Local Infiltration Analgesia With Liposomal Bupivacaine Improves Early Outcomes After Total Knee Arthroplasty: 24-Hour Data From the PILLAR Study

Background

Enhanced postoperative care pathways have shifted total knee arthroplasty (TKA) to outpatient and short-stay settings, placing greater emphasis on predischarge outcomes. In this study, we report prespecified secondary and tertiary end points of the PILLAR study within 24 hours after TKA in patients receiving local infiltration analgesia (LIA) with or without liposomal bupivacaine (LB).

Local Infiltration Analgesia With Liposomal Bupivacaine Improves Pain Scores and Reduces Opioid Use After Total Knee Arthroplasty: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Local infiltration analgesia (LIA) with liposomal bupivacaine (LB) in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has yielded mixed results. The PILLAR study, which was designed to minimize limitations associated with previous studies, compared the effects of LIA with or without LB on pain scores, opioid consumption, including proportion of opioid-free patients, time to first opioid rescue, and safety after primary unilateral TKA.

HTX-011 Reduced Pain and Opioid Use After Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty: Results of a Randomized Phase 2b Trial

BackgroundHTX-011 is an extended-release, dual-acting local anesthetic consisting of bupivacaine and low-dose meloxicam in a novel polymer that is administered by needle-free application during surgery. The active ingredients are released from the polymer by controlled diffusion over 72 hours.MethodsThis phase 2b, double-blind, placebo-controlled and active-controlled trial enrolled patients undergoing primary unilateral total knee arthroplasty under general anesthesia. Two hundred thirty-two patients were randomized into 4 groups: HTX-011 400 mg bupivacaine/12 mg meloxicam, applied without a needle into the surgical site, the same dose of HTX-011 with a separate 50 mg ropivacaine injection into the posterior capsule, bupivacaine hydrochloride (HCl) 125 mg injection, and saline placebo injection. Only opioids were permitted for postoperative pain rescue. Primary and key secondary endpoints were mean area under the curve of pain intensity scores over 48 hours and 72 hours, respectively, for HTX-011 groups vs placebo.ResultsBoth HTX-011 groups had significantly reduced mean pain intensity vs placebo through 48 and 72 hours (both P < .001). Ropivacaine added a small initial benefit in the first 12 hours. Both HTX-011 groups also had decreased mean pain intensity vs bupivacaine HCl alone through 48 and 72 hours (P < .05). The HTX-011 groups had significantly earlier discharge readiness along with lower opioid consumption through 72 hours. HTX-011 alone or with ropivacaine was well-tolerated with a safety profile similar to controls.ConclusionNeedle-free application of HTX-011 400 mg bupivacaine/12 mg meloxicam provided superior pain reduction through 72 hours after total knee arthroplasty compared with placebo and bupivacaine HCl alone.     

Efficacy of liposomal bupivacaine versus bupivacaine in port site injections on postoperative pain within enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery program: a randomized clinical trial

