Transversus Abdominis Plane Block: A Narrative Review.

In this narrative review article, the authors discuss the anatomy, nomenclature, history, approaches (posterior vs. lateral vs. subcostal), techniques, pharmacology, indications, and complications of transversus abdominis plane blocks, as well as possible alternative truncal blocks.Despite the scarcity of evidence and contradictory findings, certain clinical suggestions can nonetheless be made. Overall transversus abdominis plane blocks appear most beneficial in the setting of open appendectomy (posterior or lateral approach). Lateral transversus abdominis plane blocks are not suggested for laparoscopic hysterectomy, laparoscopic appendectomy, or open prostatectomy. However, transversus abdominis plane blocks could serve as an analgesic option for Cesarean delivery (posterior or lateral approach) and open colorectal section (subcostal or lateral approach) if there exist contraindications to intrathecal morphine and thoracic epidural analgesia, respectively.Future investigation is required to compare posterior and subcostal transversus abdominis plane blocks in clinical settings. Furthermore, posterior transversus abdominis plane blocks should be investigated for surgical interventions in which their lateral counterparts have proven not to be beneficial (e.g., laparoscopic hysterectomy/appendectomy, open prostatectomy). More importantly, because posterior transversus abdominis plane blocks can purportedly provide sympathetic blockade and visceral analgesia, they should be compared with thoracic epidural analgesia for open colorectal surgery. Finally, transversus abdominis plane blocks should be compared with newer truncal blocks (e.g., erector spinae plane and quadratus lumborum blocks) with well-designed and adequately powered trials.

A randomized comparison between interscalene and combined infraclavicular-suprascapular blocks for arthroscopic shoulder surgery.

BACKGROUND: This randomized trial aimed to evaluate combined infraclavicular-suprascapular blocks (ICB-SSBs) as a diaphragm-sparing alternative to interscalene blocks (ISBs) for arthroscopic shoulder surgery. We hypothesized that ICB-SSB would provide equivalent postoperative analgesia to ISB 30 min after surgery without the risk of hemidiaphragmatic paralysis. METHODS: Following research ethics board approval and written informed consent, participants in the ISB group received an ultrasound-guided ISB with 20 mL of levobupivacaine 0.25% and epinephrine 5 µg·mL-1. In the ICB-SSB group, ultrasound-guided ICB (20 mL) and SSB (10 mL) were carried out using the same local anesthetic. Thirty minutes after the block was performed, a blinded investigator assessed the presence of hemidiaphragmatic paralysis. Subsequently, all patients underwent general anesthesia. Postoperatively, a blinded investigator recorded pain scores at rest at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 6, 12 and 24 hr. Consumption of intra- and postoperative narcotics was also tabulated. RESULTS: Compared to its ICB-SSB counterpart, the ISB group displayed non-equivalent (i.e., lower) postoperative pain scores at 30 min (difference of the medians, -4; 99% confidence interval [CI], -6 to -3), required less cumulative morphine iv at 24 hr (difference of the means, -6.1 mg; 95% CI, -10.5 to -1.6), and resulted in a higher incidence of hemidiaphragmatic paralysis (18/20 vs 0/20 patients, respectively; P < 0.001). Although postoperative pain scores at one, two, and three hours appeared lower in the ISB group, the upper bounds of the 99% CIs did not exceed the equivalence margin. CONCLUSION: Compared with ICB-SSB, ISB provided non-equivalent (i.e., lower) postoperative pain scores 30 min after arthroscopic shoulder surgery. Thereafter, postoperative analgesia was comparable between the two groups. Further trials are required to compare ISB with ICB-SSB using a proximal (i.e., costoclavicular) technique for ICB. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.clinicaltrials.gov , NCT02993939. Registered 12 December 2016.

Treatment of complex regional pain syndrome: an updated systematic review and narrative synthesis.

