Neurovascular Complications of Iatrogenic Fusarium solani Meningitis.

A multinational outbreak of nosocomial fusarium meningitis occurred among immunocompetent patients who had undergone surgery with epidural anesthesia in Mexico. The pathogen involved had a high predilection for the brain stem and vertebrobasilar arterial system and was associated with high mortality from vessel injury. Effective treatment options remain limited; in vitro susceptibility testing of the organism suggested that it is resistant to all currently approved antifungal medications in the United States. To highlight the severe complications associated with fusarium infection acquired in this manner, we report data, clinical courses, and outcomes from 13 patients in the outbreak who presented with symptoms after a median delay of 39 days.

Randomized Prospective Trial of Epidural Analgesia after Open Hepatectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) improves postoperative pain during ambulation following elective open hepatectomy. BACKGROUND: Strategies to alleviate postoperative pain are a critical element of recovery after surgery. However, the optimal postoperative pain management strategy following open hepatectomy remains unclear. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, nonblinded, randomized comparison of PCEA (intervention) versus intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV PCA; control) for postoperative pain following elective open hepatectomy. The primary end point was pain during ambulation on postoperative day (POD) 2. The study was powered to detect a clinically significant 2-point difference on the pain numeric rating scale (NRS). Secondary end points included pain at rest, morbidity, time to return of bowel function, and length of stay. RESULTS: From 2015 to 2020, 231 patients were randomized (116 patients in the PCEA arm and 115 in the IV PCA arm). The incidence of epidural failure was 3% (n=4/116), with no epidural-related complications. Patients in the PCEA arm had a <2-point difference in NRS pain scores during ambulation on POD 2 vs. IV PCA (median 4.0 vs. 5.0, P <0.001). There was no difference in overall complications between the PCEA and IV PCA arms (33% vs. 40%, P =0.276). Secondary outcomes, including pain scores at rest, were similar between the study arms. CONCLUSIONS: PCEA was safe following open hepatectomy and was associated with a small difference in pain with activity on POD 2 that did not reach our pre-specified definition of clinical significance.

Continuous Wound Irrigation and Intraoperative Methadone Decreases Opioid Use and Shortens Length of Stay After CRS/HIPEC.

BACKGROUND: Epidural analgesia is resource and labor intense and may limit postoperative management options and delay discharge. This study compared postoperative outcomes after cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) with epidural analgesia versus continuous wound infusion system (CWIS) with/without intraoperative methadone. METHODS: A single-institution, retrospective chart review was performed including all patients undergoing open CRS/HIPEC from 2018 to 2021. Patient demographics, surgical characteristics, length of stay, and in-hospital analgesic use were reviewed. In-hospital opioid exposure in morphine milligram equivalents (MME) was calculated. Multivariate analysis (MVA) for mean total and daily opioid exposure was conducted. RESULTS: A total of 157 patients were included. Fifty-three (34%) had epidural analgesia, 96 (61%) had CWIS, and 79 (50%) received methadone. Length of stay was significantly shorter with CWIS + methadone versus epidural (7 vs. 8 days, p < 0.01). MVA showed significantly lower mean total and daily opioid exposure with CWIS+methadone versus epidural (total: 252.8 ± 17.7 MME vs. 486.8 ± 86.6 MME; odds ratio [OR] 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.52-0.98, p = 0.04; Daily: 32.8 ± 2.0 MME vs. 51.9 ± 5.7 MME, OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.52-0.99, p ≤ 0.05). The CWIS-only group (n = 17) had a significantly lower median oral opioid exposure versus epidural (135 MME vs. 7.5 MME, p < 0.001) and longer length of stay versus CWIS + methadone (9 vs. 7 days, p = 0.04), There were no CWIS or methadone-associated complications and one epidural abscess. CONCLUSIONS: CWIS + methadone safely offers better pain control with less in-hospital opioid use, shorter length of stay, and decreased resource utilization compared with epidural analgesia in patients undergoing CRS-HIPEC.

Improved Postoperative Pain Management Outcomes After Implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Protocol for Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC).