BackgroundUse of liposomal bupivacaine (LB) in surgery is reported with decreased postoperative opioid requirements. The efficacy of LB versus standard bupivacaine injections at laparoscopic port sites during bariatric surgery is unknown.ObjectivesTo determine whether there was a difference in postoperative hospital opioid requirements after port site injections of LB versus standard bupivacaine during laparoscopic bariatric surgeries. Primary endpoint was total in hospital opioid use expressed as morphine-equivalent use. Secondary endpoints included home opioid use, pain scores, hospital length of stay, and adverse events.SettingAcademic-affiliated private practice.MethodsA 2-group randomized, double-blinded trial from November 2017 to August 2018 with patients randomly assigned to receive either LB or bupivacaine alone at trocar site injections during laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) or vertical sleeve gastrectomy (VSG). All patients underwent enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocols.ResultsAll patients undergoing LRYGB or VSG assessed for eligibility. Of 682 patients undergoing LRYGB or VSG, 231 met inclusion criteria, 52 patients excluded intraoperatively. Among 231 patients (mean age, 39.2 years; 79% women; mean body mass index 45.0), 179 patients (77%) completed the trial. Patients randomly assigned to receive either LB (n = 89) or bupivacaine alone (n = 90) at trocar site injection during LRYGB or VSG. Postoperative morphine-equivalent use were similar (LB 8.3 [standard deviation 4.0–13.9] versus bupivacaine group 7.5 [standard deviation 3.6–13.1] P = .94) with highest requirement in first 4 hours after surgery. There was no significant difference in length of stay, pain scores, or complications. There were more patients in the bupivacaine group that did not take pain medications on postoperative days 2 to 4 (P = .032, P = .23, P = .005, respectively). There were more patients in the bupivacaine group 48.1% (n = 39) compared with the LB group 34.2% (n = 27) that did not consume any narcotic tablets at home but this not found to be statistically significant (P value = .07).ConclusionsAmong patients undergoing primary bariatric surgery under enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocol, there was no significant difference in postoperative hospital opioid use in those receiving LB compared with standard bupivacaine. A greater percentage of patients in the standard bupivacaine group did not require any narcotics at home, which was significant on postoperative days 2 to 4. To become completely opioid free after bariatric surgery, resources should be focused on multimodal approaches instead of reliance on type of anesthetic medication used.     

Preoperative infiltration of the surgical area enhances postoperative analgesia of a combined low–dose epidural bupivacaine and morphine regimen after upper abdominal surgery

In a randomized, blinded trial we assessed the value of adding preoperative infiltration of the surgical area with bupivacaine to a low dose epidural regimen for postoperative pain treatment. Forty–nine patients scheduled for major upper abdominal surgery during combined thoracic epidural (bupivacaine + morphine) and general anaesthesia were studied. Postoperative analgesia was epidural bupivacaine 10 mg hr^-1 + morphine 0.2 mg hr^-1 for 72 h. The patients randomly received preoperative infiltration of the surgical area with bupivacaine 0.25%, 40 ml (group I); or no infiltration (group II). Pain was evaluated at rest, during cough and during mobilization six and eight h after start of surgery, and at 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. on the following days until 72 h after start of surgery. The sensory level of analgesia was evaluated by pin prick. We found no difference between the two groups during rest and cough. However, during mobilization group I had lower pain scores compared to group II ( P < 0.05). There was a significant reduction in the need for supplemental intramuscular morphine in the treatment group compared to the control group ( P <0.05). Thus an enhanced analgesic effect was demonstrated by adding preoperative infiltration of the surgical area with local anaesthetic to a low dose epidural bupivacaine/morphine regimen after upper abdominal surgery.     

Intraoperative Infiltration of Liposomal Bupivacaine vs Bupivacaine Hydrochloride for Pain Management in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Prospective Randomized Trial

Background

Pain management after total hip arthroplasty is well studied. Nevertheless, there is no consensus regarding the “cocktail” to use in periarticular infiltration (PAI). Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) is a slow release local anesthetic that can be infiltrated during surgery. In this study, we compared LB to bupivacaine hydrochloride (HCL).

Posterior perineal block with ropivacaine 0.75% for pain control during and after hemorrhoidectomy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: As perioperative pain management is a difficult challenge during hemorrhoidectomy, we tested the hypothesis that posterior perineal block (PPB) with local anesthetics alone is able to provide adequate pain control during and after surgery. METHODS: In a prospective, blinded, randomized study, we studied analgesic conditions and side effects of PPB in American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I-II patients undergoing hemorrhoidectomy. Patients received general anesthesia (GA) either with PPB (0.75% ropivacaine, 40 mL (PPB group) or without PPB (control group). All patients received intravenous morphine patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) for postoperative pain control (morphine, 1.5 mg-boluses, 8-minute lockout interval). Intra- and postoperative opioids consumption was recorded, and pain assessments were performed at 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 hours using a visual analog scale (VAS). RESULTS: VAS scores were significantly lower during the first 8 postoperative hours in the PPB group as compared with the control group (P <.001). The PPB group required significantly less opioids during anesthesia (P <.001) and during the first postoperative day (P <.001) as compared with the control group. Time to first defecation and duration of hospitalization were identical in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The present study shows that PPB with 40 mL 0.75% ropivacaine (300 mg) was a simple, effective, and safe method to provide better postoperative analgesia than PCA alone following surgical hemorrhoidectomy. In addition, PPB was shown to significantly reduce opioid consumption intraoperatively and during the first postoperative day.     

Comparison of low-dose intrathecal and epidural morphine and bupivacaine infiltration for postoperative pain control after surgery for lumbar disc disease

This prospective, blinded, placebo-controlled study was performed to compare the postoperative analgesic efficacy of low-dose intrathecal and epidural morphine with paraspinal muscle infiltration of bupivacaine in lumbar discectomy cases. Eighty ASA I-III adult patients undergoing elective surgery for lumbar disc disease were enrolled in the study. Patients were randomized to four groups by envelopes. Study groups were as follows: group 1 (n = 20), intrathecal morphine 0.1 mg; group 2 (n = 20), epidural morphine 2 mg; group 3 (n = 20), 30 mL of bupivacaine 0.25% paraspinal muscle infiltration; group 4 (n = 20), 30 mL of saline paraspinal muscle infiltration before wound closure. Recorded parameters were time to response to painful and verbal stimuli and postoperative pain assessed at 30 minutes and 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hours by Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Numeric Pain Scale (NPS). Hemodynamic data, sedation scores, and side effects were also recorded. Meperidine and naproxen sodium were used for postoperative analgesia. Follow-up was performed by a blinded investigator. Mean VAS scores were lower in groups 1 and 2 at 30 minutes (P < 0.05). Mean VAS score of group 2 was lower than that of group 4 at 4 hours postoperatively (P < 0.05). Mean NPS scores were lower in groups 1 and 2 at 2, 4, and 6 hours (P < 0.05) and in group 2 at 8 hours compared with the other groups. The number of patients requiring meperidine at early postoperative phase (0-6 hours) was less in groups 1 and 2 compared with groups 3 and 4 (P < 0.05).There were no statistically significant differences in the late postoperative analgesic requirements, after correction for multiple testing. In conclusion, low-dose intrathecal and epidural morphine provide lower postoperative pain scores and a reduction in early postoperative analgesic requirement with insignificant side effects compared with paraspinal bupivacaine or saline infiltration.     

Periarticular Knee Injection With Liposomal Bupivacaine and Continuous Femoral Nerve Block for Postoperative Pain Management After Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Local periarticular infiltration (PAI) analgesia has emerged as an important component of multimodal approaches to treat total knee arthroplasty postoperative pain. Liposomal bupivacaine may provide prolonged analgesic duration when injected into the surrounding tissues. The purpose of this study was to compare the analgesic efficacy and serum bupivacaine levels of a continuous femoral nerve block (CFNB) with bupivacaine to PAI with liposomal bupivacaine.

Single-injection paravertebral block before general anesthesia enhances analgesia after breast cancer surgery with and without associated lymph node biopsy

