr after major abdominal surgery compared to PCA alone.

PURPOSE: To compare, over a 48-hr follow-up period, the analgesia and side-effects of patient controlled iv analgesia (PCA) with morphine alone vs combined intrathecal and PCA morphine (IT+PCA) in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. METHODS: Sixty adult patients undergoing abdominal surgery for cancer were randomly allocated to receive preoperative IT (0.3 or 0.4 mg) plus postoperative PCA morphine or postoperative PCA morphine alone. Postoperative analgesia was tested at rest and while coughing on a visual analogue pain scale and morphine consumption was recorded. Patients' satisfaction, arterial oxygen saturation, respiratory rate, episodes of nausea, vomiting and pruritus were also noted. RESULTS: Analgesia at rest and while coughing was significantly better in the IT+PCA morphine group (rest: P = 0.01; coughing: P = 0.005) on the first postoperative day only. IT+PCA morphine constantly provided adequate analgesia during this period. Morphine consumption was lower in the IT+PCA morphine group during this period also (IT+PCA: 9 (17) vs PCA: 40 (26); mg of morphine, mean (SD), P = 0.0001). No difference was found in pain relief and morphine consumption between the groups on the second postoperative day. Nausea and vomiting were more frequent with IT+PCA morphine on the first postoperative day. No respiratory depression occurred in either group. Satisfaction was high in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: IT+PCA morphine improves patient comfort constantly during the first postoperative day after major abdominal surgery. However, after the first postoperative day, IT+PCA morphine provides no additional benefit.