Dataset Information

Efficacy and Safety of Thoracic Epidural Analgesia in Patients With Acute Pancreatitis: A Narrative Review.

ABSTRACT: Patients admitted to the intensive care unit with moderate to severe acute pancreatitis carry significant morbidity and mortality. A few unfortunate patients in whom the initial line of treatment fails to show clinical improvement develop multiorgan dysfunction involving lungs (adult respiratory distress syndrome), renal failure, intra-abdominal infections, sepsis, and septic shock, which ultimately leads to prolonged hospitalization and a substantial cost of treatment. The acute abdominal pain experienced by these patients is excruciating and requires multimodal analgesia. Continuous epidural analgesia has been found to provide good quality, opioid-sparing analgesia in these patients. A few studies have also demonstrated that segmental sympathectomy resulting from epidural blockade could lead to lowering of serum amylase and lipase levels improve paralytic ileus, and thus hastens the process of recovery. The present paper aims to discuss the advantages of continuous epidural analgesia in patients with acute pancreatitis of varying severity and to review the existing literature using specific keywords.

SUBMITTER: Nair A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9012692 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficacy and Safety of Thoracic Epidural Analgesia in Patients With Acute Pancreatitis: A Narrative Review.

Nair Abhijit A Tiwary Manish Kumar MK Seelam Suresh S Kotthapalli Krishna Kishore KK Pulipaka Kaushik K

Cureus 20220316 3

Patients admitted to the intensive care unit with moderate to severe acute pancreatitis carry significant morbidity and mortality. A few unfortunate patients in whom the initial line of treatment fails to show clinical improvement develop multiorgan dysfunction involving lungs (adult respiratory distress syndrome), renal failure, intra-abdominal infections, sepsis, and septic shock, which ultimately leads to prolonged hospitalization and a substantial cost of treatment. The acute abdominal pain ...[more]

PMID: 35449658

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAcute pancreatitis (AP) is associated with high morbidity and mortality in its most severe forms. Most patients with severe AP require intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation, frequently for more than 7 days, which is associated with the worst outcome. Recent increasing evidence from preclinical and clinical studies support the beneficial effects of epidural analgesia (EA) in AP, such as increased gut barrier function and splanchnic, pancreatic and renal perfusion, decreased liver damage and inflammatory response, and reduced mortality. Because recent studies suggest that EA might be a safe procedure in the critically ill, we sought to determine whether EA reduced AP-associated respiratory failure and other major clinical outcomes in patients with AP.Methods and analysisThe Epidural Analgesia for Pancreatitis (EPIPAN) trial is an investigator-initiated, prospective, multicentre, randomised controlled two-arm trial with assessor-blinded outcome assessment. The EPIPAN trial will randomise 148 patients with AP requiring admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) to receive EA (with patient-controlled epidural administration of ropivacaine and sufentanil) combined with standard care based on current recommendations on the treatment of AP (interventional group), or standard care alone (reference group). The primary outcome is the number of ventilator-free days at day 30. Secondary outcomes include main complications of AP (eg, organ failure and mortality, among others), levels of biological markers of systemic inflammation, epithelial lung injury, renal failure, and healthcare-associated costs.Ethics and disseminationThe study was approved by the appropriate ethics committee (CPP Sud-Est VI). Informed consent is required. If the combined application of EA and standard care proves superior to standard care alone in patients with AP in the ICU, the use of EA may become standard practice in experienced centres, thereby decreasing potential complications related to AP and its burden in critically ill patients. The results will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration numberNCT02126332.

Project description:Background and objectiveAcute pancreatitis (AP) is a complex inflammatory disorder with potential systemic repercussions including sepsis, multiple organ failure and mortality. As such, the development of a prognostic tool to assess the complications and severity of AP is critical as urgent medical intervention is warranted in cases of severe AP to prevent complications and reduce mortality. Despite the plethora of scoring systems such as the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score available for prognostication of AP, they often require manual invasive blood testing and lack the ability to monitor the dynamic progression of the disease. To this end, heart rate variability (HRV), a measure of the autonomic nervous system's modulation on cardiac activity, has emerged as a promising tool. Having been previously posited as a tool to monitor the progression of cardiovascular and neurological conditions, the use of HRV as a risk stratification tool for AP is highly plausible. Therefore, this study aims to synthesize the existing literature regarding the usage of HRV as a tool for the prognostication and monitoring of AP.MethodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science, Scopus and Embase from inception to December 2023. Articles with mentions of AP and HRV were reviewed, and the complications of AP and its effects on HRV parameters were analyzed.Key content and findingsEarly studies on the use of HRV in AP have revealed the association of decreased HRV parameters with the development of subsequent complications, reflecting the suppression of sympathetic activity as a predominant driving force. In addition, HRV has also been shown to outperform other established scoring systems in predicting outcomes of the complications of AP, but more studies are needed to validate its accuracy.ConclusionsPreliminary studies have shown that certain parameters of HRV may be used to predict the severity of AP and prognosticate outcomes. Although HRV monitoring demonstrates potential to be superior to existing scoring systems in AP, more research is needed to validate its use as a prognostic tool. Nevertheless, the prospective utility of HRV monitoring in predicting the onset and outcomes of AP and its complications remains optimistic.