Paravertebral block (PVB) seems to decrease postoperative pain and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after breast surgery, but the studies have not been placebo controlled. We studied 60 patients scheduled for breast cancer surgery randomly given single-injection PVB at T3 with bupivacaine 5 mg/mL (1.5 mg/kg) or saline before general anesthesia. The patient and attending investigators were blinded; the PVB or the sham block was performed behind a curtain by an anesthesiologist not involved in the study. The patients given PVB with bupivacaine needed 40% less IV opioid medication (primary outcome variable) in the postanesthesia care unit, had a longer latency to the first opioid dose, and had less pain at rest after 24 h than the control patients (P < 0.01). They also had less PONV in the postanesthesia care unit (P < 0.05), were less sedated until 90 min (P < 0.05), and performed better in the digit symbol substitution test at 90 min and the ocular coordination test 60-120 min after surgery (P < 0.05). The average peak bupivacaine plasma concentration was 750 ng/mL. One patient had bilateral convulsions immediately after bupivacaine injection. We conclude that PVB before general anesthesia for breast cancer surgery reduced postoperative pain, opioid consumption, and occurrence of PONV and improved recovery from anesthesia.     

The effect of liposomal bupivacaine for surgical wound infiltration: A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) has consistently been considered a potential analgesic for surgical wound infiltration. However, the evidence of its analgesic effectiveness remains unclear. In this meta-analysis, we attempted to identify the potential clinical role of LB wound infiltration in different surgical procedures. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LB with non-liposomal local anaesthetics and placebos were retrieved from six electronic databases. The primary outcome was cumulative morphine equivalent consumption within 24, 48, and 72 hours after surgery. Approximately 2659 patients from 22 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Compared to the control, LB-wound infiltration did not reduce the postoperative morphine consumption at 24 hours (weighted mean difference [WMD], −0.60 mg; 97.5% confidence interval [CI], −2.78 to 1.59 mg; P = 0.54), 48 hours (WMD, −1.00 mg; 97.5% CI, −3.23 to 1.24; P = 0.32) or 72 hours (WMD, 0.50 mg; 97.5% CI, −0.67 to 1.67; P = 0.33). Similarly, secondary outcome analysis did not reveal any additional benefits of LB in any other pain-related outcomes. LB was not associated with any adverse effects. Overall, LB does not appear to improve the postoperative analgesic, rehabilitation, or safety outcomes. Current evidence does not support the routine use of LB for wound infiltration following surgical procedures.     

Bupivacaine local anesthetic to decrease opioid requirements after radical cystectomy: Does formulation matter?

IntroductionReduction of opioids is an important goal in the care of patients undergoing radical cystectomy (RC). Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) has been shown to be a safe and effective pain reliever in the immediate postoperative period and has been reported to reduce postoperative opioid requirements. Since the liposomal formulation is predicated on slow systemic absorption, the amount of bupivacaine administered is notably higher than that typically used with standard bupivacaine (SB) formulations. In addition, LB is costly, not universally available, and studies comparing this formulation to SB are lacking. We sought to determine if there is a difference in postoperative opioid requirements in patients who receive LB vs. high dose SB at the time of RC.MethodsIn May 2019 we transitioned to administration of high-volume SB injected intraoperatively at the time of RC. This prospective cohort was compared to a historical cohort of patients who received injection of LB at the time of surgery. Primary endpoints included postsurgical opioid use measured in morphine equivalent dose (MED) and patient-reported Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) pain scores and length of stay. All patients were managed using principles of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS).ResultsFrom May 2019 through August 2019, 28 patients underwent RC and met eligibility criteria to receive SB at the time of surgery. They were compared to a historical cohort of 34 patients who received LB between November 2017 and July 2018. There was no difference in MED exposure either in the postanesthesia care unit (SB 9.0 ± 8.9 MED vs. LB 6.5 ± 9.4 MED, P= 0.29) or during the remainder of the hospital stay (SB 36.8 ± 56.9 MED vs. LB 42.1 ± 102.5 MED, P= 0.81), no difference in NRS pain scores on postoperative day 1 (SB 2.6 ± 1.6 vs. LB 2.1 ± 1.7, P= 0.23), day 2 (SB 2.4 ± 1.8 vs. LB 1.9 ± 1.6, P= 0.19), or day 3 (SB 1.9 ± 1.8 vs. LB 1.7 ± 1.7, P= 0.69) and no difference in length of stay (SB 5.0 ± 1.7 days, LB 4.9 ± 3.3 days, P= 0.93). Subgroup analysis of open RC and robotic-assisted RC showed no significant difference in MED or pain scores between LB and SB patients.ConclusionsAmong patients undergoing RC under ERAS protocol there was no significant difference in postoperative opioid consumption, NRS pain scores, or length of stay among patients receiving SB compared to LB.     

利用腹腔镜戳孔局部注射布比卡因术后镇痛研究

目的 评价腹腔镜术后戳孔局部注射布比卡因的镇痛效果.方法 选用腹腔镜胆囊切除术后90例患者,随机分为3组,每组30例.布比卡因组:于戳孔局部注射0.25%布比卡因20 ml(50 mg);生理盐水组:于戳孔局部注射生理盐水加ml;镇痛泵组:于术后使用静脉镇痛泵(patientcontrolled intravenous analgesia,PCIA).在麻醉苏醒后2、6、12、24 h分别记录患者安静状态下的镇痛模拟评分(按视觉模拟评分法 visual analogue scale,VAS),同时记录3组患者术后排气时间.结果 3组患者术后均无并发症,布比卡因组患者无相应毒副作用,12 h内镇痛效果优于生理盐水组,尤以6 h内明显(t2h=8.475;t6h=5.356;t12h=3.496,均P＜0.05),与镇痛泵组相比,镇痛效果差异无统计学意义(t2h=1.361;t6h=1.720;t12h=1.682;t24h=1.721,均P＞0.05),镇痛泵组患者的术后排气时间晚于其他两组患者(x224h=5.406,P＜0.05).结论 腹腔镜胆囊切除术后,患者戳孔局部应用布比卡因镇痛效果明显,尤其在术后12 h内,可以降低使用其他镇痛药物的用量,并且不影响术后肠道功能的恢复.

Abstract：

Objective To evaluate analgesic effect of bupivacaine infiltration in trocar incision after laparoscopic surgery.Methods 90 patients were randomly divided into 3 groups after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.In group 10.25% bupivacaine 20 ml(50 mg) injection, in group 2 sterile NS 20 ml infiltrated in the muscular fasciae of the trocars, in group 3 patient-controlled intravenous analgesia(PCIA) was used.In 2, 6, 12 and 24 hours after the intervention, the pain intensity was recorded with the use of a Visual Analogue Scale ( VAS), time of flatus passing was recorded as well.Results Patients with bupivacaine or PCIA had statistically significant in pain score compared with patients with NS especially within 12 hours after the surgery (t2h = 8.475; t6h = 5.356; t12h = 3.496, P ＜ 0.05) while the difference was not statistically significant between the 3 groups at 24 hours.The time of passing flatus in group 1 patients with bupivacaine was earlier than with PCIA ( x224h = 5.406, P ＜ 0.05 ) .Conclusions Bupivacaine infiltrated in trocar incision after laparoscopic surgery reduced postoperative pain, and did not disturb peristalsis reflex recovery of the intestines.     

Pain relief by wound infiltration with bupivacaine or high-dose ropivacaine after inguinal hernia repair

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Wound infiltration with bupivacaine is often used for pain relief after inguinal hernia surgery. We hypothesized that the lower systemic toxicity of another long-acting local anesthetic of similar potency (ropivacaine) would make it possible to increase the dose to above that recommended for bupivacaine and thereby achieve more effective pain control. METHODS: Elective unilateral open hernia repair was performed on 144 patients at 4 hospitals. Surgery was performed under general anesthesia and, in a double-blind manner, the operating field was infiltrated with 40 mL ropivacaine 7.5 mg/mL (in = 73) or bupivacaine 2.5 mg/mL (n = 71 ) for postoperative pain relief. Pain at rest, on mobilization, and on coughing was assessed repeatedly during 24 hours using a visual analog scale. The patients' ability to walk and the need for supplementary analgesics were also recorded. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were found between the two groups with respect to pain scores, which the patients reported to be less than 15% (median) of the worst pain imaginable in all examinations performed at rest, or in the consumption of supplementary analgesics. Those who received ropivacaine could walk with no or only minor problems at an earlier stage than the bupivacaine patients (P < .03). Both treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Wound infiltration with long-acting local anesthetics resulted in low pain scores after hernia surgery. Bupivacaine 100 mg was as effective as ropivacaine 300 mg.     

