Is pain after TKA better with periarticular injection or intrathecal morphine?

The use of intrathecal morphine in non-abdominal surgery: a scoping review

Background

Intrathecal morphine can reduce pain and opioid requirements needed for postoperative pain relief. It can potentially aid in the effectiveness of enhanced recovery protocols in non-abdominal surgery. However, concerns about side-effects may have hindered its use. This scoping review evaluates the effectiveness, appropriate dosage, and adverse effects of intrathecal morphine in non-abdominal surgery.

Methods

We systematically searched for randomised controlled trials examining the use of intrathecal morphine in non-abdominal surgery.

Results

The search identified 75 trials involving 4685 patients. We undertook a scoping review of these randomised controlled trials, including bias assessments, to comprehensively analyse the effectiveness and side-effects of intrathecal morphine. The findings indicate that intrathecal morphine reduced postoperative pain and opioid consumption after spinal surgery, thoracic surgery, and orthopaedic lower extremity surgery. However, it was associated with an increased incidence of itching, postoperative nausea and vomiting, and urinary retention, particularly in orthopaedic procedures. Delayed respiratory depression was absent with low to moderate doses (<500 μg) in the reviewed studies.

Conclusions

This review supports the effectiveness of intrathecal morphine in non-abdominal surgery. However, the benefits must be carefully weighed against potential side-effects that could lead to prolonged hospital stays.

Clinical trial registration

PROSPERO-registry CRD42021233936.

Intrathecal Morphine Versus Other Techniques for Postoperative Pain Management in the Context of Multimodal Analgesia: A Meta-Analysis

Objective: Intrathecal morphine (ITM) has been administered in recent years to provide postoperative pain control in non-obstetric surgery; however, current research has limited consideration of the recommendations for regular, basic analgesia from clinical guidelines when exploring its efficacy. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare ITM against alternative methods of analgesia in the presence of multimodal analgesia, for reducing pain scores within the first 24 h postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included postoperative opioid consumption, incidence of opioid-related effects, and time to mobilisation. Methods: Database searches and screening identified 11 trials for inclusion in this review. Pain scores were compared by meta-analysis at 6, 12, and 24 h postoperatively at rest and on movement, with sub-analysis of systemic versus regional techniques. Results: The data found no significant difference between ITM and active comparators for reducing pain scores at rest or on movement at any of the time intervals explored. Sub-analysis demonstrated that regional techniques may provide superior analgesia at 24 h at rest (MD = -1.19; 95% CI [-1.73, -0.66], p < 0.001, I2 = 0%) and on movement (MD = 1.27 [0.44, 2.10], p = 0.003, I2 = 0%). Cumulative opioid consumption was reduced in ITM groups (MD = -11.61 [-18.73, -4.50], p = 0.001, I2 = 95%), with significantly increased risk of pruritus (p < 0.001) but not nausea and vomiting (p = 0.93). There was no evidence of respiratory depression. Conclusions: This meta-analysis was unable to demonstrate any significant benefit to postoperative pain relief with the use of ITM but may suggest that it is as a viable option compared to other active modalities. However, this meta-analysis was limited by a low quantity and quality of data from which to draw conclusions and demonstrated high statistical fragility. We believe this highlights a significant gap in the current literature on ITM.

Comparison of ketorolac intravenous versus acetaminophen intravenous in treating headache following head trauma: a semi-experimental study

BACKGROUND

Post-traumatic headache is a disabling secondary headache disorder often attributed to traumatic brain injury and affects millions of individuals worldwide. Few studies have been done on the treatment needs of these patients in emergency departments. The purpose was to compare the effectiveness of ketorolac intravenous versus acetaminophen intravenous in reducing headaches in patients following head trauma.

METHODS

This was a semi-experimental study in which the participants were assigned two groups. In the acetaminophen intravenous group, 1 g acetaminophen and in the ketorolac intravenous group, 60 mg of this drug was injected. Statistical analysis was done with IBM SPSS statistical software version 21, and a P-value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Among samples after 6 h from the injection, the pain score in the ketorolac intravenous group was less than the acetaminophen intravenous group (P = 0.006). Also, the pain reduction rate in the ketorolac intravenous group was more than the acetaminophen intravenous group from before the injection until 2 h after it (P = 0.01) and before injection until 6 h after it (P = 0.001). The frequency of drowsiness in 2 and 6 h after drug administration in the ketorolac intravenous group was lower than the acetaminophen intravenous group, which is significant in 2 h after drug administration (P = 0.038). The verbal analog scale score comparison for two groups 2 h before medicine administration with pain control score (P = 0.03) and 6 h with pethidine use control (P = 0.003) is significant.