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) for patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis is promising but has potential for significant morbidity and prolonged hospitalization. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is a standardized protocol designed to optimize perioperative care. This study describes trends in epidural and opioid use after implementing ERAS for CRS-HIPEC at a tertiary academic center. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing CRS-HIPEC from January 2020 to September 2023 was conducted. ERAS was implemented in February 2022. Medication and outcomes data were compared before and after ERAS initiation. All opioids were converted to morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs). RESULTS: A total of 136 patients underwent CRS-HIPEC: 73 (54%) pre- and 63 (46%) post-ERAS. Epidural usage increased from 63% pre-ERAS to 87% post-ERAS (p = 0.001). Compared with those without epidurals, patients with epidurals had decreased total 7-day oral and intravenous (IV) opioid requirements (45 MME vs. 316 MME; p < 0.001). There was no difference in 7-day opioid totals between pre- and post-ERAS groups. After ERAS, more patients achieved early ambulation (83% vs. 53%; p < 0.001), early diet initiation (81% vs. 25%; p < 0.001), and early return of bowel function (86% vs. 67%; p = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: ERAS implementation for CRS-HIPEC was associated with increased epidural use, decreased oral and IV opioid use, and earlier bowel function return. Our study demonstrates that epidural analgesia provides adequate pain control while significantly decreasing oral and IV opioid use, which may promote gastrointestinal recovery postoperatively. These findings support the implementation of an ERAS protocol for effective pain management in patients undergoing CRS-HIPEC.

Variation in Hospital Neuraxial Labor Analgesia Rates in California.

BACKGROUND: Neuraxial analgesia provides effective pain relief during labor. However, it is unclear whether neuraxial analgesia prevalence differs across U.S. hospitals. The aim of this study was to assess hospital variation in neuraxial analgesia prevalence in California. METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional study analyzed birthing patients who underwent labor in 200 California hospitals from 2016 to 2020. The primary exposure was the delivery hospital. The outcomes were hospital neuraxial analgesia prevalence and between-hospital variability, before and after adjustment for patient and hospital factors. Median odds ratio and intraclass correlation coefficients quantified between-hospital variability. The median odds ratio estimated the odds of a patient receiving neuraxial analgesia when moving between hospitals. The intraclass correlation coefficients quantified the proportion of the total variance in neuraxial analgesia use due to variation between hospitals. RESULTS: Among 1,510,750 patients who underwent labor, 1,040,483 (68.9%) received neuraxial analgesia. Both unadjusted and adjusted hospital prevalence exhibited a skewed distribution characterized by a long left tail. The unadjusted and adjusted prevalences were 5.4% and 6.0% at the 1st percentile, 21.0% and 21.2% at the 5th percentile, 70.6% and 70.7% at the 50th percentile, 75.8% and 76.6% at the 95th percentile, and 75.9% and 78.6% at the 99th percentile, respectively. The adjusted median odds ratio (2.3; 95% CI, 2.1 to 2.5) indicated substantially increased odds of a patient receiving neuraxial analgesia if they moved from a hospital with a lower odds of neuraxial analgesia to one with higher odds. The hospital explained only a moderate portion of the overall variability in neuraxial analgesia (intraclass correlation coefficient, 19.1%; 95% CI, 18.8 to 20.5%). CONCLUSIONS: A long left tail in the distribution and wide variation exist in the neuraxial analgesia prevalence across California hospitals that is not explained by patient and hospital factors. Addressing the low prevalence among hospitals in the left tail requires exploration of the interplay between patient preferences, staffing availability, and care providers' attitudes toward neuraxial analgesia.

