Search

Pain following brain surgery can compromise the result of surgery. Several pharmacological interventions have been used to prevent postoperative pain in adults undergoing brain surgery. Pain following craniotomy is considered to be moderate to severe during the first two post-operative days. Opioids have been historically the mainstay and are the current prominent strategy for pain treatment. They produce analgesia but may alter respiratory, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, and neuroendocrine functions. All these side effects may affect the normal postoperative course of craniotomy by affecting neurological function and increasing intracranial pressure. Therefore, their use in neurosurgery is limited, and opioids are used in case of strict necessity or as rescue medication. In addition to opioids, drugs with differing mechanisms of actions target pain pathways, resulting in additive and/or synergistic effects. Some of these agents include acetaminophen/non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), alpha-2 agonists, NMDA receptor antagonists, gabapentinoids, and local anesthesia techniques. Multimodal analgesia should be a balance between adequate analgesia and less drug-induced sedation, respiratory depression, hypercapnia, nausea, and vomiting, which may increase intracranial pressure. Non-opioid analgesics can be an useful pharmacological alternative in multimodal regimes to manage post-craniotomy pain. This narrative review aims to outline the current clinical evidence of multimodal analgesia for post craniotomy pain control.

BACKGROUND: High intraoperative PEEP with recruitment manoeuvres may improve perioperative outcomes. We re-examined this question by conducting a patient-level meta-analysis of three clinical trials in adult patients at increased risk for postoperative pulmonary complications who underwent non-cardiothoracic and non-neurological surgery. METHODS: The three trials enrolled patients at 128 hospitals in 24 countries from February 2011 to February 2018. All patients received volume-controlled ventilation with low tidal volume. Analyses were performed using one-stage, two-level, mixed modelling (site as a random effect; trial as a fixed effect). The primary outcome was a composite of postoperative pulmonary complications within the first week, analysed using mixed-effect logistic regression. Pre-specified subgroup analyses of nine patient characteristics and seven procedure and care-delivery characteristics were also performed. RESULTS: Complete datasets were available for 1913 participants ventilated with high PEEP and recruitment manoeuvres, compared with 1924 participants who received low PEEP. The primary outcome occurred in 562/1913 (29.4%) participants randomised to high PEEP, compared with 620/1924 (32.2%) participants randomised to low PEEP (unadjusted odds ratio [OR]=0.87; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.75-1.01; P=0.06). Higher PEEP resulted in 87/1913 (4.5%) participants requiring interventions for desaturation, compared with 216/1924 (11.2%) participants randomised to low PEEP (OR=0.34; 95% CI, 0.26-0.45). Intraoperative hypotension was associated more frequently (784/1913 [41.0%]) with high PEEP, compared with low PEEP (579/1924 [30.1%]; OR=1.87; 95% CI, 1.60-2.17). CONCLUSIONS: High PEEP combined with recruitment manoeuvres during low tidal volume ventilation in patients undergoing major surgery did not reduce postoperative pulmonary complications. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03937375 (Clinicaltrials.gov).

Aims: This prospective observational study evaluates the utility of non-invasive cardiac monitoring in obese patients in the day-surgery case, considering factors, such as Body Mass Index (BMI) and anaesthesia technique. Background: Obese patients are more likely to be admitted to hospital or to get hospitalized because they are more prone to concomitant diseases and obesity itself is not a contraindication to day surgery. Obese patients are a high-risk patient population that may particularly benefit from monitoring perioperative haemodynamic variations. Methods: In this observational study, we compared haemodynamic variations between overweight or obese and normal weight patients undergoing day-case surgery. We adopted NICOM® as a non-invasive cardiac output monitoring. Objective: The aim of the current study was to investigate the haemodynamic impact of BMI and anaesthesia technique during day-case surgery procedures. The other goal was to evaluate the feasibility and applications of non-invasive cardiac output monitoring among the obese population in day-surgery. Results: 74 patients were included in the study. 34 were overweight or obese (weight 84 ± 10 kg, height 160 ± 10 cm, BMI ≈ 30 kg/m2), 40 were normal weight (weight 63 ± 15 kg, height 160 ± 10 cm, BMI ≈ 22 kg/m2). Compared to normal-weight patients, obese patients show an increase in blood pressure with a return to baseline values at the end of surgery (p < 0.05). The Cardiac Output (CO) shows a similar trend, whereas the heart rate is normal. A decrease in the Cardiac Index (CI) during the operation was noticed in both groups, the one in obese patients (p = 0.24) being greater. In the same way, the Stroke Volume Index (SVI) was lower in obese patients during surgery (p < 0.05). In spinal anaesthesia, the Total Peripheral Resistance Index (TPRI) was not statistically different between the groups of study. As for the TPRI in obese patients, we reported values similar to the ones in non-obese patients in spinal anaesthesia. In local anesthesia, TPRI was higher in obese patients than in non-obese. Conclusion: Cardiovascular alterations in relation to obesity include an increase in blood pressure, CO and SV. An inadequate monitoring of haemodynamic parameters is a risk factor for perioperative complications. NICOM® provides a continuous, non-invasive haemodynamic measurement.