CONCLUSIONS

According to this study, ketorolac's intravenous effect on pain control is better than that of acetaminophen intravenous. With more samples, we can express the survey results more decisively in the future.

Comparative efficacy of intrathecal morphine and adductor canal block in the knee arthroplasty population: a retrospective multi-centre cohort study

BACKGROUND

Finding the balance of good postoperative analgesia while facilitiating mobility is important for a safe and satisfactory patient experience during Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA). This study aimed to compare the efficacy of intrathecal morphine, adductor canal block, and their combination in optimizing pain management and postoperative recovery in TKA patients. This retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data evaluated postoperative pain scores, time to mobilisation, and length of hospital stay.

METHODS

1006 consecutive patients undergoing elective TKA across two large tertiary centres were included over six years. They were divided into one of four groups according to the type of analgesia received: Group N patients received no neuraxial morphine or regional block. Group B patients received adductor canal block (ACB) only. Group M patients received intrathecal morphine (ITM) but no regional block. Group BM patients received both ACB and ITM.

RESULTS

Patients who received an ACB had faster postoperative mobilization compared to those without (p < 0.001). Patients in Group BM had the lowest pain scores at rest (Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) 2.9) and with movement (VAS 5.3), while Group B patients experienced the highest pain scores at rest (VAS 3.7) and on movement (VAS 6.5) (p = 0.005). Patients who received ITM had the lowest opioid requirements (p < 0.001). There was no significant differences between groups in requirement for rescue pain management strategies (p = 0.06).

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of ITM and ACB in patients undergoing TKA provides improved postoperative analgesia with lower postoperative opioid requirement and earlier mobilization compared with ACB or ITM alone.

Moving a skin incision to lateral side of tibial tubercle reduces the risk of persistent skin numbness compared with a regular midline one: A randomized paired study in bilateral total knee arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

The midline incision during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is known to damage the infrapatellar branch of the saphenous nerve (IPBSN), leading to lateral flap numbness. The aim was to evaluate the rate of persistent skin numbness (RSN) and area of skin numbness (AON) after a lateral-based skin incision compared with the standard midline incision in bilateral TKA patients.

METHODS

Thirty-six patients undergoing bilateral TKA were included and randomly assigned to receive the lateral skin incision (lateral side of the tibial tubercle) on one knee and the standard midline incision on the contralateral. All other surgical steps were identical. Primary outcomes were the RSN at 1 year and the AON at 6 weeks, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Kneeling ability test (KAT), operative time, and length of incision were also recorded.

RESULTS

The lateral incision had half the RSN at 12 months compared to the midline incision (25% vs 53%; p = 0.01). The median AON at 1-year after surgery was 0 [0-0.5] cm2 in lateral incision vs 4 [0-7.5] cm2 in midline group (p < 0.001). KAT was minimally better in the lateral group at 110° of kneeling between 6-month to 1-year. Operative time and length of incision were similar between both groups.

CONCLUSION

The lateral skin incision reduced RSN by approximately 50% compared with the midline incision. The AON in lateral incision was 4 cm2 smaller than midline at 1-year after surgery. Moving a skin incision more lateral may be considered to minimize the numbness after TKA.

Adductor Canal Block Combined with Interspace between the Popliteal Artery and Capsule of the Knee (iPACK) versus Periarticular Injection for Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

The combination of the adductor canal block (ACB) and the infiltration of anesthetic solution into the interspace between the popliteal artery and capsule of the knee (iPACK) has become increasingly used to augment rapid recovery protocols in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, its efficacy in comparison with periarticular anesthetic injection (PAI) alone has yet to be evaluated. Hence, we conducted a retrospective study to compare PAI and ACB + iPACK for controlling pain after TKA.

METHODS

Propensity scores, incorporating American Society of Anesthesiologists scores, body mass index, age, and sex, were used to match the ACB + iPACK group with the PAI group. All patients received the identical surgical technique and postoperative care. Outcome measures were visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, morphine consumption, knee flexion angle, straight leg raising (SLR), postoperative nausea vomiting (PONV), and length of stay (LOS) after the surgery.