PURPOSE: Although multiple treatments have been advocated for complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), the levels of supportive evidence are variable and sometimes limited. The purpose of this updated review is to provide a critical analysis of the evidence pertaining to the treatment of CRPS derived from recent randomized-controlled trials (RCTs). SOURCE: The MEDLINE, EMBASE, Psychinfo, and CINAHL databases were searched to identify relevant RCTs conducted on human subjects and published in English between 1 May 2009 and 24 August 2017. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The search yielded 35 RCTs of variable quality pertaining to the treatment of CRPS. Published trials continue to support the use of bisphosphonates and short courses of oral steroids in the setting of CRPS. Although emerging evidence suggests a therapeutic role for ketamine, memantine, intravenous immunoglobulin, epidural clonidine, intrathecal clonidine/baclofen/adenosine, aerobic exercise, mirror therapy, virtual body swapping, and dorsal root ganglion stimulation, further confirmatory RCTs are warranted. Similarly, trials also suggest an expanding role for peripheral sympathetic blockade (i.e., lumbar/thoracic sympathetic, stellate ganglion, and brachial plexus blocks). CONCLUSIONS: Since our prior systematic review article (published in 2010), 35 RCTs related to CRPS have been reported. Nevertheless, the quality of trials remains variable. Therefore, further research is required to continue investigating possible treatments for CRPS.

Randomized clinical trial comparing pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block and periarticular local anesthetic infiltration for total hip arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: This randomized trial compared pericapsular nerve group block and periarticular local anesthetic infiltration in patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty. We hypothesized that, compared with pericapsular nerve group block, periarticular local anesthetic infiltration would decrease the postoperative incidence of quadriceps weakness at 3 hours fivefold (ie, from 45% to 9%). METHODS: Sixty patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty under spinal anesthesia were randomly allocated to receive a pericapsular nerve group block (n=30) using 20 mL of adrenalized bupivacaine 0.50%, or periarticular local anesthetic infiltration (n=30) using 60 mL of adrenalized bupivacaine 0.25%. Both groups also received 30 mg of ketorolac, either intravenously (pericapsular nerve group block) or periarticularly (periarticular local anesthetic infiltration), as well as 4 mg of intravenous dexamethasone.Postoperatively, a blinded evaluator carried out sensory assessment and motor assessment (knee extension and hip adduction) at 3, 6 and 24 hours. Furthermore, the blinded observer also recorded static and dynamic pain scores at 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 hours; time to first opioid request; cumulative breakthrough morphine consumption at 24 hours and 48 hours; opioid-related side effects; ability to perform physiotherapy at 6, 24 and 48 hours; as well as length of stay. RESULTS: There were no differences in quadriceps weakness at 3 hours between pericapsular nerve group block and periarticular local anesthetic infiltration (20% vs 33%; p=0.469). Furthermore, no intergroup differences were found in terms of sensory block or motor block at other time intervals; time to first opioid request; cumulative breakthrough morphine consumption; opioid-related side effects; ability to perform physiotherapy; and length of stay. Compared with pericapsular nerve group block, periarticular local anesthetic infiltration resulted in lower static pain scores (at all measurement intervals) and dynamic pain scores (at 3 and 6 hours). CONCLUSION: For primary total hip arthroplasty, pericapsular nerve group block and periarticular local anesthetic infiltration result in comparable rates of quadriceps weakness. However, periarticular local anesthetic infiltration is associated with lower static pain scores (especially during the first 24 hours) and dynamic pain scores (first 6 hours). Further investigation is required to determine the optimal technique and local anesthetic admixture for periarticular local anesthetic infiltration. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05087862.

Skeletal muscle reoxygenation after high-intensity exercise in mitochondrial myopathy.