Introduction Low back pain (LBP) is a common problem, and facet joint pain is responsible for 15–45% of cases. Treatment is multidisciplinary, and when conservative measures are not sufficient, radiofrequency (RF) is often used. It allows the interruption of nociceptive input, producing a heat lesion in a continuous or pulsed mode. Methods Medical records of 60 patients who underwent pulsed RF denervation were examined. The standard procedure provided follow-up of pain intensity. Numerical rating scale (NRS) and Douleur Neuropathique en 4 Questions (DN4) were recorded before treatment, and 15 and 40 days, and 6 months after treatment. Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and patient satisfaction were also recorded. Successful treatment was defined as more than a 50% reduction in the NRS scores at 6 months compared with pretreatment scores. Results Scores on the NRS and DN4 were statistically different over time (p

Context Pain is commonly experienced among patients after surgical procedures. Clinical pain management after surgery is far from being successful. Patients may control postoperative pain by self-administration of intravenous opioids using devices designed for this purpose (patient-controlled analgesia or PCA). PCA devices have been developed including the sufentanil sublingual tablet system (SSTS). A systematic review of the use of SSTS for postoperative pain is needed to identify an alternative method of pain management. Objectives To systematically review literature to establish the efficacy and the safety of PCA with SSTS used in the treatment of moderate-to-severe acute post-operative pain in a hospital setting. Methods Embase, MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central Trials Register were systematically searched in December 2019 for studies examining SSTS for pain in adult after surgical procedures. The methodological quality of the studies and their results were appraised using the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist and specific measurement properties criteria, respectively. Results Sixteen studies evaluating SSTS were included for a total of 2311 patients. All participants in the SSTS group reported NRS ≤ 4 within 24 h after surgery. Patient satisfaction was high, with a minimum of 70% satisfaction among patients treated with SSTS. The most common adverse events (AEs) overall for SSTS 15 and 30 mcg were nausea, vomiting, and headache. AEs observed in the studies were generally consistent with those associated with opioids and the postsurgical setting. Conclusions SSTS is an important system for the management of moderate-to-severe acute pain in a hospital setting. SSTS is well tolerated, with no unexpected adverse events (AEs) and no clinically meaningful vital sign changes. These data confirm the safety and tolerability of the SSTS. Successful pain management resulted in a high level of acceptance of the SSTS by patients with high satisfaction for the method of pain control.

Background/Aim: Postdural puncture headache (PDPH) is one of the earliest recognized complications of regional anesthesia after inadvertent dural puncture. Epidural blood patch (EBP) is the "gold standard" for the treatment of PDPH. Several alternatives have been suggested as peripheral nerve blocks. The aim of this systematic review was to find out the potential efficacy and safety of peripheral nerve blocks for the treatment of PDPH. Materials and Methods: The main databases were systematically searched in September 2020 for studies examining regional anesthesia and PDPH. Results: Nineteen studies were identified, including a total of 221 patients. Sphenopalatine ganglion block, greater occipital nerve block, and lesser occipital nerve block were performed. All participants reported a numeric rating scale (NRS) = 4 after 48 h. No major adverse events were reported. Approximately, 17% of patients underwent a second or more peripheral nerve blocks. In 30 participants, EBP was required. Conclusion: To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review on the use of peripheral nerve blocks to treat PDPH. Peripheral nerve blocks can be considered as analgesic options in the management of PDPH.