Seek and ye shall find: The utility of perioperative VTE screening in high-risk oncologic patients undergoing abdominopelvic surgery.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence and risk factors associated with perioperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients undergoing major oncologic surgery using an epidural catheter (EC) for postoperative analgesia with mechanical prophylaxis and without chemoprophylaxis. METHODS: Six hundred and twenty-six patients undergoing major oncologic surgery from 2009 to 2023 were evaluated. VTE was defined as deep vein thrombosis above the level of the knee. Lower extremity venous duplexes (LEVDs) were done preoperatively and postoperatively after the EC was removed. All patients received mechanical thromboprophylaxis, but not chemical prophylaxis, while the EC was in place. A generalized linear multivariable model was constructed to identify risk factors that predict pre and postoperative VTE. RESULTS: 29/626 patients (4.6%) were found to have preoperative VTE. 16/626 (2.6%) were found to have a postoperative VTE when their preoperative LEVD was negative. In comparison to patients without preoperative VTE, those with VTE were more likely to be male, anticoagulated, and have a history of coronary artery disease. Patients in the postoperative VTE group were older, male, anticoagulated, and had a history of VTE. On multivariable analysis, previous history of VTE was the risk factor most strongly associated with both pre and postoperative VTE. CONCLUSION: Oncologic patients undergoing elective abdominopelvic surgery with epidural analgesia should be screened in the perioperative setting with LEVD to identify VTE and possibly prevent PE.

The application of DPE, CSEA, and EA in labor analgesia for nulliparous women and their impact on maternal and infant safety.

This work compared the effects of dural puncture epidural (DPE), combined spinal epidural analgesia (CSEA) and epidural analgesia (EA) on labor analgesia for primiparae and their impacts on maternal and infant safety. A total of 204 primiparae in need of labor analgesia for vaginal delivery were allocated to DPE, CSEA and EA groups. At 10 min, 30 min and 1 h after analgesia, the DPE and CSEA groups showed lower VAS scores and quicker onset of action than EA group. There was no significant difference in the duration of analgesia and labor and fetal decelerations among the 3 groups. At 1 min and 5 min after childbirth, the neonatal Apgar scores showed no significant difference between the 3 groups. The Bromage scores of DPE and EA groups were lower than those of CSEA group. The incidence of pruritus, hypotension, and postpartum headache in DPE and EA groups were lower than those in CSEA group. To sum up, the efficacy of DPE in labor analgesia for primiparae is similar to that of CSEA, with no obvious effect on labor stage and neonatal Apgar score, no additional complications and less LLMB, pruritus, hypotension and postpartum headache.

Epidural analgesia in labour: separating fact from fiction for autism and neurodevelopment.

Having epidural analgesia in labour has been associated with a later diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder in the offspring, resulting in concerns about childhood wellbeing. Neurodevelopmental changes are inconsistently reported in the literature, creating challenges in the interpretation of these findings. Here we explore the limitations of the current evidence base, and why findings differ between studies, concluding that the current body of evidence does not support a causal association between use of epidural analgesia in labour and autism spectrum disorder.

Noninferiority trials in acute pain research: a valid approach or a slippery slope?

The conduct and reporting of studies with a noninferiority hypothesis is challenging because of the complexity involved in their design and interpretation. However, studies with a noninferiority design have increased in popularity. A recently published trial reported on the noninferiority of lidocaine infusion to epidural analgesia in major abdominal surgeries. Apart from needing a critical appraisal, this draws attention to improve our understanding of noninferiority study framework and its unique features. Given the increasing focus on using various analgesic adjuncts and multiple approaches to fascial plane blocks to avoid more definitive and standard approaches, it is imperative that particular attention is paid to appropriate execution and reporting of noninferiority studies.