This study addressed whether O(2) delivery during recovery from high-intensity, supra-gas exchange threshold exercise would be matched to O(2) utilization at the microvascular level in patients with mitochondrial myopathy (MM). Off-exercise kinetics of (1) pulmonary O(2) uptake VO(2P) (2) an index of fractional O(2) extraction by near-infrared spectroscopy (Δ[deoxy-Hb + Mb]) in the vastus lateralis and (3) cardiac output (Q'(T)) by impedance cardiography were assessed in 12 patients with biopsy-proven MM (chronic progressive external ophthalmoplegia) and 12 age- and gender-matched controls. Kinetics of VO(2P) were significantly slower in patients than controls (τ = 53.8 ± 16.5 vs. 38.8 ± 7.6 s, respectively; p < 0.05). Q'(T), however, declined at similar rates (τ = 64.7 ± 18.8 vs. 73.0 ± 21.6 s; p > 0.05) being typically slower than [Formula: see text] in both groups. Importantly, Δ[deoxy-Hb + Mb] dynamics (MRT) were equal to, or faster than, τVO(2P) in patients and controls, respectively. In fact, there were no between-group differences in τVO(2P)MRTΔ[deoxy-Hb + Mb] (1.1 ± 0.4 vs. 1.0 ± 0.2, p > 0.05) thereby indicating similar rates of microvascular O(2) delivery. These data indicate that the slower rate of recovery of muscle metabolism after high-intensity exercise is not related to impaired microvascular O(2) delivery in patients with MM. This phenomenon, therefore, seems to reflect the intra-myocyte abnormalities that characterize this patient population.

Randomized comparison between perineural dexamethasone and combined perineural dexamethasone-dexmedetomidine for ultrasound-guided infraclavicular block.

BACKGROUND: This randomized trial compared perineural dexamethasone with combined perineural dexamethasone-dexmedetomidine for ultrasound-guided infraclavicular block. We hypothesized that the combination of perineural adjuvants would result in a longer motor block. METHODS: Fifty patients undergoing upper limb surgery with ultrasound-guided infraclavicular block (using 35 mL of lidocaine 1%-bupivacaine 0.25% with epinephrine 5 µg/mL) were randomly allocated to receive perineural dexamethasone (2 mg) or combined perineural dexamethasone (2 mg)-dexmedetomidine (50 µg). After the performance of the block, a blinded observer assessed the success rate (defined as a minimal sensorimotor composite score of 14 out of 16 points at 30 min), the onset time (defined as the time required to reach a minimal composite score of 14 points) as well as the incidence of surgical anesthesia (defined as the ability to complete surgery without local infiltration, supplemental blocks, intravenous opioids or general anesthesia).Postoperatively, the blinded observer contacted patients with successful blocks to inquire about the duration of motor block, sensory block and postoperative analgesia. RESULTS: No intergroup differences were observed in terms of success rate, onset time and surgical anesthesia. Compared with dexamethasone alone, combined dexamethasone-dexmedetomidine provided longer durations of motor block (21.5 (2.7) vs 17.0 (3.9) hours; p<0.001; 95% CI 2.6 to 6.4), sensory block (21.6 (3.6) vs 17.2 (3.6) hours; p<0.001; 95% CI 2.2 to 6.5), and postoperative analgesia (25.5 (9.4) vs 23.5 (5.6) hours; p=0.038; 95% CI 1.0 to 7.7). CONCLUSION: Compared with perineural dexamethasone (2 mg) alone, combined perineural dexamethasone (2 mg)-dexmedetomidine (50 µg) results in longer durations of sensorimotor block and analgesia. Further studies are required to determine the optimal dosing combination for dexamethasone-dexmedetomidine. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04875039.

Electroencephalography spectral edge frequency and suppression rate-guided sedation in patients with COVID-19: A randomized controlled trial.

Background: Sedation in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients has been identified as a major challenge. We aimed to investigate whether the use of a multiparameter electroencephalogram (EEG) protocol to guide sedation in COVID-19 patients would increase the 30-day mechanical ventilation-free days (VFD). Methods: We conducted a double-blind randomized clinical trial. We included patients with severe pneumonia due to COVID-19 who required mechanical ventilation (MV) and deep sedation. We randomized to the control (n = 25) or multiparameter group (n = 25). Sedation in the intervention group was administered following the standard institutional protocols together with a flow chart designed to reduce the propofol administration dose if the EEG suppression rate was over 2% or the spectral edge frequency 95 (SEF95) was below 10 Hz. We performed an intention-to-treat analysis to evaluate our primary outcome (30-day VFD). Results: There was no difference in VFD at day 30 (median: 11 [IQR 0-20] days in the control group vs. 0 [IQR 0-21] days in the BIS multiparameter group, p = 0.87). Among secondary outcomes, we documented a 17% reduction in the total adjusted propofol administered during the first 5 days of the protocol [median: 2.3 (IQR 1.9-2.8) mg/k/h in the control group vs. 1.9(IQR 1.5-2.2) mg/k/h in the MP group, p = 0.005]. This was accompanied by a higher average BIS value in the intervention group throughout the treatment period. Conclusion: A sedation protocol guided by multivariate EEG-derived parameters did not increase the 30-day VFD. However, the intervention led to a reduction in total propofol administration.