Introduction: Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a common complication due to treatment with many commonly used anti-cancer agents. CIPN is a mainly sensory neuropathy that can be characterized by the appearance of motor and autonomic alterations. Clinicians may offer duloxetine (DLX) for patients with cancer experiencing CIPN. Our aim was to assess the non-inferiority of the analgesic effect and safety of tapentadol (TP) alone compared to duloxetine plus tapentadol administered to patients with CIPN. Methods: A total of 114 patients were enrolled in the study and randomized to receive tapentadol in a dosage of 50 to 500 mg/day (n = 56) or tapentadol plus duloxetine in a dosage of 60 to 120 mg/day (n = 58) for a period of 4 weeks. We evaluated the analgesia efficacy, defined as a decrease in pain on the NRS between the first administration and 28 days later. Secondary endpoints included analgesia efficacy at 28 and 42 days, defined by a decrease in DN4 and LEPs, decrease in quality of life, and the incidence of any serious or non-serious adverse events after the first administration. Results: In this randomized, double-blind trial comparing TP and TP plus DLX for CIPN management, TP was feasible and non-inferior to the association with DLX as far as the reduction of pain after chemotherapy at 28 days is concerned. Scores on other rating scales evaluating the quality of life, anxiety and depression, and the characteristics of pain revealed similar improvements associated with tapentadol versus duloxetine at these time points. Conclusion: The use of TP is a safe and effective analgesic therapy in patients with CIPN. Positive effects of TP were noted on the patients’ quality-of-life assessments.

(1) Background: Surgery is a frequent cause of persistent pain, defined chronic post-surgical pain (CPSP). The capsaicin 8% patch (Qutenza®) is approved for the treatment of postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) and for diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) of the feet. We propose a review of the literature on use of the capsaicin 8% patch to treat neuropathic pain associated with surgery; (2) Methods: We identified the articles by searching electronic databases using a combination of such terms as “capsaicin 8% patch”, “Qutenza®”, and “chronic postsurgical pain”; (3) Results: We identified 14 selected studies reporting on a total of 632 CPSP cases treated with capsaicin 8% patch. Treatment with the capsaicin 8% patch significantly reduced the average pain intensity. Only 5 studies reported adverse events (AEs) after the patch application. The most common AEs were erythema, burning sensation and pain; (4) Conclusions: Our review indicate that capsaicin 8% patch treatment for CPSP is effective, safe and well tolerated, but randomized controlled trials on efficacy, safety and tolerability should be conducted.

Background: Postdural puncture headache (PDPH) is one of the earliest recognized complications of regional anesthesia. It is a common complication after inadvertent dural puncture. When conservative management is ineffective, the Epidural Blood Patch (EBP) is the “gold standard” for the treatment of PDPH. Due to the potential complications of EBP, several alternatives have been promoted as peripheral nerve blocks.A systematic review of the use of regional anesthesia for PDPH is needed to identify an alternative method of pain management.Objectives: To systematically review literature to establish the efficacy and applicability of regional anesthesia used in the treatment of PDPH in the hospital setting.Methods: Embase, MEDLINE, Google Scholar and Cochrane Central Trials Register were systematically searched in May 2020 for studies examining regional anesthesia for PDPH. The methodological quality of the studies and their results were appraised using the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist and specific measurement properties criteria, respectively.Results: Nineteen studies evaluating peripheral nerve blocks for PDPH were included for a total of 221 patients. Sphenopalatine ganglion block (SPGB), greater occipital nerve block (GONB) and lesser occipital nerve block (LONB) were performed. All participants reported NRS lower than 4 after peripheral nerve blocks at 1, 24 and 48 hours. Only patients who experienced PDPH after diagnostic lumbar puncture reported NRS ≥ 4 after 48 hours. No adverse event was reported after the execution of nerve blocks, except an occasionally discomfort related to the insertion of cotton-tip applicators intranasally for SPGB. 17% of patients underwent a second or more peripheral nerve block due to uncontrolled pain. In 30 participants, EBP was required; none of cases followed spinal anesthesia.Conclusion: Peripheral nerve blocks can be considered as analgesic options in the management of PDPH, as not all cases require EBP for successful treatment. Treatment of PDPH with peripheral nerve blocks seems to be a minimal invasive, easy and effective method, which can offer to patients when conservative management is ineffective.