Behavioural and neuropsychological outcomes in children exposed in utero to maternal labour epidural analgesia.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies report conflicting results regarding the relationship between labour epidural analgesia (LEA) in mothers and neurodevelopmental disorders in their offspring. We evaluated behavioural and neuropsychological test scores in children of mothers who used LEA. METHODS: Children enrolled in the Raine Study from Western Australia and delivered vaginally from a singleton pregnancy between 1989 and 1992 were evaluated. Children exposed to LEA were compared with unexposed children. The primary outcome was the parent-reported Child Behaviour Checklist (CBCL) reporting total, internalising, and externalising behavioural problem scores at age 10 yr. Score differences, an increased risk of clinical deficit, and a dose-response based on the duration of LEA exposure were assessed. Secondary outcomes included language, motor function, cognition, and autistic traits. RESULTS: Of 2180 children, 850 (39.0%) were exposed to LEA. After adjustment for covariates, exposed children had minimally increased CBCL total scores (+1.41 points; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.09 to 2.73; P=0.037), but not internalising (+1.13 points; 95% CI -0.08 to 2.34; P=0.066) or externalising (+1.08 points; 95% CI -0.08 to 2.24; P=0.068) subscale subscores. Increased risk of clinical deficit was not observed for any CBCL score. For secondary outcomes, score differences were inconsistently observed in motor function and cognition. Increased exposure duration was not associated with worse scores in any outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Although LEA exposure was associated with slightly higher total behavioural scores, there was no difference in subscores, increased risk of clinical deficits, or dose-response relationship. These results argue against LEA exposure being associated with consistent, clinically significant neurodevelopmental deficits in children.

Loss-of-Resistance Versus Dynamic Pressure-Sensing Technology for Successful Placement of Thoracic Epidural Catheters: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: The traditional loss-of-resistance (LOR) technique for thoracic epidural catheter placement can be associated with a high primary failure rate. In this study, we compared the traditional LOR technique and dynamic pressure-sensing (DPS) technology for primary success rate and secondary outcomes pertinent to identifying the thoracic epidural space. METHODS: This pragmatic, randomized, patient- and assessor-blinded superiority trial enrolled patients ages 18 to 75 years, scheduled for major thoracic or abdominal surgeries at a tertiary care teaching hospital. Anesthesiology trainees (residents and fellows) placed thoracic epidural catheters under faculty supervision and rescue. The primary outcome was the success rate of thoracic epidural catheter placement, evaluated by the loss of cold sensation in the thoracic dermatomes 20 minutes after injecting the epidural test dose. Secondary outcomes included procedural time, ease of catheter placement, the presence of a positive falling meniscus sign, early hemodynamic changes, and unintended dural punctures. Additionally, we explored outcomes that included number of attempts, needle depth to epidural space, need for faculty to rescue the procedure from the trainee, patient-rated procedural discomfort, pain at the epidural insertion site, postoperative pain scores, and opioid consumption over 48 hours. RESULTS: Between March 2019 and June 2020, 133 patients were enrolled; 117 were included in the final analysis (n = 57 for the LOR group; n = 60 for the DPS group). The primary success rate of epidural catheter placement was 91.2% (52 of 57) in the LOR group and 96.7% (58 of 60) in the DPS group (95% confidence interval [CI] of difference in proportions: -0.054 [-0.14 to 0.03]; P = .264). No difference was observed in procedural time between the 2 groups (median interquartile range [IQR] in minutes: LOR 5.0 [7.0], DPS 5.5 [7.0]; P = .982). The number of patients with epidural analgesia onset at 10 minutes was 49.1% (28 of 57) in the LOR group compared to 31.7% (19 of 60) in the DPS group ( P = .062). There were 2 cases of unintended dural punctures in each group. Other secondary or exploratory outcomes were not significantly different between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our trial did not establish the superiority of the DPS technique over the traditional LOR method for identifying the thoracic epidural space ( Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03826186).