RESULTS

After matching by propensity score, there were 49 patients with comparable demographic data in each group. The VAS and morphine requirements of the PAI and ACB + iPACK groups were not different during the first 48 hours after TKA. At 72 hours postoperatively, the VAS of the ACB + iPACK was 0.97 higher than that of the PAI group (p = 0.020). Knee flexion angle, SLR, PONV, and LOS were not significantly different between groups. No procedure-related complications were identified in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

The anesthesiologist-administered ACB + iPACK was as effective as surgeon-administered PAI in controlling pain in the first 48 hours after TKA. However, the ACB + iPACK group had higher intensity of pain than did the PAI group at 72 hours after TKA.

Pain management after total knee arthroplasty: PROcedure SPEcific Postoperative Pain ManagemenT recommendations

BACKGROUND

The PROSPECT (PROcedure SPEcific Postoperative Pain ManagemenT) Working Group is a global collaboration of surgeons and anaesthesiologists formulating procedure-specific recommendations for pain management after common operations. Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is associated with significant postoperative pain that is difficult to treat. Nevertheless, pain control is essential for rehabilitation and to enhance recovery.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the available literature and develop recommendations for optimal pain management after unilateral primary TKA.

DESIGN

A narrative review based on published systematic reviews, using modified PROSPECT methodology.

DATA SOURCES

A literature search was performed in EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed and Cochrane Databases, between January 2014 and December 2020, for systematic reviews and meta-analyses evaluating analgesic interventions for pain management in patients undergoing TKA.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Each randomised controlled trial (RCT) included in the selected systematic reviews was critically evaluated and included only if met the PROSPECT requirements. Included studies were evaluated for clinically relevant differences in pain scores, use of nonopioid analgesics, such as paracetamol and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and current clinical relevance.

RESULTS

A total of 151 systematic reviews were analysed, 106 RCTs met PROSPECT criteria. Paracetamol and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory or cyclo-oxygenase-2-specific inhibitors are recommended. This should be combined with a single shot adductor canal block and peri-articular local infiltration analgesia together with a single intra-operative dose of intravenous dexamethasone. Intrathecal morphine (100 μg) may be considered in hospitalised patients only in rare situations when both adductor canal block and local infiltration analgesia are not possible. Opioids should be reserved as rescue analgesics in the postoperative period. Analgesic interventions that could not be recommended were also identified.

CONCLUSION

The present review identified an optimal analgesic regimen for unilateral primary TKA. Future studies to evaluate enhanced recovery programs and specific challenging patient groups are needed.

Periarticular Injection of Ketorolac Augmenting Intravenous Administration of Ketorolac for Postoperative Pain Control: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Simultaneous Bilateral Total Knee Arthroplasty

Adequate postoperative pain control with minimal side effects is necessary for patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Ketorolac is a frequently used nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug due to its excellent disposition in all administration routes; however, it possesses an "analgesic ceiling," which means that higher doses of the drug have no additional analgesic effect. Alternatively, increasing the local concentration of ketorolac via periarticular injection may provide additional pain relief to parenteral administration of ketorolac, but evidence demonstrating the benefits and safety of this approach is limited. Therefore, this study assesses whether local ketorolac injection could yield additional pain reduction to intravenous administration of ketorolac. A total of 54 patients who underwent simultaneous bilateral TKA were enrolled. Randomization was performed to determine whether 50 mg of bupivacaine plus 30 mg of ketorolac (ketorolac group), or only 50 mg bupivacaine (bupivacaine group) would be periarticularly injected into the first knee operated on (more painful), and then the contralateral knee would receive another mixture. Ketorolac (30 mg) was intravenously given every 8 hours for the first 48 hours. Visual analog scales (VASs) were used to assess pain, knee recovery function, and patients' preferred knee. Postoperative VAS pain scores in the ketorolac group were lower than those in the bupivacaine group 6 to 96 hours postoperatively and reached statistical significance 12 (4.25 ± 2.38 vs. 5.06 ± 2.48, respectively; p = 0.04) and 24 hours (4.22 ± 1.94 vs. 5.30 ± 2.12, respectively; p < 0.01) postoperatively. The ketorolac group had higher degrees of knee flexion and straight leg raise. No patient experienced adverse effects of ketorolac. On the day of discharge, 61.11% of the patients favored the knee that received local ketorolac injection (p < 0.01). Adjunct local ketorolac injection to systemic administration is well tolerated and may improve its analgesic effect as determined by the patients' perception.

