Randomized placebo-controlled trial on local applications of opioids after hemorrhoidectomy

Morphine prophylaxis alleviates pain in transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt procedure: A randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is an accepted minimal invasive procedure for the management of complications of portal hypertension.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to investigate the value of the preemptive administration of morphine, when compared with on-demand morphine, during TIPS.

METHODS

The present study was a randomized control trial. A total of 49 patients were selected to receive 10 mg of morphine either before the TIPS procedure (group B, n= 26), or on demand when needed during the TIPS procedure (group A, n= 23). The patient's pain was scored using the visual analog scale (VAS) during the procedure. VAS, pain performance, HR, systolic pressure, diastolic pressure and SPO2 were recorded at four-time points: before the operation (T0), during the trans-hepatic puncture of the portal vein (T1), during the intrahepatic channel expansion (T2), and when the operation was finished (T3). The duration of the operation was also recorded.

RESULTS

In group A, the proportion of severe pain at T1 was 4.3% (one case), two cases were combined with vagus reflex, and the proportion of severe pain at T2 was 65.2% (15 cases). No severe pain occurred in group B. The VAS score significantly decreased at T1, T2 and T3 in group B, when compared to group A (P< 0.05). HR, systolic pressure and diastolic pressure significantly decreased at T2 and T3 in group B, when compared to group A (P< 0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of SPO2 (P> 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Preemptive analgesia can effectively relieve severe pain during TIPS, improve patient comfort and compliance, ensure a routine procedure, and offer excellent safety, and is simple and effective.

Early Stage Versus Late Stage Periarticular Injection during Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty for Postoperative Pain Relief: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Controlling postoperative pain after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is essential to improve patient satisfaction and promote early recovery. The purpose of this study was to investigate the difference in clinical efficacy between early and late stage periarticular injection during UKA for postoperative pain relief. Eighty-four patients meeting the inclusion and exclusion criteria were randomly divided into the early stage periarticular injection group and late stage periarticular injection group by using a random number tables method. The difference between the two groups was that the early stage periarticular injection group received superficial injection before the joint incision, while the late stage periarticular injection group received superficial injection after implantation of the prosthesis. Deep injection and other perioperative conditions of the two groups were controlled identically. The primary outcome of the study was the recovery room immediate visual analog scale (VAS) at rest. The secondary outcomes were the postoperative VAS (at rest) at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, 48, 72, 96, and 120 hours, drug dosage of rescue analgesia, range of motion (ROM), and complications. The recovery room immediate VAS (at rest) in the early stage periarticular injection group was significantly lower than that of the late stage periarticular injection group (21 ± 24 vs. 32 ± 34 mm, p = 0.018), the average difference of the VAS reached the minimal clinically important difference. No statistically significant difference in postoperative drug dosage of rescue analgesia, ROM, and complications. Preemptive analgesia combined with the early stage periarticular injection can better alleviate postoperative pain than the late stage periarticular injection.

Pressure dressings versus nonpressure dressings after hemorrhoidectomy: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Pressure dressings have been used after open hemorrhoidectomy to protect surgical wounds and manage postoperative bleeding for many years. However, pressure dressings may increase the incidence of postoperative complications, such as urinary retention, medical adhesive-related skin injury, and pain. A previous controlled trial included 67 patients who underwent Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy. The data indicated that the use of a nonpressure dressing after hemorrhoidectomy reduces the incidence of urinary retention and catheterization. However, the incidence of severe postoperative bleeding and other postoperative complications was not assessed. There is no consensus on whether it is necessary and beneficial to use a nonpressure dressing after hemorrhoidectomy. The results of this randomized clinical study will help answer this question.

METHODS

In this study, we plan to include 186 patients who have undergone modified Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy, which only sutured external hemorrhoids to reduce the risk of bleeding. The purpose is to determine whether the use of nonpressure dressings after open hemorrhoidectomy is inferior to the use of pressure dressings in terms of severe postoperative bleeding and postoperative complications. The primary endpoints of the trial are the incidence of urinary retention within 24 h after surgery and the incidence of severe postoperative bleeding 1 h after dressing removal, which requires revision surgery within 24 h after the surgery. The secondary endpoints of the study are the pain score, anal distension score, postoperative use of analgesics, and incidence of medical adhesive-related skin injury, all of which will be assessed before removing the dressings. The length of hospitalization in days and hospitalization expenses will be recorded. Safety will be assessed with consideration of all adverse and severe adverse events related to the study treatment.

