Preoperative gabapentin for acute post-thoracotomy analgesia: a randomized, double-blinded, active placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: The role of preoperative gabapentin in postoperative pain management is not clear, particularly in patients receiving regional blockade. Patients undergoing thoracotomy benefit from epidural analgesia but still may experience significant postoperative pain. We examined the effect of preoperative gabapentin in thoracotomy patients. METHODS: Adults undergoing elective thoracotomy were enrolled in this prospective, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study, and randomly assigned to receive 600 mg gabapentin or active placebo (12.5 mg diphenhydramine) orally within 2 hours preoperatively. Standardized management included thoracic epidural infusion, intravenous patient-controlled opioid analgesia, acetaminophen and ketorolac. Pain scores, opioid use and side effects were recorded for 48 hours. Pain was also assessed at 3 months. RESULTS: One hundred twenty patients (63 placebo and 57 gabapentin) were studied. Pain scores did not significantly differ at any time point (P = 0.53). Parenteral and oral opioid consumption was not significantly different between groups on postoperative day 1 or 2 (P > 0.05 in both cases). The frequency of side effects such as nausea and vomiting or respiratory depression was not significantly different between groups, but gabapentin was associated with decreased frequency of pruritus requiring nalbuphine (14% gabapentin vs. 43% control group, P < 0.001). The frequency of patients experiencing pain at 3 months post-thoracotomy was also comparable between groups (70% gabapentin vs. 66% placebo group, P = 0.72). CONCLUSIONS: A single preoperative oral dose of gabapentin (600 mg) did not reduce pain scores or opioid consumption following elective thoracotomy, and did not confer any analgesic benefit in the setting of effective multimodal analgesia that included thoracic epidural infusion.

Pilot evaluation of a stellate ganglion block for the treatment of hot flashes.

PURPOSE: Hot flashes are a significant problem in breast cancer patients, especially because the most effective therapy, estrogen, is often contraindicated. Based on recent pilot data from a single group supporting the use of a stellate ganglion block for the treatment of hot flashes, the present pilot trial was done to further evaluate the hypothesis that a stellate ganglion block may be a safe and effective therapy for hot flashes. METHODS: In women with breast cancer who had hot flashes, a stellate ganglion block was performed after 1 week of baseline hot flash data collection. The main efficacy measures were the changes from baseline in hot flash frequency and hot flash score during the 6th week. RESULTS: Ten patients were enrolled between 4/23/2009 and 7/10/2009; eight patients were evaluable. After the stellate ganglion block, the mean hot flash frequency and score decreased from baseline values by over 60% during some of the post-treatment weeks. The mean hot flash frequency and score at week 6 decreased from baseline values by 44% and 45%, respectively. There were no significant adverse events clearly attributed to the stellate ganglion blocks. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this pilot trial support that stellate ganglion blocks may be a helpful therapy for hot flashes. A prospective placebo-controlled clinical trial should be done to more definitively determine this contention.

Evaluating efficacy and feasibility of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation for postoperative pain after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery: A randomized pilot trial.

BACKGROUND: Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) has been applied for pain relief after surgical procedures. This study evaluated whether TENS after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS), in addition to opioid administration, decreased postoperative pain and pain medication use. METHODS: In a controlled trial, 56 patients scheduled to undergo VATS were randomly assigned to TENS plus opioids (Group 1) or opioids alone (Group 2) for 48 h. RESULTS: Forty patients completed the study. Pain scores and use of oral morphine equivalents (OMEs) were not significantly different between the groups during the first and second 24 h. A decreased use of OMEs between the first and second 24 h was significant for Group 1 (P = .005) but not for Group 2 (P = .11); a decreased use of OMEs between groups was not significant (P = .35). CONCLUSIONS: A larger, well-powered clinical trial is indicated to evaluate the effects of TENS for pain control after a VATS procedure. Clinical Trial No.: NCT01046695.

Effect of neurolytic celiac plexus block on pain relief, quality of life, and survival in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer: a randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: Pancreatic cancer is an aggressive tumor associated with high mortality. Optimal pain control may improve quality of life (QOL) for these patients. OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that neurolytic celiac plexus block (NCPB) vs opioids alone improves pain relief, QOL, and survival in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Double-blind, randomized clinical trial conducted at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn. Enrolled (October 1997 and January 2001) were 100 eligible patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer experiencing pain. Patients were followed up for at least 1 year or until death. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either NCPB or systemic analgesic therapy alone with a sham injection. All patients could receive additional opioids managed by a clinician blinded to the treatment assignment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pain intensity (0-10 numerical rating scale), QOL, opioid consumption and related adverse effects, and survival time were assessed weekly by a blinded observer. RESULTS: Mean (SD) baseline pain was 4.4 (1.7) for NCPB vs 4.1 (1.8) for opioids alone. The first week after randomization, pain intensity and QOL scores were improved (pain intensity, P< or =.01 for both groups; QOL, P<.001 for both groups), with a larger decrease in pain for the NCPB group (P =.005). From repeated measures analysis, pain was also lower for NCPB over time (P =.01). However, opioid consumption (P =.93), frequency of opioid adverse effects (all P>.10), and QOL (P =.46) were not significantly different between groups. In the first 6 weeks, fewer NCPB patients reported moderate or severe pain (pain intensity rating of > or =5/10) vs opioid-only patients (14% vs 40%, P =.005). At 1 year, 16% of NCPB patients and 6% of opioid-only patients were alive. However, survival did not differ significantly between groups (P =.26, proportional hazards regression). CONCLUSION: Although NCPB improves pain relief in patients with pancreatic cancer vs optimized systemic analgesic therapy alone, it does not affect QOL or survival.

Discitis after lumbar epidural corticosteroid injection: a case report and analysis of the case report literature.

OBJECTIVE: The primary objective is to document the first case report of discitis after a lumbar epidural corticosteroid injection. The second objective is to analyze the case report literature to identify clinical features and trends of patients with infectious complications after spinal injections. DESIGN: Single case report. A MEDLINE and EMBASE literature search was conducted using key words from the names of commonly performed spinal procedures, including epidural corticosteroid, selective nerve root, transforaminal epidural, facet joint, and sacroiliac joint injections. SETTING: Pain medicine clinic at a tertiary medical center. PATIENT: A 64-year-old man with an 8-year history of left lower extremity radicular pain and recurrent pulmonary infections was referred for a lumbar epidural corticosteroid injection. Six weeks following the injection, the patient returned with a 4-week history of worsening right-sided paraspinous pain without associated recurrent pneumonia. Magnetic resonance imaging revealed a right-sided L5-S1 disc extrusion with discitis and a right L5-S1 discectomy was performed. Cultures of disc material and blood showed growth of coagulase-negative Staphylococcus, and a transesophageal echocardiogram showed no evidence of endocarditis. The patient received 6 weeks of intravenous antibiotics and he had symptomatic recovery at 3-month follow-up. RESULTS: Including our patient, the literature search identified 27 case reports of infectious complications. Similar clinical features and significant trends were evident in five categories including predisposing factors, symptom presentation, diagnostic evaluation, etiological organisms, and treatment outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The identified clinical features and trends could prove useful to the practitioner when an infectious complication is suspected or has occurred.