Dexamethasone Does not Compensate for Local Anesthetic Cytotoxic Effects on Tenocytes: Morphine or Morphine Plus Dexamethasone May Be a Safe Alternative

Purpose

The purposes of this in vitro study were to investigate whether the addition of dexamethasone can compensate for any cytotoxic effects of the amide-type local anesthetics (LA) bupivacaine and ropivacaine and whether morphine and morphine-6-glucuronide (M6G) may be a safe alternative for peritendinous application.

Methods

Biopsies of human biceps tendons (n = 6) were dissected and cultivated. Cells were characterized by the expression for tenocyte markers, collagen I, biglycan, tenascin C, scleraxis, and RUNX via reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction and immunohistochemistry. Tenocytes were incubated with bupivacaine, ropivacaine, morphine, M6G, or a saline control with and without addition of dexamethasone for 15, 60, or 240 min. Cell viability was determined by quantifying the presence of adenosine-triphosphate.

Results

Significant time-dependent cytotoxic effects were observed for LA after all exposure times. After 15, 60, and 240 minutes, cell viability decreased to 81.1%, 49.4% and 0% (P < .001) for bupivacaine and to 81.4%, 69.6%, and 9.3% (P < .001) for ropivacaine compared to saline control. Dexamethasone did not compensate for these cytotoxic effects. Cell viability was not affected after 15, 60-min exposures to morphine and M6G but decreased significantly (P < .001) after 240 minutes compared to saline control. However, in combination with dexamethasone, tenocyte viability was significantly increased at all times for morphine (P < .01) and at 15 and 60 minutes for M6G (P < .01).

Conclusions

The results showed that amide-type LA have a time-dependent cytotoxic effect on human tenocytes in vitro, which could not be compensated for by dexamethasone, whereas morphine and M6G had no cytotoxic effects on tenocytes after 15 and 60 minutes. The addition of dexamethasone to morphine and M6G had a positive effect on viability, which increased significantly compared to the opioids.

Clinical Relevance

It is known that amide-type local anesthetics used for local joint analgesia have chondrotoxic side-effects. The combined application of morphine and dexamethasone may be a safe alternative.

Additional Peripheral Nerve Block to Periarticular Injection Has No Benefit for Patients Undergoing TKA: A Factorial Propensity Score-Matched Analysis Comparing Four Multimodal Analgesic Techniques

BACKGROUND

Controversy remains over what and how many analgesic techniques are required as the most effective multimodal pain regimen in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This study aimed to evaluate the effect of additional analgesic methods combined with periarticular injection (PAI) analgesia for TKA.

METHODS

Using retrospective cohort data, patients undergoing TKA with spinal anesthesia and PAI were divided into 4 groups. Group A (control) comprised 66 patients; group B (73 patients) had additional adductor canal block; group C (70 patients) obtained additional femoral nerve block, and group D (73 patients) received additional adductor canal block and intrathecal morphine. Propensity score matching was applied to compare visual analog scale (VAS) for pain intensity, cumulative morphine use (CMU), knee flexion angle, straight leg raise, length of hospital stay, and postoperative nausea and vomiting.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference regarding VAS and morphine use, when either group B or C was compared with group A. Group D had significantly lower VAS than groups A, B, and C during the first 24 hours after surgery and required significantly less CMU than groups A and B. However, the pain score of group D increased afterward, with significantly longer length of hospital stay than groups A and B. There was no difference in straight leg raise among the groups.

CONCLUSION

Additional peripheral nerve block to PAI provides no benefit for patients undergoing TKA. Adjuvant intrathecal morphine could significantly reduce the VAS and CMU in the acute postoperative period; however, rebound pain with prolonged hospital stays was observed.