BackgroundBreast surgery in the United States is common. Pain affects up to 50% of women undergoing breast surgery and can interfere with postoperative outcomes. General anesthesia is the conventional, most frequently used anaesthetic technique. Various locoregional anesthetic techniques are also used for breast surgeries. A systematic review of the use of locoregional anesthesia for postoperative pain in breast surgery is needed to clarify its role in pain management.ObjectivesTo systematically review literature to establish the efficacy and the safety of locoregional anesthesia used in the treatment of pain after breast surgery.MethodsEmbase, MEDLINE, Google Scholar and Cochrane Central Trials Register were systematically searched in Mars 2020 for studies examining locoregional anesthesia for management of pain in adults after breast surgery. The methodological quality of the studies and their results were appraised using the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist and specific measurement properties criteria, respectively.ResultsNineteen studies evaluating locoregional anesthesia were included: 1058 patients underwent lumpectomy/mastectomy, 142 breast augmentation and 79 breast reduction. Locoregional anesthesia provides effective anesthesia and analgesia in the perioperative setting, however no statistically significant difference emerged if compared to other techniques. For mastectomy only, the use of locoregional techniques reduces pain in the first hour after the end of the surgery if compared to other procedures (p = 0.02). Other potentially beneficial effects of locoregional anesthesia include decreased need for opioids, decreased postoperative nausea and vomiting, fewer complications and increased patient satisfaction. All this improves postoperative recovery and shortens hospitalization stay. In none of these cases, locoregional anesthesia was statistically superior to other techniques.ConclusionThe results of our review showed no differences between locoregional anesthesia and other techniques in the management of breast surgery. Locoregional techniques are superior in reducing pain in the first hour after mastectomy.

Dexmedetomidine is a highly selective alpha-2 adrenoreceptor agonist without any effect on the GABA receptor. Its sedative, anxiolytic, analgesic, and sympatholytic activities together with opioid-sparing effects make it suitable for short- and long-term sedation in the intensive care setting. We report our experience with dexmedetomidine use during transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) procedure as an alternative to general anesthesia. This is a retrospective analysis of high-risk patients undergoing dexmedetomidine infusion for the transfemoral TAVI procedure between July 2017 and October 2019. The primary outcome parameters were hemodynamic: heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP); respiratory oxygen saturation (SpO2), pH, partial pressure of arterial oxygen (PaO2), partial pressure of arterial carbon dioxide (PaCO2), and sedation level (Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale, RASS). The frequency of conversion to general anesthesia and the need for sedative “rescue therapy” were secondary endpoints. We also reported the overall anesthetic management and the incidence of intra- and postoperative complications. Eighty-five patients were evaluated (age 81.58 ± 5.23 years, 36.5% men, 63.5% women). High comorbidity, according to the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality (STS PROM). The patients’ hemodynamic functions were kept normal. Complications such as cardiac arrest occurred in four patients; orotracheal intubation and cardiopulmonary resuscitation were necessary. Atrioventricular block occurred in nine patients. Respiratory parameters were maintained stable. Complications such as apnea, hypoventilation, and hypoxemia did not occur. All patients had RASS scores above or equal to 0 and − 1. No patient required rescue midazolam or fentanyl. No conversion to general anesthesia in patients sedated with dexmedetomidine was observed in the absence of hemodynamic complications caused by the surgical technique. In this series, sedation with dexmedetomidine for TAVI procedures with femoral access was proven effective and safe. Dexmedetomidine may be a valid alternative to general anesthesia in high-risk older patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI.

Background: Head and neck cancer affects approximately 382,000 new patients per year worldwide with a significant portion undergoing surgical treatment. During postoperative period key elements in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) are airway management and pain control. Objective: We evaluated the average change of inpatient pain control using a Numerical Rating Score (NRS). We also evaluated the time of extubation after ICU admission recording the incidence of desaturation and the necessity of re-intubation. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of postoperative complications, included those narcotics-related, and the use of rescue analgesics. Methods: In this retrospective observational study, we analyzed data of registry before and after we have changed our postoperative analgesic protocol from remifentanil infusion to ketamine infusion. Results: Medical records of 20 patients were examined. 10 patients received 0.5 mg/kg ketamine bolus at the end of surgery, followed by a continuous infusion of 0.25 mg/kg/h. All patients presented a significant decrease in pain intensity from the 4th to 48th postoperative hour (p < 0.05), but statically not a significant difference in NRS score was recorded between the two groups. Time to extubation was shorter in ketamine group compared to the remifentanil group (112.30 min ± 16.78 vs. 78 min ± 14.17; p < 0.05). Desaturation rate was 10% in the remifentanil group, while no case was recorded in the ketamine group. Conclusion: The level of analgesia provided by ketamine and remifentanil was comparable. Ketamine was superior in ventilatory management of the patient with more rapid extubation and with no case of desaturation.