Motor-sparing nerve blocks for total knee replacement: A scoping review.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: This scoping review investigates the optimal combination of motor-sparing analgesic interventions for patients undergoing total knee replacement (TKR). DESIGN: Scoping review. INTERVENTION: MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL databases were searched (inception-last week of May 2020). Only trials including motor-sparing interventions were included. Randomized controlled trials lacking prospective registration and blinded assessment were excluded. MAIN RESULTS: The cumulative evidence suggests that femoral triangle blocks outperform placebo and periarticular infiltration. When combined with the latter, femoral triangle blocks are associated with improved pain control, higher patient satisfaction and decreased opioid consumption. Continuous femoral triangle blocks provide superior postoperative analgesia compared with their single-injection counterparts. However, these benefits seem less pronounced when perineural adjuvants are used. Combined femoral triangle-obturator blocks result in improved analgesia and swifter discharge compared with femoral triangle blocks alone. CONCLUSIONS: The optimal analgesic strategy for TKR may include a combination of different analgesic modalities (periarticular infiltration, femoral triangle blocks, obturator nerve block). Future trials are required to investigate the incremental benefits provided by local anesthetic infiltration between the popliteal artery and the capsule of the knee (IPACK), popliteal plexus block and genicular nerve block.

Erector spinae plane block: A narrative review with systematic analysis of the evidence pertaining to clinical indications and alternative truncal blocks.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: This narrative review discusses the anatomy, mechanism of action, techniques, pharmacology, indications, complications and substitutes for erector spinae plane (ESP) blocks. INTERVENTIONS: The Medline, Embase and Google Scholar databases (inception-last week of April 2020) were searched. For indications and alternative blocks, a systematic analysis of the available evidence was carried out. In order to highlight the best evidence available, only randomized trials with prospective registration, blinded assessment and sample size justification were retained for analysis. MAIN RESULTS: The collective body of anatomical studies suggests that ESP block may work through a combination of different mechanisms (e.g., local anesthetic spread to the thoracic paravertebral space, epidural space, and dorsal ramus). Compared to control, the available evidence suggests that ESP block results in decreased postoperative pain and opioid requirement for a wide array of thoracic and abdominal surgical interventions. Erector spinae plane blocks and thoracic paravertebral blocks seem to provide comparable benefits for thoracoscopic and breast cancer surgery when performed with a similar number of injections. Currently, ESP blocks should be favored over intercostal blocks since, at best, the latter provide similar analgesia to ESP blocks despite requiring multiple-level injections. CONCLUSIONS: In recent years, ESP blocks have become the topic of considerable clinical interest. Future trials are required to investigate their optimal technique, dose of local anesthetic and perineural adjuvants. Moreover, additional investigation should compare ESP blocks with robust multimodal analgesic regimens as well as truncal blocks such as thoracic epidural block, midpoint transverse process to pleura block, PECS block, quadratus lumborum block, and transversus abdominis plane block.