Assessing outcome in postoperative pain trials: are we missing the point? A systematic review of pain-related outcome domains reported in studies early after total knee arthroplasty

ABSTRACT

The management of acute postoperative pain remains suboptimal. Systematic reviews and Cochrane analysis can assist with collating evidence about treatment efficacy, but the results are limited in part by heterogeneity of endpoints in clinical trials. In addition, the chosen endpoints may not be entirely clinically relevant. To investigate the endpoints assessed in perioperative pain trials, we performed a systematic literature review on outcome domains assessing effectiveness of acute pain interventions in trials after total knee arthroplasty. We followed the Cochrane recommendations for systematic reviews, searching PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase, resulting in the screening of 1590 potentially eligible studies. After final inclusion of 295 studies, we identified 11 outcome domains and 45 subdomains/descriptors with the domain "pain"/"pain intensity" most commonly assessed (98.3%), followed by "analgesic consumption" (88.8%) and "side effects" (75.3%). By contrast, "physical function" (53.5%), "satisfaction" (28.8%), and "psychological function" (11.9%) were given much less consideration. The combinations of outcome domains were inhomogeneous throughout the studies, regardless of the type of pain management investigated. In conclusion, we found that there was high variability in outcome domains and inhomogeneous combinations, as well as inconsistent subdomain descriptions and utilization in trials comparing for effectiveness of pain interventions after total knee arthroplasty. This points towards the need for harmonizing outcome domains, eg, by consenting on a core outcome set of domains which are relevant for both stakeholders and patients. Such a core outcome set should include at least 3 domains from 3 different health core areas such as pain intensity, physical function, and one psychological domain.

Is continuous locking suture with braided suture sufficient for arthrotomy repair in the conventional TKR? A randomized controlled trial study

Introduction

Medial-parapatellar-arthrotomy is the standard approach for total knee replacement(TKR). No studies have clarified the outcomes as quadriceps-strength-recovery (QS) and safety of Continuous-locking-suture-technique(CLS) for the arthrotomy-repair.

Methods

Patients were randomly assigned into a CLS(n = 40) and an interrupted-horizontal-mattress(IHM, n = 40). QS, visual-analog-scale(VAS), modified-timed-up-and-go(TUGT) test, Western-Ontario-and McMasters-Universities-Osteoarthritis-Index[WOMAC] and Knee-Society-Score[KSS] were followed for 6 months’.

Results

A significantly-shorter capsular-closure-time in CLS(233 ± 40 VS 388 ± 47 sec)(p < 0.0001). There were insignificant difference in QS, VAS, TUGT, WOMAC and KSS during the 6-month follow-up period(p > 0.05 all). No wound complications were found.

Conclusion

CLS with braided-suture is safe and effective as demonstrated a recovery of the QS and knee function outcome comparable to IHM.

Trial registration

This study was registered in Thai Clinical Trials Registry on December 2015 (https://www.clinicaltrials.in.th). The registration number was TCTR20151208003.

Intravenous versus oral acetaminophen as an adjunct on pain and recovery after total knee arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is gradually emerging as the treatment of choice for end-stage osteoarthritis. In the past, intravenous (IV) versus oral acetaminophen (APAP) treatment is still a controversial subject in TKA. Therefore, we write this systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of IV versus oral APAP on pain and recovery after TKA.

METHODS

Embase, Pubmed, and Cochrane Library were comprehensively searched. Randomized controlled trials, cohort studies were included in our meta-analysis. Five studies that compared IV APAP groups with oral APAP groups were included in our meta-analysis. The research was reported according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines to ensure the reliability and verity of results.

RESULTS

Pooled results indicated that no significant difference between the IV APAP groups and oral APAP groups in term of VAS score at 24 hours (P = .67), 48 hours (P = 0.08), and total morphine consumption at 24 hours (P = .07), but there was a significant difference in terms of length of hospital stay (LOS) (P = .0004).

CONCLUSION

IV APAP was not found to be superior to oral APAP in patients undergoing TKA in terms of VAS scores at 24 hours, 48 hours, and total morphine consumption at 24 hours. However, it can significantly reduce the LOS. We still need a large of high-quality research to verify the relationship between the oral and the IV APAP to give the conclusion.

No Difference in Pain After Spine Surgery with Local Wound Filtration of Morphine and Ketorolac: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Controlling postoperative pain after spinal surgery is important for rehabilitation and patient satisfaction. Wound infiltration with local anesthetics may improve postoperative pain, but true multimodal approaches for achieving analgesia after spinal surgery remain unknown.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

In this randomized, controlled, double-blind trial after lumbar interbody fusion, we asked: (1) Does multimodal analgesia reduce VAS pain scores by a clinically important amount? (2) Does this analgesic approach reduce the amount of morphine patients consume after surgery? (3) Is this approach associated with fewer opioid-related side effects after surgery?