DISCUSSION

The study received full ethics committee approval. The first patient was enrolled on 27 November 2020. The results of this trial will finally answer the question of whether a nonpressure dressing after open hemorrhoidectomy is necessary and beneficial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2000040283 . Registered on 28 November 2020.

Evidence-based review of methods used to reduce pain after excisional hemorrhoidectomy

Background Excisional hemorrhoidectomy is one of the most commonly performed anorectal procedures. Despite the satisfactory outcomes of excisional hemorrhoidectomy, the pain perceived by the patients following the procedure can be a distressing sequel. This review aimed to search the current literature for the existing evidence on how to avoid or minimize the severity of post-hemorrhoidectomy pain.

Methods An organized literature search was performed using electronic databases including PubMed/Medline and Google Scholar service for the articles that evaluated different methods for pain relief after excisional hemorrhoidectomy. Then, the studies were summarized in a narrative way illustrating the hypothesis and the outcomes of each study. The methods devised to reduce pain after excisional hemorrhoidectomy were classified into three main categories: technical tips; systemic and topical agents; and surgical methods. The efficacy of each method was highlighted along the level of evidence supporting it.

Results Stronger evidence (level Ia) supported LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy and the use of glyceryl trinitrate ointment to be associated with significant pain relief after excisional hemorrhoidectomy whereas the remaining methods were supported by lower level of evidence (level Ib).

Conclusion The use of LigaSure in performing excisional hemorrhoidectomy and the application of topical glyceryl trinitrate ointment contributed to remarkable relief of postoperative pain after excisional hemorrhoidectomy according to the highest level of evidence. Perhaps a multimodality strategy that combines systemic and topical agents can be the optimal method for control of pain after excisional hemorrhoidectomy, yet further prospective trials are required to draw such conclusion.

Preemptive Analgesia Decreases Pain Following Anorectal Surgery: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pain is a frequent cause for delayed discharge following outpatient procedures, including anorectal surgery. Both central and peripheral pain receptor sensitization are thought to contribute to postoperative pain. Blocking these receptors and preempting sensitization prevents hyperalgesia leading to lower pain medication requirements. Studies in the orthopedic, urologic, and gynecologic literature support this practice, but the use of preemptive analgesia in anorectal surgery is understudied.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of preemptive analgesia in decreasing postoperative pain.

DESIGN

This is a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial.

SETTING

This study was conducted at the University of Vermont Medical Center, a tertiary care referral center in Burlington, Vermont.

PATIENTS

Patients who were over 18 years of age, ASA Physical Status Classes I, II, or III, and undergoing surgery for anal fissure, fistula or condyloma or hemorrhoids were selected.

INTERVENTIONS

Preoperative oral acetaminophen and gabapentin followed by intravenous ketamine and dexamethasone were given before incision compared with oral placebos.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes measured were postoperative pain scores, percentage of patients utilizing breakthrough narcotics, and rates of side effects.

RESULTS

Ninety patients were enrolled. Because of patient withdrawal, screen failures, and loss to follow-up, 61 patients were analyzed (30 in the preemptive analgesia group and 31 in the control group). Patients in the active group had significantly less pain in the postanesthesia care unit and at 8 hours postoperatively. Significantly fewer participants in the active group used narcotics in the postanesthesia care unit and at 8 hours postoperatively. Average pain scores were excellent for both groups. There was no difference in the number of medication-related side effects between the 2 groups.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by the small sample size and excellent pain control in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Preemptive analgesia is safe and results in decreased pain in the early postoperative period following anorectal surgery. It should be implemented by surgeons performing these procedures. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A588.

Slow drug delivery decreased total body clearance and altered bioavailability of immediate- and controlled-release oxycodone formulations

Oxycodone is a commonly used analgesic with a large body of pharmacokinetic data from various immediate-release or controlled-release formulations, under different administration routes, and in diverse populations. Longer terminal half-lives from extravascular administration as compared to IV administration have been attributed to flip-flop pharmacokinetics with the rate constant of absorption slower than elimination. However, PK parameters from the extravascular studies showed faster absorption than elimination. Sustained release formulations guided by the flip-flop concept produced mixed outcomes in formulation development and clinical studies. This research aims to develop a mechanistic knowledge of oxycodone ADME, and provide a consistent interpretation of diverging results and insight to guide further extended release development and optimize the clinical use of oxycodone. PK data of oxycodone in human studies were collected from literature and digitized. The PK data were analyzed using a new PK model with Weibull function to describe time-varying drug releases/ oral absorption, and elimination dependent upon drug input to the portal vein. The new and traditional PK models were coded in NONMEM. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to address the relationship between rates of drug release/absorption and PK profiles plus terminal half-lives. Traditional PK model could not be applied consistently to describe drug absorption and elimination of oxycodone. Errors were forced on absorption, elimination, or both parameters when IV and PO profiles were fitted separately. The new mechanistic PK model with Weibull function on absorption and slower total body clearance caused by slower absorption adequately describes the complex interplay between oxycodone absorption and elimination in vivo. Terminal phase of oxycodone PK profile was shown to reflect slower total body drug clearance due to slower drug release/absorption from oral formulations. Mechanistic PK models with Weibull absorption functions, and release rate-dependent saturable total body clearance well described the diverging oxycodone absorption and elimination kinetics in the literature. It showed no actual drug absorption during the terminal phase, but slower drug clearance caused by slower release/absorption producing the appearance of flip-flop and offered new insight for the development of modified release formulations and clinical use of oxycodone.

