Comment on "Comparison of analgesic efficacy between rectus sheath blockade, intrathecal morphine with bupivacaine, and intravenous patient-controlled analgesia in patients undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: a prospective, observational clinical study".
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Loffel LM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7968232 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Comment on "Comparison of analgesic efficacy between rectus sheath blockade, intrathecal morphine with bupivacaine, and intravenous patient-controlled analgesia in patients undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: a prospective, observational clinical study".
Löffel Lukas M LM Engel Dominique D Wuethrich Patrick Y PY
BMC anesthesiology 20210317 1
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundWe explored the analgesic outcomes on postoperative day (POD) 1 in patients undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) who received intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA), rectus sheath bupivacaine block (RSB), or intrathecal morphine with bupivacaine block (ITMB).MethodsThis was a prospective, observational clinical trial. Patients were divided into three groups: IV-PCA (n = 30), RSB (n = 30), and ITMB (n = 30). Peak pain scores at rest and with coughing, cumulative IV-PCA drug consumption, the need for IV rescue opioids, and Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) questionnaire scores collected on POD 1 were compared among the groups.ResultsThe preoperative and intraoperative findings were comparable among the groups; the ITMB group required the least remifentanil of all groups. During POD 1, the ITMB group reported lower levels of pain at rest and with coughing, compared with the other two groups. During POD 1, incidences of severe pain at rest (10.0% vs. 23.3% vs. 40.0%) and with coughing (16.7% vs. 36.7% vs. 66.7%) were the lowest in the ITMB group compared with the RSB and IV-PCA groups, respectively. After adjustment for age, body mass index, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and intraoperative remifentanil infusion, severe pain at rest was 0.167-fold less common in the ITMB group than in the IV-PCA group, while pain with coughing was 0.1-fold lower in the ITMB group and 0.306-fold lower in the RSB group, compared with the IV-PCA group. The ITMB group required lower cumulative IV-PCA drug infusions and less IV rescue opioids, while exhibiting a better QoR-15 global score, compared with the other two groups. Complications (nausea and pruritus) were significantly more common in the ITMB group than in the other two groups; however, we noted no ITMB- or RSB-related anesthetic complications (respiratory depression, post-dural headache, nerve injury, or puncture site hematoma or infection), and all patients were assessed as Clavien-Dindo grade I or II during the hospital stay.ConclusionAlthough ITMB induced complications of nausea and pruritus, this analgesic technique provided appropriate pain relief that enhanced patient perception related to early postoperative recovery.Trial registrationClinical Research Information Service, Republic of Korea, (approval number: KCT0005040 ) on May 20, 2020.
| S-EPMC7681986 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy causes discomfort in the immediate postoperative period. This randomised controlled trial investigated if intrathecal bupivacaine/morphine, in addition to general anaesthesia, could be beneficial for the postoperative quality of recovery. One hundred and fifty-five patients were randomly allocated to an intervention group that received intrathecal 12.5 mg bupivacaine/300 μg morphine (20% dose reduction in patients > 75 years) or a control group receiving a subcutaneous sham injection and an intravenous loading dose of 0.1 mg.kg-1 morphine. Both groups received standardised general anaesthesia and the same postoperative analgesic regimen. The primary outcome was a decrease in the Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) questionnaire score on postoperative day 1. The intervention group (n = 76) had less reduction in QoR-15 on postoperative day 1; median (IQR [range]) 10% (1-8 [-60% to 50%]) vs. 13% (5-24 [-6% to 50%]), p = 0.019, and used less morphine during the admission; 2 mg (1-7 [0-41 mg]) vs. 15 mg (12-20 [8-61 mg]), p < 0.001. Furthermore, they perceived lower pain scores during exertion; numeric rating scale (NRS) 3 (1-6 [0-9]) vs. 5 (3-7 [0-9]), p = 0.001; less bladder spasms (NRS 1 (0-2 [0-10]) vs. 2 (0-5 [0-10]), p = 0.001 and less sedation; NRS 2 (0-3 [0-10]) vs. 3 (2-6 [0-10]), p = 0.005. Moreover, the intervention group used less rescue medication. Pruritus was more severe in the intervention group; NRS 4 (1-7 [0-10]) vs. 0 (0-1 [0-10]), p = 0.000. We conclude that despite a modest increase in the incidence of pruritus, multimodal pain management with intrathecal bupivacaine/morphine remains a viable option for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.
