Search

Although most randomized clinical trials conclude that the addition of continuous peripheral nerve blockade (CPNB) decreases postoperative pain and opioid-related side effects when compared with opioids, studies have included relatively small numbers of patients and the majority failed to show statistical significance during all time periods for reduced pain or side effects. We identified studies primarily by searching Ovid Medline (1966-May 21, 2004) for terms related to postoperative analgesia with CPNB and opioids. Each article from the final search was reviewed and data were extracted from tables, text, or extrapolated from figures as needed. Nineteen articles, enrolling 603 patients, met all inclusion criteria. Inclusion criteria were a clearly defined anesthetic technique (combined general/regional anesthesia, general anesthesia alone, peripheral nerve block), randomized trial, adult patient population (> or =18 yr old), CPNB (or analgesia) used postoperatively (intrapleural catheters were deemed not to be classified as a peripheral nerve catheter), and opioids administered for postoperative analgesia in groups not receiving peripheral nerve block. Perineural analgesia provided better postoperative analgesia compared with opioids (P < 0.001). This effect was seen for all time periods measured for both mean visual analog scale and maximum visual analog scale at 24 h (P < 0.001), 48 h (P < 0.001), and 72 h (mean visual analog scale only) (P < 0.001) postoperatively. Perineural catheters provided superior analgesia to opioids for all catheter locations and time periods (P < 0.05). Nausea/vomiting, sedation, and pruritus all occurred more commonly with opioid analgesia (P < 0.001). A reduction in opioid use was noted with perineural analgesia (P < 0.001). CPNB analgesia, regardless of catheter location, provided superior postoperative analgesia and fewer opioid-related side effects when compared with opioid analgesia.

Opioids are frequently associated with side effects such as nausea, vomiting, and pruritus. We hypothesized that a prophylactic, continuous small-dose naloxone infusion would reduce the incidence of opioid-induced side effects without affecting analgesia or opioid consumption. In this prospective, double-blind, randomized, controlled clinical trial, we studied 46 postoperative patients (M:F, 21:25), averaging 14 +/- 2.5 yr and 53 +/- 17 kg, at the start of morphine IV patient-controlled analgesia. Patients were randomized to either saline (control, n = 26) or naloxone 0.25 microg . kg(-1) . h(-1) (n = 20). We found that the incidence and severity of pruritus (77% versus 20%; P < 0.05) and nausea (70% versus 35%; P < 0.05) was significantly more frequent in the placebo group compared with the naloxone group. Morphine consumption (1.02 +/- 0.41 mg . kg(-1) . d(-1) versus 1.28 +/- 0.61 mg . kg(-1) . d(-1)), pain scores at rest (4 +/- 2 versus 3 +/- 2), and pain scores with coughing (6 +/- 2 versus 6 +/- 2) were not different. We conclude that, in children and adolescents, a small-dose naloxone infusion (0.25 microg . kg(-1) . h(-1)) can significantly reduce the incidence and severity of opioid-induced side effects without affecting opioid-induced analgesia. When initiating morphine IV patient-controlled analgesia for the treatment of moderate to severe pain, clinicians should strongly consider starting a concomitant small-dose naloxone infusion.

Peripherally-inserted central catheters (PICCs) are long-term IV catheters used for drug and fluid administration, blood sampling, or hyperalimentation. The short-term use of PICCs in postoperative patients has not been studied. In this randomized, controlled trial, patients received either a PICC or peripheral IV catheter (PIV). Our outcome measures were patient and parent satisfaction with care, complications of the venous access devices, number of postoperative venipunctures, and cost-effectiveness of use. Satisfaction was significantly more frequent in the PICC group (P < 0.05), and there were significantly fewer postoperative needle punctures in the PICC group compared with the PIV group (P < 0.05). Minor complications were common in the PIV group; major complications were uncommon in both groups. PICCs are more expensive, but better satisfaction can make them a cost-effective option. Additionally, insertion during surgical preparation time in the operating room (OR) means that cost is not increased by adding anesthesiologist and OR time. Anesthesiologists should consider placing PICCs in patients requiring more than 4 days of in-hospital postoperative care, especially if frequent blood sampling or IV access is required.