An Innovative Approach to Determine Programmed Intermittent Epidural Bolus Pump Settings for Labor Analgesia: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Three settings are required on a programmed intermittent epidural bolus (PIEB) pump for labor analgesia: the PIEB next bolus (PIEBnb), PIEB interval (PIEBi), and PIEB volume (PIEBv). The ideal settings for these parameters are still unknown. We hypothesized a mathematical modeling tool, response surface methodology (RSM), could estimate 3 PIEB pump parameters while balancing 3 clinically important patient outcomes simultaneously. The study objective was to use RSM to estimate PIEB settings (PIEBnb, PIEBi, and PIEBv) while maximizing maternal satisfaction, minimizing the need for clinician-administered boluses, and optimizing the ratio of delivered/requested patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) boluses simultaneously. METHODS: With institutional ethics approval, a double-blind randomized trial was completed in a tertiary care labor and delivery center. Nulliparous, English-speaking American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status II patients aged 18 to 45 years at full term, single gestation in vertex presentation, in spontaneous labor and ≤7 cm cervical dilation were included. Patients with comorbidities, contraindications to neuraxial analgesia, using chronic analgesics, <152 cm, or body mass index (BMI) >45 kg/m 2 were excluded. After informed consent, labor analgesia was initiated using 10 mL ropivacaine 0.2% with 10 µg/mL fentanyl solution and PCEA (volume 6 mL every 10 minutes). Patients were randomized to predetermined PIEB settings. RSM identified 3 pump settings that represented a stationary point that best maximized or minimized 3 outcomes simultaneously: PCEA ratio (a ratio closest to 1), clinician bolus (optimal is 0), and maternal satisfaction (visual analog scale, 0-100, ideal response is ≥90). RESULTS: Of 287 potential participants, 192 did not meet inclusion criteria or declined to participate, and 26 were withdrawn, leaving 69 patients for study inclusion. Using RSM, the suggested PIEB settings for all the primary study outcomes were as follows: PIEBnb = 29.4 minutes, PIEBi = 59.8 minutes, and PIEBv = 6.2 mL. These PIEB settings corresponded to the following clinical outcomes: maternal satisfaction at 93.9%, PCEA ratio at 0.77, and need for clinician bolus at 0.29. The dermatome sensory score was between T10 and T5 in 89% of the patients. The median lowest Bromage score was 4. CONCLUSIONS: This novel study used a mathematical model to estimate PIEB pump settings while simultaneously maximizing 3 clinical outcomes. Equally weighted clinical outcomes prevent maximal outcome optimization and may not reflect patient priorities. Future studies or quality improvement endeavors could use RSM methodology to estimate PIEB pump settings targeting optimal values for a single clinical outcome of determined importance to parturients.

Using part of the initial analgesic dose as the epidural test dose did not delay the onset of labor analgesia: a randomized controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Epidural test dose for labor analgesia is controversial and varies widely in clinical practice. It is currently unclear whether using a portion of the initial dose for analgesia as the test dose delays the onset time of analgesia, compared to the traditional test dose. METHODS: One hundred and twenty-six parturients who chose epidural analgesia during labor were randomly assigned to two groups. The first dose in group L was 3 ml 1.5% lidocaine, and in the RF group was 10 ml 0.1% ropivacaine combined with 2 µg/ml fentanyl. After 3 min of observation, both groups received 8 ml 0.1% ropivacaine combined with 2 µg/ml fentanyl. The onset time of analgesia, motor and sensory blockade level, numerical pain rating scale, patient satisfaction score, and side effects were recorded. RESULTS: The onset time of analgesia in group RF was similar to that in group L (group RF vs group L, 7.0 [5.0-9.0] minutes vs 8.0 [5.0-11.0] minutes, p = 0.197). The incidence of foot numbness (group RF vs group L, 34.9% vs 57.1%, p = 0.020) and foot warming (group RF vs group L, 15.9% vs 47.6%, p < 0.001) in group RF was significantly lower than that in group L. There was no difference between the two groups on other outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with 1.5% lidocaine 3 ml, 0.1% ropivacaine 10 ml combined with 2 µg/ml fentanyl as an epidural test dose did not delay the onset of labor analgesia, and the side effects were slightly reduced. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.chictr.org.cn (ChiCTR2100043071).

Role of mitochondrial DNA level in epidural-related maternal fever: a single-centre, observational, pilot study.