Project description:BackgroundPostoperative analgesia is an essential component of enhanced recovery after surgery following abdominal surgery. Studies comparing the effectiveness of epidural analgesia with that of other analgesic modalities after liver surgery have reported inconsistent results. Consequently, the use of epidural analgesia for open hepatectomy is controversial.ObjectiveThe present single-center retrospective study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) and patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) in adults undergoing open hepatectomy.MethodsPatients who underwent open hepatectomy between January 2018 to December 2019 at Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University were retrospectively analyzed. Propensity score matching was used to adjust baseline information between the PCEA and PCIA groups. The primary outcome measure was scores of the numeric rating scales (NRSs) for resting, exercise, and nocturnal pain at postoperative 24 h (postoperative day 1 [POD1]) and 48 h (POD2). The secondary outcome indicators included postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), hypotension, pruritus, respiratory depression, functional activity score (FAS), effective analgesic pump compression ratio, analgesic relief rate, discontinuation of the analgesic pump, reasons for discontinuation of the analgesic pump, and patient satisfaction with postoperative analgesia.ResultsThe NRS scores of the PCEA group on POD1 were significantly lower than those of the PCIA group (P < 0.05). On POD2, the difference between the two groups was significant only for motion NRS scores (P < 0.05). The PCIA group had significantly more patients with lower FAS functional class than the PCEA group (P < 0.001). The effective analgesic pump compression ratio and the analgesic relief rate at 2 days after the surgery were lower in the PCEA group than in the PCIA group (P < 0.001). The incidence of pump discontinuation was higher in the PCEA group than in the PCIA group on POD2 (P = 0.044). Moreover, on POD1 and POD2, the PCEA group showed a higher incidence of pruritus and hypotension than the PCIA group (P < 0.001). Both groups showed no significant difference in PONV incidence.ConclusionIn patients undergoing open hepatectomy, PCEA was more effective than PCIA in relieving moderate to severe pain on POD1. However, improving the safety and effectiveness of PCEA remains a challenge.

Project description:ObjectivesTo conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of abdominal paracentesis drainage (APD) in patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) when compared with conventional 'step-up' strategy based on percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD).DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsPubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (OVID), China National Knowledge Infrastructure and Wanfang Database were electronically searched to collect cohort studies and randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from inception to 25 July 2020. Studies related to comparing APD with conventional 'step-up' strategy based on PCD were included.OutcomesThe primary outcome was all-cause mortality. The secondary outcomes were the rate of organ dysfunction, infectious complications, hospitalisation expenses and length of hospital stay.ResultsFive cohort studies and three RCTs were included in the analysis. Compared with the conventional 'step-up' method, pooled results suggested APD significantly decreased all-cause mortality during hospitalisation (cohort studies: OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.89 and p=0.02), length of hospital stay (cohort studies: standard mean difference (SMD) -0.31, 95% CI -0.53 to -0.10 and p=0.005; RCTs: SMD -0.45, 95% CI -0.64 to -0.26 and p<0.001) and hospitalisation expenses (cohort studies: SMD -2.49, 95% CI -4.46 to -0.51 and p<0.001; RCTs: SMD -0.67, 95% CI -0.89 to -0.44 and p<0.001). There was no evidence to prove that APD was associated with a higher incidence of infectious complications. However, the incidence of organ dysfunction between cohort studies and RCTs subgroup slightly differed (cohort studies: OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.28 and p=0.22; RCTs: OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.98 and p=0.04).ConclusionsThe findings suggest that early application of APD in patients with AP is associated with reduced all-cause mortality, expenses during hospitalisation and the length of stay compared with the 'step-up' strategy without significantly increasing the risk of infectious complications. These results must be interpreted with caution because of the limited number of included studies as well as a larger dependence on observational trials.Prospero registration numberCRD42020168537.

Project description:Background: Hydromorphone patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) provides satisfactory postoperative pain therapy, but its effect has not been assessed in acute pancreatitis (AP). Aim: To assess the safety and efficacy of intravenous hydromorphone PCA for pain relief in AP. Methods: This open-label trial included AP patients admitted within 72 h of symptom onset, aged 18-70 years old, and with Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain intensity ≥5. They were randomized to receive intravenous hydromorphone PCA (0.05 mg/h with 0.2 mg on-demand) or intramuscular pethidine (50 mg as required) for three consecutive days. Intramuscular dezocine (5 mg on demand) was the rescue analgesia. The primary outcome was the change of VAS score recorded every 4 h for 3 days. Interim analysis was conducted by an Independent Data and Safety Monitoring Committee (IDSMC). Results: From 26 July 2019 to 15 January 2020, 77 patients were eligible for the intention-to-treat analysis in the interim analysis (39 in the hydromorphone group and 38 in the pethidine group). Baseline parameters were comparable between groups. No difference in VAS between the two groups was found. Hydromorphone PCA was associated with higher moderately severe to severe cases (82.1% vs. 55.3%, p = 0.011), acute peripancreatic fluid collections (53.9% vs. 28.9%, p = 0.027), more cumulative opioid consumption (median 46.7 vs. 5 mg, p < 0.001), higher analgesia costs (median 85.5 vs. 0.5 $, p < 0.001) and hospitalization costs (median 3,778 vs. 2,273 $, p = 0.007), and more adverse events (20.5% vs. 2.6%, p = 0.087). The per-protocol analysis did not change the results. Although a sample size of 122 patients was planned, the IDSMC halted further recruitment as disease worsening or worse clinical outcomes between the groups in the interim analysis. Conclusion: Hydromorphone PCA was not superior to pethidine in relieving pain in AP patients and might have worse clinical outcomes. Therefore, its use is not recommended. Clinical Trial Registration: Chictr.org.cn. ChiCTR1900025971.

Dataset Information

Efficacy and Safety of Thoracic Epidural Analgesia in Patients With Acute Pancreatitis: A Narrative Review.

Publications

Efficacy and Safety of Thoracic Epidural Analgesia in Patients With Acute Pancreatitis: A Narrative Review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets