Significant reduction of postoperative pain and opioid analgesics requirement with an Enhanced Recovery After Thoracic Surgery protocol

ObjectiveTo evaluate differences in postoperative pain control and opioids requirement in thoracic surgical patients following implementation of an Enhanced Recovery after Thoracic Surgery protocol with a comprehensive postoperative pain management strategy.Material and MethodsA retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of patients undergoing pulmonary resections by robotic thoracoscopy or thoracotomy from January 1, 2017, to January 31, 2019, was conducted. Multimodal pain management strategy (opioid-sparing analgesics, infiltration of liposomal bupivacaine to intercostal spaces and surgical sites, and elimination of thoracic epidural analgesia use in thoracotomy patients) was implemented as part of Enhanced Recovery after Thoracic Surgery on February 1, 2018. Outcome metrics including patient-reported pain levels, in-hospital and postdischarge opioids use, postoperative complications, and length of stay were compared before and after protocol implementation.ResultsIn total, 310 robotic thoracoscopy and 62 thoracotomy patients met the inclusion criteria. This pain management strategy was associated with significant reduction of postoperative pain in both groups with an overall reduction of postoperative opioids requirement. Median in-hospital opioids use (morphine milligram equivalent per day) was reduced from 30 to 18.36 (P = .009) for the robotic thoracoscopy group and slightly increased from 15.48 to 21.0 (P = .27) in the thoracotomy group. More importantly, median postdischarge opioids prescribed (total morphine milligram equivalent) was significantly reduced from 480.0 to 150.0 (P < .001) and 887.5 to 150.0 (P < .001) for the thoracoscopy and thoracotomy groups, respectively. Similar short-term perioperative outcomes were observed in both groups before and following protocol implementation.ConclusionsImplementation of Enhanced Recovery after Thoracic Surgery allows safe elimination of epidural use, better pain control, and less postoperative opioids use, especially a drastic reduction of postdischarge opioid need, without adversely affecting outcomes.     

Patients' expectations,experience and acceptability of postoperative analgesia: a nested qualitative study within a randomised controlled trial comparing rectus sheath catheter and thoracic epidural analgesia

Adequate postoperative analgesia is a key element of enhanced recovery programmes. Thoracic epidural analgesia is associated with superior postoperative analgesia but can lead to complications. Rectus sheath catheter analgesia may provide an alternative. In a nested qualitative study (within a two-year randomised controlled trial) focussing on the acceptability, expectations and experiences of receiving the interventions, participants (n = 20) were interviewed 4 weeks post-intervention using a grounded theory approach. Constant comparative analysis, with patient and public involvement, enabled emerging findings to be pursued through subsequent data collection. We found no notable differences regarding postoperative acceptability or the experience of pain management. Pre-operatively, however, thoracic epidural analgesia was a source of anticipatory fear and anxiety. Both interventions resulted in some experienced adverse events (proportionately more with thoracic epidural analgesia). Participants had negative experiences of the insertion of thoracic epidural analgesia; others receiving the rectus sheath catheter lacked confidence in staff members' ability to manage the local anaesthetic infusion pump. The anticipation of the technique of thoracic epidural analgesia, and concerns about its impact on mobility, represented an additional, unpleasant experience for patients already managing an illness experience, anticipating a life-changing operation and dealing with concerns about the future. The anticipation of rectus sheath catheter analgesia was not associated with such anxieties. Patients' experiences start far earlier than the experience of the intervention itself through anticipatory anxieties and fears about receiving a technique and its potential implications. Complex pain packages can take on greater meaning than their actual efficacy in relieving postoperative pain. Future research into patient acceptability and experience should not focus solely on efficacy of pain relief but should include anticipatory fears, anxieties and experiences.     

经颈椎间孔类固醇激素注射治疗神经根性颈椎病的临床疗效观察

目的 探讨X线引导下经颈椎间孔类固醇激素注射（cervical transforaminal epidural steroids injection, CTFESI）治疗由神经根性颈椎病所致慢性颈部疼痛的临床疗效。方法 回顾性分析2016年5月至2018年3月于我院门诊骨科治疗室经X线引导下行CTFESI治疗的47例慢性颈部疼痛病人的临床资料，将其纳入研究组；将同期采用牵引、按摩等保守治疗的56例慢性颈部疼痛病人纳入对照组。收集并比较两组病人治疗前后的疼痛视觉模拟量表（visual analogue score, VAS）评分、颈椎功能障碍指数（neck disability index, NDI），并利用Odom''s评分计算两组病人的治疗有效率。结果 研究组病人均顺利完成注射，其中1例病人于术后出现瞳孔缩小、眼睑下垂等Honor综合征表现，2例病人出现疑似局部血肿症状，经按压、冰敷后症状好转，上述病人均经急诊室留观确认病情稳定后出院。治疗后6个月，研究组和对照组VAS评分分别为（1.96±1.23）分、（3.27±1.52）分，NDI分别为20.18%±1.83%、29.73%±3.57%，均较治疗前水平显著改善，且研究组优于对照组，两组间比较，差异具有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。研究组的治疗总有效率为72.34%（34/47），对照组为51.79%（29/56），两组间比较，差异具有统计学意义（χ²=4.550，P=0.043）。结论 CTFESI治疗由神经根性颈椎病所致慢性颈部疼痛临床疗效好，是介于保守治疗与手术治疗之间的一种有效方法。     