INTRODUCTION: Epidural analgesia has been associated with intrapartum maternal fever development. Epidural-related maternal fever (ERMF) is believed to be based on a non-infectious inflammatory reaction. Circulating cell-free mitochondrial deoxyribonucleic acid (mtDNA) is one of the possible triggers of sterile inflammatory processes; however, a connection has not been investigated so far. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate cell-free mtDNA alterations in women in labour with ERMF in comparison with non-febrile women. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 60 women in labour were assessed for maternal temperature every 4 h and blood samples were obtained at the beginning and after delivery. Depending on the analgesia and the development of fever (axillary temperature ≥ 37.5 °C), the women were allocated either to the group of no epidural analgesia (n = 17), to epidural analgesia no fever (n = 34) or to ERMF (n = 9). Circulating cell-free mtDNA was analysed in the maternal plasma for the primary outcome whereas secondary outcomes include the evaluation of inflammatory cytokine release, as well as placental inflammatory signs. RESULTS: Of the women with epidural analgesia, 20% (n = 9) developed ERMF and demonstrated a decrease of circulating mtDNA levels during labour (p = 0.04), but a trend towards higher free nuclear DNA. Furthermore, women with maternal pyrexia showed a 1.5 fold increased level of Interleukin-6 during labour. A correlation was found between premature rupture of membranes and ERMF. CONCLUSIONS: The pilot trial revealed an evident obstetric anaesthesia phenomenon of maternal fever due to epidural analgesia in 20% of women in labour, demonstrating counterregulated free mtDNA and nDNA. Further work is urgently required to understand the connections between the ERMF occurrence and circulating cell-free mtDNA as a potential source of sterile inflammation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT0405223 on clinicaltrials.gov (registered on 25/07/2019).

Parturients feel capable of giving informed consent for epidural analgesia: A qualitative and quantitative analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The patient's right to autonomy confirmed by informed consent is a cornerstone in modern medicine. Epidural analgesia is increasingly popular in obstetric analgesia, but physicians disagree whether labour pain impairs parturient decision-making. We investigated the fraction of parturients feeling capable of giving informed consent including their knowledge of risks. METHODS: Bedside survey postpartum women at the Herlev Hospital, Denmark. The inclusion criteria were recipient of epidural analgesia during labour. A power calculation based on the recognition of genuine and false side effects required the inclusion of 50 participants. RESULTS: Forty out of fifty (80%) of the participants felt they could make a judicious consent during labour and 46 out of 50 (92%) felt they knew enough about epidural analgesia to give consent to the procedure again if necessary. Participants spontaneously reported a median of two risks associated with epidural analgesia. Additionally, when prompted with a cued list of true and false risks from epidural analgesia, the participants reported on average 5.1 genuine risks compared with 0.4 made-up risks. The difference (4.7) suggests the included women could discern genuine risks from made-up risks. DISCUSSION: The majority of participants reported the capacity to give informed consent. Our quantitative results show the participants could clearly distinguish genuine risks of epidural labour analgesia from made-up risks. Our qualitative data likewise suggest that participants understood the information and consequently their informed consent was genuine. Accordingly, parturients are able to give informed consent. This is supported by parturients' ability to identify risks from epidural labour analgesia.

An ultrasound-guided serratus anterior plane block with continuous local anaesthetic infusion and epidural analgesia for rib fracture pain.

BACKGROUND: We compared analgesia with an ultrasound (US)-guided serratus anterior plane block (SAPB) to thoracic epidural analgesia (EA) with continuous local anaesthetic infusion in patients with unilateral multiple traumatic rib fractures. EA often carries contraindications in patients with multiple rib fractures (MRFs), whereby having alternative effective methods to treat rib fracture pain remains important to patient care. Thus, we hypothesised that both regional anaesthetic techniques would provide effective pain relief. METHODS: In this study, we included 59 patients with unilateral MRFs and a numerical rating scale (NRS) pain score ≥4 at rest or upon movement. Patients were randomised to receive a US-guided SAPB or continuous infusion EA with 2 mg/mL ropivacaine. Patients were given a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) device with intravenous oxycodone boluses for rescue medication. The primary outcome was a change in the NRS score at rest and upon movement from baseline to Day 2 following the block. We also measured the forced expiratory volume in 1 s of expiration (FEV1) and FEV1% at the same time points when NRS was measured. The total consumption of oxycodone with PCA was measured at 24 and 48 h after the block. RESULTS: We detected a significant reduction (≥2) in NRS for both groups; however, EA associated with a greater reduction in NRS upon movement after block initiation. The mean reduction in NRS upon movement within 1 h was 3 (1.8, p < .01) in the SAPB group versus 4.7 (2.4, p < .01) in the EA group. We found no significant difference between groups in pain scores on Days 1 and 2 following the block. In the EA group, FEV1% increase in the first 12 h from baseline. Finally, PCA oxycodone consumption did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: SAPB with continuous local anaesthetic infusion is an effective alternative to treat rib fracture pain when EA is contraindicated. We found that SABP significantly reduces pain in patients with unilateral MRFs, although EA achieves better analgesia over the first 12 h following the block.