Preoperative infiltration of bupivacaine - effects on pain relief and trauma response (cortisol and interleukin-6)

Hypothesis: Subcutaneous infiltration of bupivacaine before skin incision can reduce postoperative pain and modulate the stress response.
Methods: In a randomized study on pain relief after hysterectomy 29 patients were referred into one of three groups, receiving 30 ml of bupivacaine 0.25% with adrenaline, 30 ml of saline or no infiltration along the line of the proposed incision 10 min before start of surgery. A Visual Analogue Scale was used for repeated pain ratings. Postoperative pain relief was provided with patient-controlled analgesia with intravenous morphine 0.04 mg/kg. Lockout time was 10 min. The immuno-logical and endocrine stress response to trauma was reflected by blood interleukin-6 (IL-6) and cortisol concentrations measured during 72 h following skin incision.
Results: There were large individual variations in the accumulated postoperative consumption of morphine at 20 h after start of surgery. It was significantly reduced in patients receiving infiltration of bupivacaine. They used 39 mg (9–62) median (range) of intravenous morphine whereas the patients in the saline group used 65 mg (47–120) and patients in the control group used 54 mg (36–130) ( P <0.05). Significant elevation of plasma IL-6 and serum cortisol levels appeared in all groups with peak values at 3 h. There were no differences between the groups. There was a correlation between cortisol and IL-6. Six of the 29 patients had a postoperative infection which was reflected in increased IL-6 levels.
Conclusion: Preoperative subcutaneous infiltration of bupivacaine significantly reduced the postoperative consumption of intravenous morphine.     

Prospective, double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled comparison of local anesthetic and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for postoperative pain management after laparoscopic surgery

Compared with the open approach, laparoscopy has been shown to significantly reduce postoperative pain. Improving postoperative analgesia in laparoscopic surgery is an area of continued interest. The goal of this study was to compare the efficacy of local anesthetic infiltration with or without preoperative nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were enrolled in an Institutional Review Board-approved, prospective, double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled comparison study. Patients were randomized into four groups: Group I, preoperative oral administration of a placebo medication and preincision local infiltration of 40 mL of 0.5 per cent bupivicaine at trocar sites; Group II, preoperative oral administration of 50 mg of rofecoxib; Group III, preoperative oral administration of 50 mg of rofecoxib and preincision local infiltration of 40 mL of 0.5 per cent bupivicaine into skin, muscle, and peritoneum; and Group IV, preoperative oral administration of a placebo medication. Postoperative pain scores were assessed at 4 hours, 8 hours, 12 hours, and 24 hours using a visual analog scale. Postoperative analgesic use, complications, and length of stay were recorded. Statistical significance was defined as P < 0.05. Fifty-five patients (46 women and 9 men) were enrolled in this study and underwent a standardized, elective, laparoscopic cholecystectomy for mild, symptomatic cholelithiasis (96.4%) and gallbladder polyps (3.6%). No patient had pain immediately before surgery. Postoperative analgesic requests, visual analog scale results, incidence of postoperative vomiting at 4 hours, 8 hours, 12 hours, and 24 hours, in addition to length of stay, were not statistically different between the four groups. No complications occurred. The use of preoperative rofecoxib, 0.5 per cent bupivicaine infiltration, or both for postoperative analgesia did not decrease postoperative pain or decrease length of stay after laparoscopic cholecystectomy compared with placebo. Preoperative administration of an oral anti-inflammatory pain medication, infiltration of a local anesthetic, or both had no greater effect than placebo in controlling discomfort after a laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The challenge of preempting postoperative pain continues and will require further investigation.     