| S-EPMC7187216 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Although intrathecal morphine and bupivacaine are increasingly implemented in effective postoperative pain control, there is a lack of consensus on the dosage as high doses of bupivacaine may inadvertently cause unwanted side effects. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of intrathecal morphine injection and low-dose bupivacaine with morphine injection. In total, 90 patients were divided into 3 groups: (1) sham injection for the control group; (2) morphine 400 mcg for the morphine group (M); and (3) morphine 400 mcg and bupivacaine 5 mg for the morphine and bupivacaine group (M + B). Our primary outcome was time to first rescue analgesic. The VAS (visual analogue scale) pain score was compared until POD (postoperative day)1. Total fentanyl dose was compared until POD2. Side effects were monitored until POD3. Although time to first rescue was significantly shorter in the control group compared to group M and group M + B (p < 0.001), both groups (M and M + B) were comparable to each other. There was a significant decrease in the VAS score and total fentanyl administration in group M and group M + B compared to the control group. Pruritus and tingling were more prevalent in the M + B group (p = 0.023; p = 0.010). The addition of 5 mg bupivacaine may be insufficient in providing further analgesic benefits; however, higher doses may aggravate side effects.
| S-EPMC8879321 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOpioid analgesics have been a standard modality for postoperative pain management after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) but are also associated with increased risk of nausea, pruritus, vomiting, respiratory depression, prolonged ileus, and cognitive dysfunction. There is still a need for a method of anesthesia that can deliver effective long-term postoperative pain relief without incurring the high cost and health burden of opioids and nerve blocks.Questions/purposes(1) Is liposomal bupivacaine-based periarticular injection (PAI) more effective than morphine-based spinal anesthesia or ropivacaine-based PAI in controlling postoperative pain after TKA? (2) Do patients treated with liposomal bupivacaine-based PAI experience fewer opioid-related adverse events compared with patients treated with morphine-based spinal anesthesia or ropivacaine-based PAI in controlling postoperative pain after TKA?MethodsThis multicenter, blind trial randomized 119 patients undergoing TKA with spinal anesthesia to receive spinal anesthesia plus periarticular injection with liposomal bupivacaine (40 patients), spinal anesthesia with bupivacaine plus intrathecal morphine (41 patients) but no liposomal bupivacaine injection, or spinal anesthesia with bupivacaine (38 patients) and no liposomal bupivacaine injection. The two groups that did not receive periarticular liposomal bupivacaine did receive periarticular injection with ropivacaine, and all three groups had ketorolac (30 mg) plus epinephrine (1:1000) in the periarticular injections. Patients in all three groups received identical perioperative multimodal analgesic and antiemetic drugs. All patients were analyzed in the group to which they were randomized and no patients were lost to followup. The primary study endpoints were visual analog score (VAS) for pain and narcotic use during postoperative day 1. Secondary endpoints included side effects associated with narcotic administration during the hospital stay.ResultsMean VAS pain in the liposomal bupivacaine PAI group was lower than that for the ropivacaine PAI group at 6 hours (1.8 ± 2.1 versus 3.3 ± 2.3, p = 0.005, mean difference: 1.5, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.5-2.5) and 12 hours (1.5 ± 2.0 versus 3.3 ± 2.4, p < 0.001, mean difference: 1.8, 95% CI, 0.8-2.8) after surgery. The morphine spinal group had lower pain compared with the liposomal bupivacaine PAI group at 6 hours (0.9 ± 1.8 versus 1.8 ± 2.1, p = 0.035, mean difference: 1.0, 95% CI, 0.1-1.8), but there was no difference at 12 hours (0.8 ± 1.5 versus 1.5 ± 2.0, p = 0.086, mean difference: 0.7, 95% CI, -0.1 to 1.5). The magnitude of the differences at 6 and 12 hours are near the lower end of minimal clinically important differences reported in the literature, and thus the improvement shown in this study may only represent a small clinical improvement. Both the liposomal bupivacaine group (13% [five of 40]) and the ropivacaine group (5% [two of 38]) had fewer incidents of itching (pruritus) than the spinal morphine group (38% [15 of 41]) (p = 0.001).ConclusionsThis prospective multicenter three-arm blind randomized controlled trial showed potentially improved pain control at 6 and 12 hours in the liposomal bupivacaine and intrathecal morphine groups compared with the ropivacaine group at the cost of much higher incidences of pruritus (itching) in the intrathecal morphine group. Based on these results, we prefer the use of PAI with liposomal bupivacaine as an alternative to spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine as a result of similar postoperative pain control and the potential for reducing adverse events.Level of evidenceLevel I, therapeutic study.
