The Impact of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) on Acute Pain and Other Postoperative Outcomes: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) in postoperative acute pain control. PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library were searched on 1-8 December 2022, for randomized controlled trials on the analgesic effects of TENS. The outcomes were pain intensity and opioid use (primary), and postoperative (PO) adverse events, blood pressure, and the duration of hospital stay (secondary); PROSPERO CRD42022333335. A total of 40 articles were included in the meta-analysis. Pain intensity at rest and during coughing for all types of surgeries combined was lower in the TENS group (standardized mean difference (SMD) = -0.51 [-0.61, -0.41], p < 0.00001, 29 studies, and -1.28 [-2.46, -0.09], p-value = 0.03, six studies, respectively). There was a statistically significant decrease in morphine requirements, as well as in the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, dizziness, and pruritus. There was no difference between the groups in postoperative pain intensity during walking, in blood pressure, and only a borderline difference in the length of hospital stay. The subgroup analysis by surgery type did not show significant differences between the groups in pain severity at rest. Thus, TENS has a potential for pain control and postoperative recovery outcomes.

The Analysis of Multiple Outcomes between General and Regional Anesthesia in Hip Fracture Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Surgical interventions in hip fracture have been associated with multiple adverse events, including perioperative hypotension and mortality, making the choice of the anesthetic method for this procedure crucial. There is still no consensus on whether regional (RA) or general (GA) anesthesia should be used to maintain hemodynamic stability and more favorable outcomes. Therefore, this meta-analysis examines the differences between RA and GA groups in the incidence of mortality, intraoperative hypotension, and other intra- and postoperative complications. The comparison is essential given the rising global prevalence of hip fractures and the need to optimize anesthesia strategies for improved patient outcomes, particularly in an aging population. We followed PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO #CRD42022320413). We conducted the search for studies published in English before March 2022 in PubMed, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Library. We included RCTs that compared general and regional anesthesia in adult patients having hip fracture surgical interventions. The primary outcome was perioperative mortality. The secondary outcomes were peri- or postoperative complications and duration of hospital stay. We conducted a meta-analysis in RevMan (version 5.4). We examined the quality of the methodology with the Cochrane risk of bias 2 tool, while the quality of evidence was determined with GRADE. Fifteen studies with 4110 patients were included. Our findings revealed no significant difference between general and regional anesthesia in risk of perioperative mortality (RR = 1.42 [0.96, 2.10], p-value = 0.08), intraoperative complications, or duration of hospital length of stay. Our results suggest that regional anesthesia and general anesthesia have comparable safety and can be used as alternatives based on specific patient requirements.

Effect of Ketamine on Postoperative Neurocognitive Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Neurocognitive alterations in the perioperative period might be caused by a wide variety of factors including pain, blood loss, hypotension, hypoxia, micro- and macroemboli, cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), reperfusion damage, and surgery itself, and all are risk factors for developing postoperative delirium (POD) and postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD). The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of ketamine on neurocognitive dysfunction after anesthesia. METHODS: We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ketamine use (experimental group) with placebo (controls). RESULTS: The model favors the control group over the experimental group in terms of frequency of hallucinations (the risk ratio with 95% CI is 1.54 [1.09, 2.19], p-value = 0.02), the number of patients readmitted within 30 days (RR with 95% CI is 0.25 [0.09, 0.70]), and the number of adverse events (overall RR with 95% CI is 1.31 [1.06, 1.62]). In terms of morphine consumption, the model favors the experimental group. CONCLUSION: There was no statistically significant difference in incidences of postoperative delirium, vasopressor requirement, and fentanyl consumption between the ketamine and control groups. However, hallucinations were more frequently reported in the ketamine group.

Postoperative Delirium and Cognitive Dysfunction after General and Regional Anesthesia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: Perioperative disorders of neurocognitive function are a set of heterogeneous conditions, which include transient post-operative delirium (POD) and more prolonged post-operative cognitive dysfunction (POCD). Since the number of annually performed surgical procedures is growing, we should identify which type of anesthesia is safer for preserving neurocognitive function. The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of general anesthesia (GA) and regional anesthesia (RA) in patients undergoing surgical procedures under general anesthesia and regional anesthesia. Material and methods: We searched for randomized controlled studies, which studied post-operative cognitive outcomes after general and regional anesthesia in the adult patient population. Results: Thirteen articles with 3633 patients: the RA group consisted of 1823 patients, and the GA group of 1810 patients, who were selected for meta-analysis. The overall effect of the model shows no difference between these two groups in terms of risk for post-operative delirium. The result is insensitive to the exclusion of any study. There was no difference between RA and GA in terms of post-operative cognitive dysfunction. Conclusions: There was no statistically significant difference between GA and RA in the incidence of POD. There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of POCD per-protocol analysis, psychomotor/attention tests (preoperative/baseline, post-operative), memory tests (postoperatively, follow up), mini-mental state examination score 24 h postoperatively, post-operative reaction time three months postoperatively, controlled oral word association test, and digit copying test. There were no differences in the incidence of POCD in general and regional anesthesia at one week postoperatively, three months postoperatively, or total events (one week or three months). The incidence of post-operative mortality also did not differ between two groups.