预置硬膜外导管对分娩镇痛效果和母婴安全的影响

目的观察预置硬膜外导管实施分娩镇痛的效果及对母婴安全的影响。方法选择单胎、头位、足月、有镇痛需求的初产妇364例,年龄22～30岁,BMI 25～30 kg/m~2,随机分为两组:预置管组(n=180)在出现规律宫缩、宫颈接近消失后硬膜外穿刺置管,产妇自觉疼痛剧烈要求镇痛时开始镇痛;常规组(n=184)在出现规律宫缩、宫口开大1 cm后开始硬膜外穿刺置管镇痛。两组镇痛液配方均为0.075%罗哌卡因+舒芬太尼0.5μg/ml。记录分娩镇痛的有效性评分,包括镇痛开始时的VAS评分、镇痛起效时间(从产妇要求镇痛到疼痛缓解的时间)和镇痛期间最高VAS评分;分娩期间补救镇痛情况,以及产程时间、新生儿1 min和5 min Apgar评分,产间发热情况等。结果与常规组比较,预置管组镇痛开始时的VAS评分明显降低[3(2～4)分vs 5(4～5)分,P0.05],镇痛起效时间明显缩短[(18.45±7.05)min vs (33.2±10.51)min,P0.05],但镇痛期间最高VAS评分差异无统计学意义[4(2～6)分vs 4(2～6)分],预置管组的有效性评分明显较高[4(3～5)分vs 3(2～4)分,P0.05]。两组产妇产程时间、出血量、镇痛泵按压次数、补救次数、产妇发热比例及新生儿Apgar评分差异无统计学意义。结论硬膜外预置管可以提高分娩镇痛的有效性,且不影响产程和母婴安全,是一种值得推广的分娩镇痛模式。     

腰硬联合镇痛及患者自控镇痛对产程及分娩结局的影响

目的 探讨腰硬联合(CSEA)及患者自控镇痛(PCEA)对产程及分娩结局的影响。方法 随机选取2014年1~12月足月待产、无妊娠合并症和并发症初产妇996例,其中503例产妇于活跃期实施CSEA+PCEA镇痛(分娩镇痛组),493例未行分娩镇痛(对照组),分别记录并比较两组产妇各产程时间、子宫收缩、镇痛效果、运动神经阻滞程度、产程中缩宫素的使用率、产后出血率、羊水Ⅲ度污染率、新生儿Apgar评分、产钳助产和剖宫产率。结果 分娩镇痛组第一产程、第二产程较对照组有所延长,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);第三产程无明显改变;子宫收缩力减弱;分娩镇痛组较对照组镇痛效果显著,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);运动阻滞程度低;缩宫素使用率、产后出血率、羊水Ⅲ度污染率、及新生儿Apgar评分及产钳助产和剖宫产率两组比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 腰硬联合分娩镇痛可能会使第一产程、第二产程延长,对子宫收缩力有一定的影响,但并未增加缩宫素的使用率及产钳助产和剖宫产率,其镇痛效果显著,运动阻滞程度低,对分娩结局无不良影响。     

Labor epidural analgesia onset time and subsequent analgesic requirements: a prospective observational single-center cohort study

BackgroundWe investigated the correlation between lumbar epidural analgesia onset time and pain intensity at 60 and 120 min after initiation.MethodsWe conducted a prospective observational study of nulliparous women receiving lumbar epidural analgesia (initial bolus 15 mL bupivacaine 0.1% with fentanyl 3.33 μg/mL), followed by patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA). The measured variable was lumbar epidural analgesia onset time (time to pain numerical rating score ≤3). Secondary outcomes were pain score at 60 and 120 min and at full dilatation; and analgesic requirements through the labor.ResultsOne-hundred-and-five women were eligible for analysis. There was a significant correlation between lumbar epidural analgesia onset time and pain intensity at 60 min (Spearman’s R²=0.286, P=0.003), but not at 120 min (R²=0.030, P=0.76). Women who requested more PCEA boluses during the first 120 min had a longer lumbar epidural analgesia onset time (R²=0.321, P=0.001) and reported higher pain scores at 60 min (R²=0.588, P <0.001) and at 120 min (R²=0.539, P <0.001). Women who reported higher pain scores at 60 min had more pain at 120 min (R²=0.47, P <0.001) and higher analgesic consumption during labor (R²=0.403, P <0.001). Women who were at a greater cervical dilatation at 60 and 120 min had higher pain scores at the same time point (R²=0.259, P=0.008 and R²=0.243, P=0.013 respectively).ConclusionThere was a correlation between the onset time of lumbar epidural analgesia during labor and the pain score 60 min later but this had disappeared by 120 min.