Randomized comparison between pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block and suprainguinal fascia iliaca block for total hip arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: This randomized trial compared ultrasound-guided pericapsular nerve group block and suprainguinal fascia iliaca block in patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty. We selected the postoperative incidence of quadriceps motor block (defined as paresis or paralysis of knee extension) at 6 hours as the primary outcome. We hypothesized that, compared with suprainguinal fascia iliaca block, pericapsular nerve group block would decrease its occurrence from 70% to 20%. METHODS: Forty patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty under spinal anesthesia were randomly allocated to receive a pericapsular nerve group block (n=20) using 20 mL of adrenalized levobupivacaine 0.50%, or a suprainguinal fascia iliaca block (n=20) using 40 mL of adrenalized levobupivacaine 0.25%. After the performance of the block, a blinded observer recorded pain scores at 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 36, and 48 hours; cumulative breakthrough morphine consumption at 24 and 48 hours; opioid-related side effects; ability to perform physiotherapy at 24 and 48 hours; as well as length of stay. Furthermore, the blinded observer also carried out sensory assessment (of the anterior, lateral, and medial aspects of the mid-thigh) and motor assessment (knee extension and hip adduction) at 3, 6, and 24 hours. RESULTS: Compared with suprainguinal fascia iliaca block, pericapsular nerve group block resulted in a lower incidence of quadriceps motor block at 3 hours (45% vs 90%; p<0.001) and 6 hours (25% vs 85%; p<0.001). Furthermore, pericapsular nerve group block also provided better preservation of hip adduction at 3 hours (p=0.023) as well as decreased sensory block of the anterior, lateral, and medial thighs at all measurement intervals (all p≤0.014). No clinically significant intergroup differences were found in terms of postoperative pain scores, cumulative opioid consumption at 24 and 48 hours, ability to perform physiotherapy, opioid-related side effects, and length of hospital stay. CONCLUSION: For primary total hip arthroplasty, pericapsular nerve group block results in better preservation of motor function than suprainguinal fascia iliaca block. Additional investigation is required to elucidate the optimal local anesthetic volume for motor-sparing pericapsular nerve group block and to compare the latter with alternate motor-sparing strategies such as periarticular local anesthetic infiltration. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04402450.

Neuroscience20 (BRAIN20, SPINE20, and MENTAL20) Health Initiative: A Global Consortium Addressing the Human and Economic Burden of Brain, Spine, and Mental Disorders Through Neurotech Innovations and Policies.

Neurological disorders significantly impact the world's economy due to their often chronic and life-threatening nature afflicting individuals which, in turn, creates a global disease burden. The Group of Twenty (G20) member nations, which represent the largest economies globally, should come together to formulate a plan on how to overcome this burden. The Neuroscience-20 (N20) initiative of the Society for Brain Mapping and Therapeutics (SBMT) is at the vanguard of this global collaboration to comprehensively raise awareness about brain, spine, and mental disorders worldwide. This paper aims to provide a comprehensive review of the various brain initiatives worldwide and highlight the need for cooperation and recommend ways to bring down costs associated with the discovery and treatment of neurological disorders. Our systematic search revealed that the cost of neurological and psychiatric disorders to the world economy by 2030 is roughly $16T. The cost to the economy of the United States is $1.5T annually and growing given the impact of COVID-19. We also discovered there is a shortfall of effective collaboration between nations and a lack of resources in developing countries. Current statistical analyses on the cost of neurological disorders to the world economy strongly suggest that there is a great need for investment in neurotechnology and innovation or fast-tracking therapeutics and diagnostics to curb these costs. During the current COVID-19 pandemic, SBMT, through this paper, intends to showcase the importance of worldwide collaborations to reduce the population's economic and health burden, specifically regarding neurological/brain, spine, and mental disorders.

Bronchodilators accelerate the dynamics of muscle O2 delivery and utilisation during exercise in COPD.

