Transient neurologic symptoms (TNS) following spinal anaesthesia with lidocaine versus other local anaesthetics

A meta-analysis on the efficacy of the ropivacaine infiltration in comparison with other dental anesthetics

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the clinical efficacy and safety profile of ropivacaine in comparison with other dental anesthetics in different clinical conditions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This meta-analysis was registered in the National Institute for Health Research PROSPERO (ID: CRD42020205580). PubMed and Scholar Google were consulted to identify clinical trials using ropivacaine in comparison with other local anesthetic drugs for any dental procedure. Articles comparing ropivacaine and other dental anesthetics were assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool. Data from reports without a high risk of bias were extracted (anesthetic and adverse effects) and analyzed using the Review Manager Software 5.3. for Windows and the Risk Reduction Calculator.

RESULTS

Ropivacaine produces a longer anesthetic time when compared with lidocaine/adrenaline (n = 260; p = 0.00001) and similar anesthesia than bupivacaine (n = 190).

CONCLUSIONS

Data of this study indicate that ropivacaine infiltration produces a longer anesthetic time when compared with lidocaine and articaine but not when compared to bupivacaine in dental procedures.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Ropivacaine was more effective than lidocaine for dental anesthesia. For this reason, the manufacture of a ropivacaine dental cartridge with a suitable concentration could be an important advancement for clinical practice.

Transient neurological symptoms (TNS) following spinal anaesthesia with lidocaine versus other local anaesthetics in adult surgical patients: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Spinal anaesthesia has been implicated as one of the possible causes of neurological complications following surgical procedures. This painful condition, occurring during the immediate postoperative period, is termed transient neurological symptoms (TNS) and is typically observed after the use of spinal lidocaine. Alternatives to lidocaine that can provide high-quality anaesthesia without TNS development are needed. This review was originally published in 2005, and last updated in 2009.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the frequency of TNS after spinal anaesthesia with lidocaine and compare it with other types of local anaesthetics by performing a meta-analysis for all pair-wise comparisons, and conducting network meta-analysis (NMA) to rank interventions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Elsevier Embase, and LILACS on 25 November 2018. We searched clinical trial registries and handsearched the reference lists of trials and review articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing the frequency of TNS after spinal anaesthesia with lidocaine to other local anaesthetics. Studies had to have two or more arms that used distinct local anaesthetics (irrespective of the concentration and baricity of the solution) for spinal anaesthesia in preparation for surgery. We included adults who received spinal anaesthesia and considered all pregnant participants as a subgroup. The follow-up period for TNS was at least 24 hours.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion. Three review authors independently evaluated the quality of the relevant studies and extracted the data from the included studies. We performed meta-analysis for all pair-wise comparisons of local anaesthetics, as well as NMA. We used an inverse variance weighting for summary statistics and a random-effects model as we expected methodological and clinical heterogeneity across the included studies resulting in varying effect sizes between studies of pair-wise comparisons. The NMA used all included studies based on a graph theoretical approach within a frequentist framework. Finally, we ranked the competing treatments by P scores.

MAIN RESULTS

The analysis included 24 trials reporting on 2226 participants of whom 239 developed TNS. Two studies are awaiting classification and one is ongoing. Included studies mostly had unclear to high risk of bias. The NMA included 24 studies and eight different local anaesthetics; the number of pair-wise comparisons was 32 and the number of different pair-wise comparisons was 11. This analysis showed that, compared to lidocaine, the risk ratio (RR) of TNS was lower for bupivacaine, levobupivacaine, prilocaine, procaine, and ropivacaine with RRs in the range of 0.10 to 0.23 while 2-chloroprocaine and mepivacaine did not differ in terms of RR of TNS development compared to lidocaine. Pair-wise meta-analysis showed that compared with lidocaine, most local anaesthetics were associated with a reduced risk of TNS development (except 2-chloroprocaine and mepivacaine) (bupivacaine: RR 0.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.09 to 0.28; 12 studies; moderate-quality evidence; 2-chloroprocaine: RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.51; 2 studies; low-quality evidence; levobupivacaine: RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.69; 2 studies; low-quality evidence; mepivacaine: RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.18 to 5.82; 4 studies; very low-quality evidence; prilocaine: RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.49; 4 studies; moderate-quality evidence; procaine: RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.52; 2 studies; moderate-quality evidence; ropivacaine: RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.78; 2 studies; low-quality evidence). We were unable to perform any of our planned subgroup analyses due to the low number of TNS events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Results from both NMA and pair-wise meta-analysis indicate that the risk of developing TNS after spinal anaesthesia is lower when bupivacaine, levobupivacaine, prilocaine, procaine, and ropivacaine are used compared to lidocaine. The use of 2-chloroprocaine and mepivacaine had a similar risk to lidocaine in terms of TNS development after spinal anaesthesia. Patients should be informed of TNS as a possible adverse effect of local anaesthesia with lidocaine and the choice of anaesthetic agent should be based on the specific clinical context and parameters such as the expected duration of the procedure and the quality of anaesthesia. Due to the very low- to moderate-quality evidence (GRADE), future research efforts in this field are required to assess alternatives to lidocaine that would be able to provide high-quality anaesthesia without TNS development. The two studies awaiting classification and one ongoing study may alter the conclusions of the review once assessed.