Comparison of dexmedetomidine and propofol for sedation in awake craniotomy: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Awake craniotomy (AC) is the preferred option for the resection of tumors adjacent to eloquent cortical areas and in cases of intractable epilepsy. It is mostly used to maintain the integrity of the brain during intracranial neurosurgical procedures. Awake craniotomy requires the use of ideal anesthetics, hypnotics, and analgesics to balance sedation, prompt the reversal of sedation, and prevent respiratory depression while maintaining communication between patient and medical team. Although a wide variety of anesthetics and hypnotics have been used for awake craniotomy over the past several decades, the optimal drug for the procedure has yet to be determined. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare dexmedetomidine and propofol in terms of intraoperative adverse events (i.e., hypertension, hypotension, nausea, vomiting, respiratory depression), patient and surgeon satisfaction, and procedure duration. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Library for relevant articles published between the inception of these databases and April of 2022. The systematic search yielded 781 articles. After screening, we excluded 778 articles. The remaining three articles reporting 138 patients were selected for meta-analysis. RESULTS: This meta-analysis showed no statistically significant difference between propofol and dexmedetomidine related to intraoperative adverse events, patient satisfaction, or procedure duration. The only statistically significant result was surgeon satisfaction, which appeared to be higher in the dexmedetomidine group. CONCLUSIONS: Further high-quality randomized and controlled trials are needed to find a preferred agent for intraoperative sedation in awake craniotomy.

Epidural dexamethasone for acute postoperative pain management: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

Aim: To study the effect of epidural dexamethasone in postoperative pain management. Methods: Random-effects meta-analysis was conducted in RevMan 5.4. Results: We included nine randomized-controlled trials (RCT) with 657 patients. Dexamethasone demonstrated longer analgesia duration (mean difference 266.18 minutes, 95% CI [3.21,529.14]; p 0.05), lower incidence of nausea and vomiting during the first postoperative day (risk ratio 0.36, 95% CI [0.18,0.71]; p 0.004), and lower antiemetic requirements (risk ratio 0.33, 95% CI [0.14,0.79]; p 0.01). No difference in pain reduction and the length of hospital stay was observed between the groups. Conclusion: Dexamethasone was associated with a longer analgesic effect, a lower number of patients requiring antiemetics, and lower incidences of nausea and vomiting.

Pain after major surgeries can be severe. Sometimes patients need to take additional analgesics after surgery. Dexamethasone is a steroid, which can potentially reduce this pain and the need for pain-relieving medications. We wanted to know whether dexamethasone reduces the use of analgesics, nausea and vomiting after surgeries, pain, or length of hospital stay. We found nine articles with 657 patients, which compared dexamethasone with a placebo. According to our analysis, dexamethasone does not decrease pain or length of hospital stay. However, surgery patients can benefit from a decrease in nausea and vomiting and the need for medications for these side effects. Due to the small number of participants, our conclusions should be taken with caution.

Intravenous versus Epidural Routes of Patient-Controlled Analgesia in Abdominal Surgery: Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the intravenous and epidural routes of patient-controlled anesthesia in abdominal surgery. METHODS: We searched for randomized clinical trials that compared the intravenous and epidural modes of patient-controlled anesthesia in intra-abdominal surgery in adults. Data analysis was performed in RevMan 5.4. Heterogeneity was measured using I2 statistic. Risk of bias was assessed using the Jadad/Oxford quality scoring system. RESULTS: Seven studies reporting 529 patients were included into the meta-analysis. For pain at rest, the mean difference with 95% confidence interval (CI) was -0.00 [-0.79, 0.78], p-value 0.99, while for pain on coughing, it was 0.43 [-0.02, 0.88], p-value 0.06, indicating that patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) was superior. For the sedation score, the mean difference with 95% CI was 0.26 [-0.37, 0.89], p-value 0.42, slightly favoring PCEA. For the length of hospital stay, the mean difference with 95% CI was 1.13 [0.29, 1.98], p-value 0.009, favoring PCEA. For postoperative complications, the risk ratio with 95% CI was 0.8 [0.62, 1.03], p-value 0.08, slightly favoring patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIVA). A significant effect was observed for hypotension, favoring PCIVA. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-controlled intravenous analgesia compared with patient-controlled epidural analgesia was associated with fewer episodes of hypotension. PCEA, on other hand, was associated with a shorter length of hospital stay. Pain control and other side effects did not differ significantly. Only three studies out of seven had an acceptable methodological quality. Thus, these conclusions should be taken with caution.