BACKGROUND: Expiratory flow limitation and lung hyperinflation promote cardiocirculatory perturbations that might impair O(2) delivery to locomotor muscles in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The hypothesis that decreases in lung hyperinflation after the inhalation of bronchodilators would improve skeletal muscle oxygenation during exercise was tested. METHODS: Twelve non- or mildly hypoxaemic males (forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1))=38.5+/-12.9% predicted; Pao(2)>60 mm Hg) underwent constant work rate cycle ergometer exercise tests (70-80% peak) to the limit of tolerance (Tlim) after inhaled bronchodilators (salbutamol plus ipratropium) or placebo. Muscle (de)oxygenation (approximately fractional O(2) extraction) was determined in the vastus lateralis by changes (Delta) in the deoxyhaemoglobin/myoglobin signal ([HHb]) from near-infrared spectroscopy, and cardiac output (QT) was monitored by impedance cardiography. RESULTS: Bronchodilators reduced lung hyperinflation and increased Tlim compared with placebo (454+/-131 s vs 321+/-140 s, respectively; p<0.05). On-exercise kinetics of QT and pulmonary O(2) uptake V(o(2))were accelerated with active treatment; Delta[HHb] dynamics, however, were delayed by approximately 78% and the signal amplitude diminished by approximately 21% (p<0.01). Consequently, the ratio between V(o(2)) and Delta[HHb] dynamics decreased, suggesting improved microvascular O(2) delivery (tau-V(o(2))/MRT-Delta[HHb]=4.48+/-1.57 s vs 2.08+/-1.15 s, p<0.05). Of note, reductions in lung hyperinflation were related to faster QT kinetics and larger decrements in tau-V(o(2))/MRT-Delta[HHb] (p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Decreases in operating lung volumes after the inhalation of bronchodilators are associated with faster 'central' cardiovascular adjustments to high-intensity exercise with beneficial consequences on muscle oxygenation in patients with moderate to severe COPD.

Single- versus double-injection costoclavicular block: a randomized comparison.

BACKGROUND: The costoclavicular approach targets the brachial plexus in the proximal infraclavicular fossa, where the lateral, medial, and posterior cords are tightly bundled together. This randomized trial compared single- and double-injection ultrasound-guided costoclavicular blocks. We selected onset time as the primary outcome and hypothesized that, compared with its single-injection counterpart, the double-injection technique would result in a swifter onset. METHODS: Ninety patients undergoing upper limb surgery (at or below the elbow joint) were randomly allocated to receive a single- (n=45) or double-injection (n=45) ultrasound-guided costoclavicular block. The local anesthetic agent (35 mL of lidocaine 1%-bupivacaine 0.25%with epinephrine 5 µg/mL and 2 mg of preservative-free dexamethasone) was identical in all subjects. In the single-injection group, the entire volume of local anesthetic was injected between the three cords of the brachial plexus. In the double-injection group, the first half of the volume was administered in this location; the second half was deposited between the medial cord and the subclavian artery. After the performance of the block, a blinded observer recorded the onset time (defined as the time required to achieve a minimal sensorimotor composite score of 14 out of 16 points), success rate (surgical anesthesia) and block-related pain scores. Performance time and the number of needle passes were also recorded during the performance of the block. The total anesthesia-related time was defined as the sum of the performance and onset times. RESULTS: Compared with its single-injection counterpart, the double-injection technique displayed shorter onset time (16.6 (6.4) vs 23.4 (6.9) min; p<0.001; 95% CI for difference 3.9 to 9.7) and total anesthesia-related time (22.5 (6.7) vs 28.9 (7.6) min; p<0.001). No intergroup differences were found in terms of success and technical execution (ie, performance time/procedural pain). The double-injection group required more needle passes than the single-injection group (2 (1-4) vs 1 (1-3); p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Compared with its single-injection counterpart, double-injection costoclavicular block results in shorter onset and total anesthesia-related times. Further investigation is required to determine if a triple-injection technique (with targeted local anesthetic injection around each cord of the brachial plexus) could further decrease the onset time. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03595514.