Peripherally applied opioids for postoperative pain: evidence of an analgesic effect? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Opioids applied peripherally at the site of surgery may produce postoperative analgesia with few side effects. We performed this systematic review to evaluate the analgesic effect of peripherally applied opioids for acute postoperative pain.

METHODS

We searched PubMed (1966 to June 2013), Embase (1980 to June 2013), and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 6). Randomized controlled trials investigating the postoperative analgesic effect of peripherally applied opioids vs. systemic opioids or placebo, measured by pain intensity scores, consumption of supplemental analgesics and time to first analgesic were included. Trials with sample sizes of fewer than 10 patients per treatment group or trials with opioids administered intra-articularly or as peripheral nerve blocks were excluded.

RESULTS

Data from 26 studies, including 1531 patients and 13 different surgical interventions were included. Clinical heterogeneity of the studies was substantial. Meta-analysis indicated statistically significant, but not clinically relevant, reductions in VAS score at 6-8 h (mean difference -4 mm, 95% CI: -6 to -2) and 12 h postoperatively (mean difference -5 mm, 95% CI: -7 to -3) for peripherally applied opioids vs. placebo and statistically significant increased time to first analgesic (mean difference 153 min, 95% CI: 41-265). When preoperative inflammation was reported (five studies), peripherally applied opioids significantly improved postoperative analgesia.

CONCLUSION

Evidence of a clinically relevant analgesic effect of peripherally applied opioids for acute postoperative pain is lacking. The analgesic effect of peripherally applied opioids may depend on the presence of preoperative inflammation.

Clinical Outcome Following Hemorrhoid Surgery: a Narrative Review

Surgical therapy guaranties satisfactory results, which are significantly better than those obtained with conservative therapies, especially for Grade III and IV hemorrhoids. In this review, we present and discuss the results of the most diffuse surgical techniques for hemorrhoids. Traditional surgery for hemorrhoids aims to remove the hemorrhoids, with closure (Fergusson's technique) or without closure (Milligan-Morgan procedure) of the ensuing defect. This traditional approach is effective, but causes a significant postoperative pain because of wide external wounds in the innervated perianal skin. Stapled hemorrhoidopexy, proposed by Longo, has gained a vast acceptance because of less postoperative pain and faster return to normal activities. In the recent literature, a significant incidence of recurrence after stapled hemorrhoidopexy was reported, when compared with conventional hemorrhoidectomy. Double stapler hemorrhoidopexy may be an alternative to simple stapled hemorrhoidopexy to reduce the recurrence in advanced hemorrhoidal prolapse. Transanal hemorrhoidal deartertialization was showed to be as effective as stapled hemorrhoidopexy in terms of treatment success, complications, and incidence recurrence. However, further high-quality trials are recommended to assess the efficacy and safety of this technique.

[Pain management after hemorrhoidectomy. Patient-controlled analgesia vs conventional pain therapy]

PURPOSE

The aim of this randomized non-blinded study was to assess the pain management after hemorrhoidectomy using patient-controlled analgesia (PCA).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this study following Ferguson hemorrhoidectomy 38 patients were administered either standard pain management with oral non-steroidal analgesics (control n = 18) or additional PCA with piritramid intravenously by infusion pump within the first 24 h (PCA n = 19).

RESULTS

The pain score within the first 24 h after surgery was significantly lower in patients with PCA compared to control patients (maximum pain within 12 h postoperatively: mean PCA 2.6 versus control 5.7). During the first 24 h postoperatively, patients with PCA were significantly more satisfied with the pain management than the control patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Pain after hemorrhoidectomy can be reduced within the first 24 h using PCA. Patients are significantly more satisfied with PCA than with standard medication.