Preincision 0.25% bupivacaine scalp infiltration and postcraniotomy pain: a randomized double-blind,placebo-controlled study

This prospective, double-blind, randomized, and placebo-controlled trial was performed to evaluate the effect of preincisional scalp infiltration with 0.25% bupivacaine on the postoperative pain perception and analgesic requirement of patients undergoing elective supratentorial craniotomy. Twenty patients (bupivacaine group) received scalp infiltration with 25 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine followed by intravenous 5 mL of saline as placebo 5 minutes before incision, and another 21 patients (fentanyl group) received scalp infiltration with a similar volume of 0.9% saline solution followed by 2 microg/kg of intravenous fentanyl 5 minutes before incision. Following standard anesthesia technique, basal, preincisional, and postincisional hemodynamic data were recorded. Postoperative pain was assessed at 1, 6, 12, 24, and 48 hours by using a 10-cm visual analog scale. Diclofenac sodium was used as rescue analgesic in the postoperative period. Results showed rescue analgesic was required only during the first 12 hours. In each group the same number of patients needed rescue analgesia, but bupivacaine delayed this requirement 105 (30-720; median [range]) minutes compared with 60 (15-720; median [range]) minutes for the fentanyl group (P = 0.13). But there was no difference in the amount of analgesic consumed at different time intervals. Six of 20 patients in the bupivacaine group required rescue analgesic at the end of 1 hour compared with 9 of 21 fentanyl patients (P = 0.61). At 6 hours, the fraction of patients who required rescue analgesia were 7 of 20 and 11 of 21, respectively (P = 0.44). In conclusion, bupivacaine preincision scalp infiltration did not have any significant effect on postcraniotomy pain and analgesic requirement. However, bupivacaine may delay the requirement of the first analgesic dose.     

Prophylactic oral ibuprofen or ibuprofen-codeine versus placebo for postoperative pain after primary hip arthroplasty

The postoperative analgesic effect of ibuprofen was compared with a combination of ibuprofen and codeine versus placebo. The study was prospective, randomized, double blind with 123 consecutive hip arthroplasly operations. All the patients received oral diazepam as premedication and spinal anaesthesia with bupivacaine 5 mg/ml 3–4 ml.
Postoperatively, when the spinal anaesthesia started to wear off, the patients were randomly assigned to one of three groups; the ibuprofen group (n=48) received 800 mg of ibuprofen orally. The ibuprofen/codeine group (IC, n=48) received 800 mg of ibuprofen combined with 60 mg of codeine. The placebo group (P, n=25), received oral placebo medication. The patients were observed for the need of additional opioid (e.g. ketobemidone), pain score (verbal and VAS), bleeding and side effects for five hours. The patients in the placebo group (P) had significantly higher pain scores ( P >0.05) compared with the two other groups after 2 and 4 hours, with no significant differences after 1, 3 and 5 hours. The P group also received 45% more opioids ( P <0.001) compared with the two other groups during the same period. No significant differences in bleeding or side-effects were observed between the groups. There were no significant differences between the ibuprofen group and the ibuprofen/codeine group.
We conclude that a prophylactic dose of 800 mg ibuprofen orally has an opioid sparing effect with a tendency of less pain experience during the first hours after hip arthroplasty.     