| S-EPMC5174037 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe present study was performed to investigate the analgesic efficacy of intrathecal morphine and bupivacaine (ITMB) in terms of treating early postoperative pain in adult patients who underwent robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP).MethodsFifty patients were prospectively enrolled and randomly classified into the non-ITMB (n = 25) and ITMB (n = 25) groups. The ITMB therapeutic regimen consisted of 0.2 mg morphine and 7.5 mg bupivacaine (total 1.7 mL). All patients were routinely administered the intravenous patient-controlled analgesia and appropriately treated with rescue intravenous (IV) opioid drugs, based on the discretion of the attending physicians who were blinded to the group assignments. Cumulative IV opioid consumption and the numeric rating scale (NRS) score were assessed at 1, 6, and 24 h postoperatively, and opioid-related complications were measured during the day after surgery.ResultsDemographic findings were comparable between patients who did and did not receive ITMB. The intraoperative dose of remifentanil was lower in the ITMB group than in the non-ITMB group. Pain scores (i.e., NRS) at rest and during coughing as well as cumulative IV opioid consumption were significantly lower in patients who received ITMB than in those who did not in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU; i.e., at 1 h after surgery) and the ward (i.e., at 6 and 24 h after surgery). ITMB was significantly associated with postoperative NRS scores of ≤ 3 at rest and during coughing in the PACU (i.e., at 1 h after surgery) before and after adjusting for cumulative IV opioid consumption. In the ward (i.e., at 6 and 24 h after surgery), ITMB was associated with postoperative NRS scores of ≤ 3 at rest and during coughing before adjusting for cumulative IV opioid consumption but not after. No significant differences in complications were observed, such as post-dural puncture headache, respiratory depression, nausea, vomiting, pruritus, or neurologic sequelae, during or after surgery.ConclusionA single spinal injection of morphine and bupivacaine provided proper early postoperative analgesia and decreased additional requirements for IV opioids in patients who underwent RALP.Trial registrationClinical Research Information Service, Republic of Korea; approval number: KCT0004350 on October 17, 2019. https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/en/search/search_result_st01.jsp?seq=15637.
| S-EPMC7908773 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRectus sheath block can provide analgesia following umbilical hernia repair. However, conflicting reports on its analgesic effectiveness exist. No study has investigated plasma local anesthetic concentration following ultrasound-guided rectus sheath block (USGRSB) in children.ObjectivesCompare the effectiveness and bupivacaine absorption following USGRSB or wound infiltration (WI) for umbilical hernia repair in children.MethodsA randomized blinded study comparing WI with USGRSB in 40 children undergoing umbilical hernia repair was performed. Group WI (n = 20) received wound infiltration 1 mg·kg(-1) 0.25% bupivacaine. Group RS (n = 20) received USGRSB 0.5 mg·kg(-1) 0.25% bupivacaine per side in the posterior rectus sheath compartment. Pain scores and rescue analgesia were recorded. Blood samples were drawn at 0, 10, 20, 30, 45, and 60 min.ResultsPatients in the WI group had a twofold increased risk of requiring morphine (hazard ratio 2.06, 95% CI 1.01, 4.20, P = 0.05). When required, median time to first morphine dose was longer in the USGRSB group (65.5 min vs. 47.5 min, P = 0.049). Peak plasma bupivacaine concentration was higher following USGRSB than WI (median: 631.9 ng·ml(-1) IQR: 553.9-784.1 vs. 389.7 ng·ml(-1) IQR: 250.5-502.7, P = 0.002). Tmax was longer in the USGRSB group (median 45 min IQR: 30-60 vs. 20 min IQR: 20-45, P = 0.006).ConclusionsUSGRSB provides more effective analgesia than WI for umbilical hernia repair. USGRSB with 1 mg·kg(-1) 0.25% bupivacaine is associated with safe plasma bupivacaine concentration that peaks higher and later than WI. Caution against using larger volumes of higher concentration local anesthetic for USGRSB is advised.