Is epidural analgesia non-inferior to intrathecal fentanyl as initiation for neuraxial analgesia in early non-spontaneous labour?

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Intrathecal fentanyl, using the combined spinal-epidural (CSE) technique, provides rapid analgesia during early labour. Because of the technique's more complex and invasive nature, as its replacement we assessed the use of epidural analgesia in primiparous parturients with induced labour. The study was registered at www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov (NCT04645823). The aim was to compare the efficacy, duration of analgesia and maternal satisfaction. The primary outcome was the difference in pain visual analogue scale (VAS) between the interventions at 20 min after the analgesia administration. METHODS: Sixty volunteering parturients were randomly allocated in 1:1 ratio to receive either intrathecal fentanyl 20 µg or epidural analgesia (fentanyl 100 µg and lidocaine 80 mg). Contraction pain and maternal satisfaction were assessed by 0-100 mm VAS for 30 min, respectively. Foetal heart rate abnormalities, the time to first epidural dose and the incidence of pruritus were recorded. Non-inferiority margin for mean (95% CI) VAS after epidural analgesia was set at 20 mm above the VAS value for intrathecal fentanyl at 20 min. RESULTS: The contraction pain VAS fell from (median [interquartile range, IQR]) 82 (14) to 13 (20) mm and 76 (17) to 12 (27) mm in 20 min following the intrathecal fentanyl and epidural analgesia, respectively. The absolute mean difference (epidural-intrathecal fentanyl) in the VAS values was 3.3(-0.06 to 6.66) mm indicating non-inferiority. The median time to reach VAS <30 mm was 10 min in both groups. The duration until request for supplemental analgesia was 82(69-95) and 91(75-106) min after intrathecal fentanyl and epidural analgesia, respectively. The difference for the duration (epidural-intrathecal fentanyl) was 9 (6-12) min and for satisfaction-VAS 0.3 (-3.0 to 3.7) mm. There were no differences between the groups in the incidence of foetal heart rate abnormalities, while pruritus was more common after intrathecal fentanyl. CONCLUSION: After 20 min, epidural analgesia by lidocaine and fentanyl was within the non-inferior threshold compared with intrathecal fentanyl in efficacy. The duration of action was not shorter than that of intrathecal fentanyl and maternal satisfaction was also similar.

Race-Based Variation in the Utilization of Epidural Analgesia in Addition to General Anesthesia for Open Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Epidural analgesia (EA) is recommended along with general anesthesia (GA) for patients undergoing open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (AAA) and is known to be associated with improved postoperative outcomes. This study evaluates inequities in using this superior analgesic approach and further assesses the disparities at patient and hospital levels. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed using the Vascular Quality Initiative database of adult patients undergoing elective open AAA repair between 2003 and 2022. Patients were grouped and analyzed based on anesthesia utilization, that is, EA + GA (Group I) and GA only (Group II). Study groups were further stratified by race, and outcomes were studied. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to study the impact of race on the utilization of EA with GA. A subgroup analysis was also carried out to learn the EA analgesia utilization in hospitals performing open AAA with the least to most non-White patients. RESULTS: A total of 8,940 patients were included in the study, of which EA + GA (Group I) comprised n = 4,247 (47.5%) patients, and GA (Group II) had n = 4,693 (52.5%) patients. Based on multivariate regression analysis, the odds ratio of non-White patients receiving both EA and GA for open AAA repair compared to White patients was 0.76 (95% confidence interval: 0.53-0.72, P < 0.001). Of the patients who received both EA + GA, non-White race was associated with increased length of intensive care unit stay and a longer total length of hospital stay compared to White patients. Hospitals with the lowest quintile of minorities had the highest utilization of EA + GA for all patients compared to the highest quintile. CONCLUSIONS: Non-White patients are less likely to receive the EA + GA than White patients while undergoing elective open AAA repair, demonstrating a potential disparity. Also, this disparity persists at the hospital level, with hospitals with most non-White patients having the least EA utilization, pointing toward system-wide disparities.