Lumbar plexus block versus suprainguinal fascia iliaca block for total hip arthroplasty: A single-blinded, randomized trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Comparison of ultrasound-guided lumbar plexus block (LPB) and suprainguinal fascia iliaca block (SIFIB) in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). DESIGN: Randomized equivalence trial. SETTING: University Hospital. PATIENTS: Sixty patients undergoing primary THA. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly allocated to receive ultrasound-guided LPB (n = 30) or SIFIB (n = 30). The local anesthetic agent (40 mL of levobupivacaine 0.25% with epinephrine 5 µg/mL) and block adjuvant (4 mg of intravenous dexamethasone) were identical in all subjects. Postoperatively, all patients received patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (morphine) as well as acetaminophen and ketoprofen during 48 h. MEASUREMENTS: A blinded investigator recorded morphine consumption at 24 and 48 h as well as time to first morphine request, pain scores at 3, 6, 12, 24 and 48 h, incidence of adverse events, time to readiness for discharge, and length of hospital stay. The blinded investigator also carried out sensorimotor block assessment at 3, 6 and 24 h using a 10-point sensorimotor composite scale. MAIN RESULTS: No intergroup differences were found in terms of cumulative morphine consumption at 24 h (95% CI: -4.0 mg to 2.0 mg) and 48 h (95% CI, -5.0 mg to 2.0 mg) or time to first morphine request. Furthermore, pain scores were similar at all time intervals after 3 h. There were no intergroup differences in terms of composite sensorimotor scores at 3 and 6 h. However, SIFIB lasted longer than lumbar plexus block as evidenced by a higher composite score at 24 h. No intergroup differences were found in terms of complications. Compared with LPB, SIFIB was associated with shorter time to readiness for discharge (3 [1-4] vs. 2 [1-3] days; P = 0.042) and length of hospital stay (3 [2-5] vs. 3 [2-4] days; P = 0.048). CONCLUSIONS: For THA, no differences were found between LPB and SIFIB in terms of breakthrough morphine requirement and pain control. However, SIFIB resulted in a longer block and was associated with shorter time to readiness for discharge as well as decreased hospital stay.

A systematic review of DURAL puncture epidural analgesia for labor.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to summarize the evidence derived from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing dural puncture epidural analgesia (DPEA) and conventional lumbar epidural analgesia (LEA) for women undergoing labor. INTERVENTIONS: The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched from inception to July 2018 in order to find RCTs published in the English language, which investigated DPEA in laboring women. MAIN RESULTS: Six RCTs were included in the final analysis. Their collective results remain ambiguous. Dural puncture with small (i.e., 26- or 27-gauge) spinal needles seems to confer either minimal benefits or improved analgesic quality and lower pain scores in the first 10 min. Dural puncture with 25-gauge spinal needles has been reported to provide higher success rate than conventional LEA in one trial; however two other studies could only agree on the fact that DPEA results in improved sacral blockade and fewer unilateral blocks compared to LEA. CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence regarding DPEA for labor analgesia remains ambiguous. Future research should investigate the optimal (spinal) needle size for dural puncture as well as factors governing transmeningeal flux of local anesthetics and opioids in the presence of a dural hole.

Diaphragm-sparing nerve blocks for shoulder surgery, revisited.

Although interscalene brachial plexus block (ISB) remains the gold standard for analgesia after shoulder surgery, the inherent risks of ipsilateral phrenic nerve block and hemidiaphragmatic paralysis (HDP) limit its use in patients with preexisting pulmonary compromise. In a previous Daring Discourse (2017), our research team has identified potential diaphragm-sparing alternatives to ISB for patients undergoing shoulder surgery. In recent years, the field has been fertile with research, with the publication of multiple randomized controlled trials investigating supraclavicular blocks, upper trunk blocks, anterior suprascapular nerve blocks, costoclavicular blocks, and combined infraclavicular-suprascapular blocks. To date, the cumulative evidence (pre-2017 and post-2017) suggests that costoclavicular blocks may provide similar postoperative analgesia to ISB coupled with a 0%-incidence of HDP. However, in light of the small number of patients recruited by the single study investigating costoclavicular blocks, further confirmatory trials are required. Moreover, future investigation should also be undertaken to determine if costoclavicular blocks could achieve surgical anesthesia for shoulder surgery. Anterior suprascapular nerve blocks have been demonstrated to provide surgical anesthesia and similar analgesia to ISB. However, their risk of HDP has not been formally quantified. Of the remaining diaphragm-sparing nerve blocks, supraclavicular blocks (with local anesthetic injection posterolateral to the brachial plexus), upper trunk blocks, and combined infraclavicular-anterior suprascapular blocks merit further investigation, as they have been shown to achieve similar analgesia to ISB, coupled with an HDP incidence <10%.