| S-EPMC4125512 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7808000 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIntrathecal opioids are routinely administered during spinal anesthesia for postcesarean analgesia. The effectiveness of intrathecal morphine for postcesarean analgesia is well established, and the use of intrathecal hydromorphone is growing. No prospective studies have compared the effectiveness of equipotent doses of intrathecal morphine versus intrathecal hydromorphone as part of a multimodal analgesic regimen for postcesarean analgesia. The authors hypothesized that intrathecal morphine would result in superior analgesia compared with intrathecal hydromorphone 24 h after delivery.MethodsIn this single-center, double-blinded, randomized trial, 138 parturients undergoing scheduled cesarean delivery were randomized to receive 150 µg of intrathecal morphine or 75 µg of intrathecal hydromorphone as part of a primary spinal anesthetic and multimodal analgesic regimen; 134 parturients were included in the analysis. The primary outcome was the numerical rating scale score for pain with movement 24 h after delivery. Static and dynamic pain scores, nausea, pruritus, degree of sedation, and patient satisfaction were assessed every 6 h for 36 h postpartum. Total opioid consumption was recorded.ResultsThere was no significant difference in pain scores with movement at 24 h (intrathecal hydromorphone median [25th, 75th] 4 [3, 5] and intrathecal morphine 3 [2, 4.5]) or at any time point (estimated difference, 0.5; 95% CI, 0 to 1; P = 0.139). Opioid received in the first 24 h did not differ between groups (median [25th, 75th] oral morphine milligram equivalents for intrathecal hydromorphone 30 [7.5, 45.06] vs. intrathecal morphine 22.5 [14.0, 37.5], P = 0.769). From Kaplan-Meier analysis, the median time to first opioid request was 5.4 h for hydromorphone and 12.1 h for morphine (log-rank test P = 0.200).ConclusionsAlthough the hypothesis was that intrathecal morphine would provide superior analgesia to intrathecal hydromorphone, the results did not confirm this. At the doses studied, both intrathecal morphine and intrathecal hydromorphone provide effective postcesarean analgesia when combined with a multimodal analgesia regimen.
| S-EPMC8754417 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES:Intrathecal morphine is used in the postoperative management of pain after caesarean section (CS), but might not be optimal for intraoperative analgesia. We hypothesized that intrathecal fentanyl could supplement intraoperative analgesia when added to a local anesthetic and morphine without affecting management of postoperative pain. METHODS:This prospective, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study included 60 parturients scheduled for elective CS. Spinal anesthesia consisted of bupivacaine with either morphine 100??g (M group), or fentanyl 25??g and morphine 100??g (FM group). The frequency of intraoperative pain and pethidine consumption in the 24?hours postoperatively was recorded. RESULTS:Fewer patients in the FM group required additional intraoperative analgesia (P?<?.01, relative risk 0.06, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.004-1.04). The FM group was noninferior to the M group for 24-hour opioid consumption (95% CI -10.0?mg to 45.7?mg, which was below the prespecified boundary of 50?mg). Pethidine consumption in postoperative hours 1 to 12 was significantly higher in the FM group (P?=?.02). Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) were more common in the FM group (P?=?.01). Visual analog scale scores, effective analgesia, Apgar scores, and rates of pruritus and respiratory depression were similar between the groups. CONCLUSIONS:Intrathecal combination of fentanyl and morphine may provide better perioperative analgesia than morphine alone in CS and could be useful when the time from anesthesia to skin incision is short. However, an increase in PONV and possible acute spinal opioid tolerance after addition of intrathecal fentanyl warrants further investigation using lower doses of fentanyl.
| S-EPMC5728777 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRectus sheath catheter analgesia (RSCA) and thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) are both used for analgesia following laparotomy. The aim was to compare the analgesic effectiveness of RSCA with TEA after laparotomy for elective colorectal and urological surgery.MethodsPatients undergoing elective midline laparotomy were randomized in a non-blinded fashion to receive RSCA or TEA for postoperative analgesia at a single UK teaching hospital. The primary quantitative outcome measure was dynamic pain score at 24 h after surgery. A nested qualitative study (reported elsewhere) explored the dual primary outcome of patient experience and acceptability. Secondary outcome measures included rest and movement pain scores over 72 h, functional analgesia, analgesia satisfaction, opiate consumption, functional recovery, morbidity, safety, and cost-effectiveness.ResultsA total of 131 patients were randomized: 66 in the RSCA group and 65 in the TEA group. The median (interquartile range; i.q.r.) dynamic pain score at 24 h was significantly lower after TEA than RSCA (33 (11-60) versus 50.5 (24.50-77.25); P = 0.018). Resting pain score at 72 h was significantly lower after RSCA (4.5 (0.25-13.75) versus 12.5 (2-13); P = 0.019). Opiate consumption on postoperative day 3 (median (i.q.r.) morphine equivalent 17 (10-30) mg versus 40 (13.25-88.50) mg; P = 0.038), hypotension, or vasopressor dependency (29.7 versus 49.2 per cent; P = 0.023) and weight gain to day 3 (median (i.q.r.) 0 (-1-2) kg versus 1 (0-3) kg; P = 0.046) were all significantly greater after TEA, compared with RSCA. There were no significant differences between groups in other secondary outcomes, although more participants experienced serious adverse events after TEA compared with RSCA, which was also the more cost-effective.ConclusionsTEA provided superior initial postoperative analgesia but only for the first 24 h. By 72 hours RSCA provides superior analgesia, is associated with a lower incidence of unwanted effects, and may be more cost-effective.
| S-EPMC9092444 | biostudies-literature