METHODS

This study included 80 adult patients undergoing lumbar interbody fusion who were randomized into two groups: A control group (n = 40) who received infiltration of the surgical incision at the end of the procedure with an injection of 0.5% bupivacaine 100 mg (20 mL) and epinephrine 0.5 mg (0.5 mL), and the multimodal group (n = 40), who received wound infiltration with the same approach but with different medications: 0.5% bupivacaine 92.5 mg (18.5 mL), ketorolac 30 mg (1 mL), morphine 5 mg (0.5 mL), and epinephrine 0.5 mg (0.5 mL). There were no between-group differences in the proportion of patients who were male, nor in the mean age, height, weight, preoperative pain score, or surgical time. All treatments were administered by one surgeon. All patients, the surgeon, and the researchers were blinded to the allocation of patients to each group. Pain at rest was recorded using the VAS. Postoperative morphine consumption (administered using a patient-controlled analgesia pump) and opiod-associated side effects including nausea/vomiting, pruritus, urinary retention, and respiratory depression were assessed; this study was analyzed according to intention-to-treat principles. No loss to follow-up or protocol deviations were noted. We considered a 2-cm change on a 10-cm scale on the VAS as the minimum clinically important difference (MCID). Differences smaller than this were considered unlikely to be important.

RESULTS

At no point were there between-group differences in the VAS scores that exceeded the MCID, indicating no clinically important reductions in pain associated with administering multimodal injections. The highest treatment effect was observed at 3 hours that showed only a -1.3 cm mean difference between the multimodal and the control groups (3.2 ± 1.8 versus 4.5 ± 1.9 [95% CI -1.3 to -0.3]; p < 0.001), which was below the MCID. Morphine consumption was very slightly higher in the control group than in the multimodal group (2.8 ± 2.8 versus 0.3 ± 1.0, mean difference 2.47; p < 0.001). The percentage of patients reporting opioid-related side effects was lower in the multimodal group than in the control group. The proportions of nausea and vomiting were higher in the control group (30% [12 of 40] than in the multimodal group (3% [1 of 40]; p = 0.001). All of these side effects were transient and none was severe.

CONCLUSIONS

Multimodal wound infiltration with an NSAID and morphine did not yield any clinically important reduction in pain or opioid consumption. Since no substantial benefit of adding these drugs to a patient's aftercare regimen was achieved, and considering the potential risks of administering opioids and NSAIDs (such as, polypharmacy in older patients, serious adverse effects of NSAIDs), we recommend against routine use of this approach in clinical practice.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, therapeutic study.

Does Surgical-site Multimodal Drug Injection After Palmar Plating of Distal Radius Fractures Improve Pain Scores?

BACKGROUND

Although palmar locked plating is a stable fixation method frequently used to treat unstable distal radius fractures (DRFs), surgical treatment may be painful, and so interventions to decrease that pain might improve our patients' experiences with surgery. Some surgeons use local multimodal drug injections to decrease postoperative pain after lower-extremity arthroplasty, but little is known about the effectiveness of a local multimodal drug injection in patients who undergo palmar plating for DRFs.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) Do patients who receive a local multimodal drug injection after palmar plating for unstable DRFs have better pain scores at 4, 8, 24, and 48 hours after surgery than patients who have not received such an injection? (2) Do patients who receive a local multimodal drug injection have lower fentanyl consumption and administration of anti-emetic drugs within the first 48 hours after surgery than patients who have not received such an injection?