Remifentanil-Induced Secondary Hyperalgesia Is Not Prevented By Preoperative Acetazolamide Administration In Patients Undergoing Total Thyroidectomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: Acute administration of remifentanil may lead to opioid-induced hyperalgesia (OIH). Studies in mice suggest that OIH is mediated by impaired anionic homeostasis in spinal lamina I neurons due to a down-regulation of the K+-Cl- co-transporter KCC2, which was reverted using acetazolamide (ACTZ), a carbonic anhydrase inhibitor. We propose that ACTZ prevents remifentanil-mediated OIH in humans. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial between December 2016 and September 2018. Patients were randomly allocated to receive ACTZ (250 mg of ACTZ 2 h before surgery) or placebo. To detect hyperalgesia, mechanical pain threshold (MPT) were measured before and after surgery using hand-held von Frey filaments in the forearm. Anesthesia was maintained with remifentanil at a target effect site of 4.5 ± 0.5 ng/mL, and sevoflurane at an end-tidal concentration of 0.8 MAC corrected for age. RESULTS: In total, 47 patients completed the study. Both groups were comparable in the baseline characteristics and intraoperative variables. Baseline MPT were similar in both groups. However, MPT in the forearm significantly diminished in the time in both groups. Finally, postoperative pain and morphine consumption were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: Both groups developed remifentanil-mediated OIH at 12-18 h after surgery. However, ACTZ did not prevent the MPT reduction in patients undergoing total thyroidectomy.

Randomized comparison between interscalene and costoclavicular blocks for arthroscopic shoulder surgery.

BACKGROUND: This randomized trial compared ultrasound-guided interscalene block (ISB) and costoclavicular brachial plexus block (CCB) for arthroscopic shoulder surgery. We hypothesized that CCB would provide equivalent analgesia to ISB 30 min after surgery without the risk of hemidiaphragmatic paralysis. METHODS: All 44 patients received an ultrasound-guided block of the intermediate cervical plexus. Subsequently, they were randomized to ISB or CCB. The local anesthetic agent (20 mL of levobupivacaine 0.5% and epinephrine 5 µg/mL) and pharmacological block adjunct (4 mg of intravenous dexamethasone) were identical for all study participants. After the block performance, a blinded investigator assessed ISBs and CCBs every 5 min until 30 min using a composite scale that encompassed the sensory function of the supraclavicular nerves, the sensorimotor function of the axillary nerve and the motor function of the suprascapular nerve. A complete block was defined as one displaying a minimal score of six points (out of a maximum of eight points) at 30 min. Onset time was defined as the time required to reach the six-point minimal composite score. The blinded investigator also assessed the presence of hemidiaphragmatic paralysis at 30 min with ultrasonography.Subsequently, all patients underwent general anesthesia. Postoperatively, a blinded investigator recorded pain scores at rest at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 6, 12, and 24 hours. Patient satisfaction at 24 hours, consumption of intraoperative and postoperative narcotics, and opioid-related side effects (eg, nausea/vomiting, pruritus) were also tabulated. RESULTS: Both groups displayed equivalent postoperative pain scores at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 6, 12, and 24 hours. ISB resulted in a higher incidence of hemidiaphragmatic paralysis (100% vs 0%; P < 0.001) as well as a shorter onset time (14.0 (5.0) vs 21.6 (6.4) minutes; p<0.001). However, no intergroup differences were found in terms of proportion of patients with minimal composite scores of 6 points at 30 min, intraoperative/postoperative opioid consumption, side effects, and patient satisfaction at 24 hours. CONCLUSION: Compared to ISB, CCB results in equivalent postoperative analgesia while circumventing the risk of hemidiaphragmatic paralysis. Further confirmatory trials are required. Future studies should also investigate if CCB can provide surgical anesthesia for arthroscopic shoulder surgery. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT03411343.