Articaine: a review of its use for local and regional anesthesia

Articaine is an intermediate-potency, short-acting amide local anesthetic with a fast metabolism due to an ester group in its structure. It is effective with local infiltration or peripheral nerve block in dentistry, when administered as a spinal, epidural, ocular, or regional nerve block, or when injected intravenously for regional anesthesia. In comparative trials, its clinical effects were not generally significantly different from those of other short-acting local anesthetics like lidocaine, prilocaine, and chloroprocaine, and there is no conclusive evidence demonstrating above-average neurotoxicity. Articaine proved to be suitable and safe for procedures requiring a short duration of action in which a fast onset of anesthesia is desired, eg, dental procedures and ambulatory spinal anesthesia, in normal and in special populations.

Systematic review of methods used in meta-analyses where a primary outcome is an adverse or unintended event

BACKGROUND

Adverse consequences of medical interventions are a source of concern, but clinical trials may lack power to detect elevated rates of such events, while observational studies have inherent limitations. Meta-analysis allows the combination of individual studies, which can increase power and provide stronger evidence relating to adverse events. However, meta-analysis of adverse events has associated methodological challenges. The aim of this study was to systematically identify and review the methodology used in meta-analyses where a primary outcome is an adverse or unintended event, following a therapeutic intervention.

METHODS

Using a collection of reviews identified previously, 166 references including a meta-analysis were selected for review. At least one of the primary outcomes in each review was an adverse or unintended event. The nature of the intervention, source of funding, number of individual meta-analyses performed, number of primary studies included in the review, and use of meta-analytic methods were all recorded. Specific areas of interest relating to the methods used included the choice of outcome metric, methods of dealing with sparse events, heterogeneity, publication bias and use of individual patient data.

RESULTS

The 166 included reviews were published between 1994 and 2006. Interventions included drugs and surgery among other interventions. Many of the references being reviewed included multiple meta-analyses with 44.6% (74/166) including more than ten. Randomised trials only were included in 42.2% of meta-analyses (70/166), observational studies only in 33.7% (56/166) and a mix of observational studies and trials in 15.7% (26/166). Sparse data, in the form of zero events in one or both arms where the outcome was a count of events, was found in 64 reviews of two-arm studies, of which 41 (64.1%) had zero events in both arms.

CONCLUSIONS

Meta-analyses of adverse events data are common and useful in terms of increasing the power to detect an association with an intervention, especially when the events are infrequent. However, with regard to existing meta-analyses, a wide variety of different methods have been employed, often with no evident rationale for using a particular approach. More specifically, the approach to dealing with zero events varies, and guidelines on this issue would be desirable.

[Spinal anaesthesia in day-case surgery. Optimisation of procedures]

BACKGROUND

Since prilocaine is being increasingly used for day case surgery as a short acting local anaesthetic for spinal anaesthesia and because of its low risk for transient neurological symptoms, we compared it to bupivacaine.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients (n=88) who were scheduled for lower limb surgery with spinal anaesthesia randomly received 15 mg hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% or 60 mg hyperbaric prilocaine 2% (administered in a sitting position). Onset time, intensity, duration of the sensomotoric block, vital parameters and time of spontaneous miction were recorded and patients were questioned on satisfaction with the anaesthesia procedure and the occurrence of adverse side-effects after 24 h.

RESULTS

Bupivacaine caused a significantly higher sensory block than prilocaine (T6 vs. T8). Both groups were similar in reaching an analgesic level of at least T12, block intensity and onset times. Median analgesic levels at T12 were maintained for 60 min with prilocaine versus 120 min with bupivacaine, regression of the motor block was 135 min versus 210 min, sensory block S1 was 240 min versus 360 min, and time for spontaneous miction was 306 min versus 405 min, respectively (differences for all comparisons were statistically significant).

CONCLUSION

Under the present study conditions, hyperbaric prilocaine 2% was superior to hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% due to a shorter effect profile but otherwise equivalent quality of block. However, puncture in a sitting position and positioning with elevated torso for restriction of the cranial expansion of block spread might cause an enhanced sacral block with delayed recovery of bladder function.