Comparison of Femoral Nerve Catheter,Adductor Canal Catheter,and Periarticular Liposomal Bupivacaine Infiltration for Postoperative Analgesia After Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundPeripheral nerve catheters are used to provide analgesia after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and have been shown to decrease pain and opioid use, to facilitate participation with physical therapy (PT), and to hasten discharge. More recently, pericapsular infiltration using liposomal bupivacaine (LB) has been employed as an alternative analgesic approach.MethodsThis retrospective study compared outcomes for three analgesic approaches: femoral nerve catheter (FNC), adductor canal catheter (ACC), and intraoperative LB infiltration. The primary outcome was numeric rating scale (NRS) pain scores at 24 hours. Secondary outcomes included pain scores at 12, 36, and 48 hours, time-to-first opioid, cumulative opioid use, distance walked, and time-to-discharge.ResultsPain scores at 24 hours were significantly lower in both the ACC and FNC cohorts when compared to the LB cohort (3.1 versus 4.6 [P = .017] and 2.4 versus 4.6 [P < .0001]). The ACC and FNC groups did not differ significantly at that timepoint (P = .27). Similar comparisons were found at 12 and 36 hours, while at 48 hours the FNC group was superior. Time to first opioid and opioid consumption favored the ACC and FNC groups. Walking distance favored the ACC group. Both the ACC and LB groups had a faster time-to-discharge than the FNC group.ConclusionBoth ACCs and FNCs provided superior analgesia at 24 hours compared to LB, while being equivalent to each other. Pain scores at 12 hours and 36 hours as well as opioid consumption through 48 hours mirrored this finding. Although various differences were found between groups in terms of time-to-first analgesic, walking distance and time-to-discharge, the ACC approach appeared to optimally balance analgesia, ambulation, and time-to-discharge.     

The use of a continuous popliteal sciatic nerve block after surgery involving the foot and ankle: does it improve the quality of recovery?

Popliteal sciatic nerve block is a commonly used technique for surgery involving the foot and ankle. However, pain can be difficult to control as the local anesthetic block wears off. Therefore, we hypothesized that extending the block by using a continuous infusion of bupivacaine (0.25%) would provide improved pain management and might facilitate the recovery process after foot or ankle surgery. In this randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study, 24 consenting patients undergoing foot or ankle surgery with a standardized general anesthetic technique were studied. Before surgery, a popliteal sciatic nerve block was performed in all patients with an 18-gauge Tuohy epidural needle and a peripheral nerve stimulator. After injection of bupivacaine 0.25% 30 mL and placement of a 20-gauge catheter, patients were randomly assigned to receive either 0.9% saline (control) or bupivacaine 0.25% at a constant rate of 5 mL/h for up to 48 h after surgery. An 11-point verbal rating scale (0 = no pain to 10 = worst pain imaginable) was used to assess the severity of pain. Opioid analgesic use was recorded at specific time intervals after surgery. Follow-up evaluations were performed at 24 h, 48 h, 72 h, and 1 week after surgery to assess pain scores, as well as patient satisfaction with their pain management and quality of recovery, by using a 100-point verbal rating scale (1 = highly dissatisfied to 100 = highly satisfied). In the bupivacaine group, there was a statistically significant reduction in the maximal pain scores (>50%) and in opioid use (>60%) during the postoperative period compared with the control group. Patient satisfaction with postoperative pain management (95 +/- 3 versus 77 +/- 13) and quality of recovery (96 +/- 7 versus 83 +/- 14) was significantly improved in the bupivacaine group (versus control). In addition, 40% of the patients in the bupivacaine group (versus none in the control group) were able to be discharged home on the day of surgery (P = 0.087). In conclusion, a continuous infusion of bupivacaine 0.25% decreased postoperative pain and the need for opioid analgesic rescue medication after orthopedic surgery involving the foot and ankle, leading to improved patient satisfaction and quality of recovery. IMPLICATIONS: A continuous infusion of bupivacaine 0.25% (versus saline) at the popliteal fossa by using a simple elastomeric pump is an effective method of decreasing postoperative pain, reducing the opioid analgesic requirement, and increasing patient satisfaction with pain management after orthopedic surgery involving the foot and ankle. More importantly, the use of the continuous sciatic nerve block in the popliteal fossa facilitated an earlier discharge after lower extremity surgery.