The association between epidural labour analgesia and postpartum depression: a randomised controlled trial.

There is conflicting evidence regarding the association between epidural labour analgesia and risk of postpartum depression. Most previous studies were observational trials with limited ability to account for confounders. We aimed to determine if epidural analgesia was associated with a significant change in the incidence of postpartum depression in this randomised controlled trial. We enrolled women aged 21-50 years old with a singleton fetus ≥ 36 weeks gestation. Patients were advised regarding available labour analgesic modalities during enrolment (epidural block; intramuscular pethidine; nitrous oxide; or intravenous remifentanil). On request for analgesia, patients were offered the modality that they had been allocated randomly to first. Blinded investigators recorded patient and obstetric characteristics within 24 h of delivery and assessed for postpartum depression at 6-10 weeks following delivery using the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (score ≥ 13 considered positive for postpartum depression). The modified intention-to-treat population consisted of all patients who received any form of labour analgesia, while per-protocol consisted of patients who received their randomised modality as their first form of labour analgesia. Of 881 parturients allocated randomly (epidural n = 441, non-epidural n = 440), we analysed 773 (epidural n = 389, non-epidural n = 384); 62 (15.9%) of women allocated to epidural group developed postpartum depression compared with 65 (16.9%) women allocate to the non-epidural group. There were no significant differences in the incidence of postpartum depression between the two groups (adjusted risk difference (95%CI) 1.6 (-3.0-6.3%), p = 0.49). Similar results were obtained with per-protocol analysis (adjusted risk difference (95%CI) -1.0 (-8.3-6.3%), p = 0.79). We found no significant difference in the risk of postpartum depression between patients who received epidural labour analgesia and those who utilised non-epidural analgesic modalities.

Socio-economic disadvantage and utilisation of labour epidural analgesia in Scotland: a population-based study†.

Socio-economic deprivation is associated with adverse maternal and childhood outcomes. Epidural analgesia, the gold standard for labour analgesia, may improve maternal well-being. We assessed the association of socio-economic status with utilisation of epidural analgesia and whether this differed when epidural analgesia was advisable for maternal safety. This was a population-based study of NHS data for all women in labour in Scotland between 1 January 2007 and 23 October 2020, excluding elective caesarean sections. Socio-economic status deciles were defined using the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation. Medical conditions for which epidural analgesia is advisable for maternal safety (medical indications) and contraindications were defined according to national guidelines. Of 593,230 patients in labour, 131,521 (22.2%) received epidural analgesia. Those from the most deprived areas were 16% less likely to receive epidural analgesia than the most affluent (relative risk 0.84 [95%CI 0.82-0.85]), with the inter-decile mean change in receiving epidural analgesia estimated at -2% ([95%CI -2.2% to -1.7%]). Among the 21,219 deliveries with a documented medical indication for epidural analgesia, the socio-economic gradient persisted (relative risk 0.79 [95%CI 0.75-0.84], inter-decile mean change in receiving epidural analgesia -2.5% [95%CI -3.1% to -2.0%]). Women in the most deprived areas with a medical indication for epidural analgesia were still less likely (absolute risk 0.23 [95%CI 0.22-0.24]) to receive epidural analgesia than women from the most advantaged decile without a medical indication (absolute risk 0.25 [95%CI 0.24-0.25]). Socio-economic deprivation is associated with lower utilisation of epidural analgesia, even when epidural analgesia is advisable for maternal safety. Ensuring equitable access to an intervention that alleviates pain and potentially reduces adverse outcomes is crucial.