METHODS

A randomized controlled study was performed between August 2018 and August 2019 at a single tertiary care referral center. Patients who underwent palmar plating for DRFs under general anesthesia were eligible for inclusion. Patients were allocated into two groups: Those who received a local multimodal drug injection, and those who did not receive an injection. During the study period, 101 patients treated with palmar plating for DRFs met the inclusion criteria and were enrolled and randomized. Fifty-two patients were allocated to the multimodal injection group and 49 were allocated to the control group. Three patients (two in the multimodal injection group and one in the control group) were excluded after randomization because their pain level was not registered at any timepoint and so they could not be analyzed; our analysis was by intention to treat, and there was no crossover. After palmar plating, patients in the multimodal injection group received an injection of ropivacaine (10 mL), morphine (5 mL), ceftezole (5 mL) as well as normal saline (5 mL) to the periosteal area, pronator quadratus muscle, subcutaneous area, and skin. There were no differences between the groups in terms of age (62 years ± 13 years in the multimodal injection group versus 62 years ± 11 years in the control group; p = 0.93), gender (84% [42 of 50] women in the multimodal injection group versus 77% [37 of 48] women in the control group; p = 0.39), hand dominance (70% [35 of 50] dominant wrist in the multimodal injection group versus 60% [29 of 48] dominant wrist in the control group; p = 0.32) and AO/Orthopaedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA) classification (p = 0.57). All patients underwent treatment with the same perioperative protocol, and 25 μg of fentanyl was injected intravenously when a patient complained of pain and asked for additional pain control after surgery. In addition, when a patient complained of nausea or vomiting associated with fentanyl use, an anti-emetic drug was also injected. All nursing staff who administered the analgesics and anti-emetic drugs were blinded to treatment allocation. These two groups were compared regarding their pain level using a 100-mm VAS at 4, 8, 24, and 48 hours postoperatively. The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for the VAS score was set to 20 mm. VAS scores were also collected by nursing staff who remained blinded to the treatment allocation. The total amount of fentanyl use and the number of patients who received anti-emetic drugs associated with administration of fentanyl within the first 48 hours were also recorded.

RESULTS

With an MCID of 20 points, we found no clinically important reduction in VAS scores among patients who received a local multimodal injection compared with those who did not receive an injection at 4 hours (34 ± 15 versus 41 ± 20, mean difference -7.079 [95% CI -13.986 to -0.173]; p = 0.045), 8 hours (27 ± 16 versus 40 ± 19, mean difference -12.263 [95% CI -19.174 to -5.353]; p = 0.001), 24 hours (18 ± 12 versus 29 ± 20, mean difference -11.042 [95% CI -17.664 to -4.419]; p = 0.001), and 48 hours (9 ± 8 versus 10 ± 6, mean difference -1.318 [95% CI -4.000 to 1.365]; p = 0.33). Within the first 48 hours after surgery, fentanyl consumption was lower in patients receiving a local multimodal injection than in control patients (25 μg [range 0-100 μg] versus 37.5 μg [range 0-125 μg], difference of medians -12.5; p = 0.01). There was also a difference between the study groups in terms of the proportion of patients who received anti-emetic medications (16% [8 of 50] in the multimodal injection group versus 35% [17 of 48] in the control group, odds ratio = 2.879 [95% CI 1.102 to 7.519]; p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that patients who received a surgical-site multimodal analgesic injection after palmar plating for a distal radius fracture had no clinically important reduction in pain scores, but they did consume lower doses of opioid analgesics and fewer of these patients received anti-emetic drugs within 2 days of surgery. The high-potency opioids or other analgesia usually used for postoperative pain management have many side effects. Thus, reducing additional analgesia is as important as postoperative pain management and a surgical-site multimodal analgesic injection is one of the methods to achieve this a goal.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, therapeutic study.

Comparison of intrathecal morphine versus local infiltration analgesia for pain control in total knee and hip arthroplasty: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to comprehensively collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the clinical efficacy of intrathecal morphine (ITM) versus local infiltration analgesia (LIA) in the treatment of total knee and hip arthroplasty patients.

METHODS

Relevant studies were identified from the Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Wanfang, and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases. We also reviewed the references of all identified articles to identify additional studies. For each study, we assessed the risk ratio (RR), weighted mean difference (WMD), and corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI) to synthesize outcomes. Meta-analysis was performed with Stata 12.0 software.

RESULTS

We included 13 studies with 942 patients for meta-analysis. LIA significantly decreased the pain value with rest or mobilization until 72 hours (P < .05). LIA significantly decreased cumulative morphine consumption by 13.52 mg. Moreover, the length of hospital stay was lower in the LIA group than in the ITM analgesia group. Finally, LIA significantly reduced morphine-related complications (nausea and vomiting, pruritus, and respiration depression).

CONCLUSIONS

LIA was an effective approach for relieving postoperative pain and reducing postoperative consumption of morphine compared with ITM in total knee and hip arthroplasty patients.

Efficacy and safety of local infiltration analgesia for pain management in total knee and hip arthroplasty: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Local infiltration analgesia (LIA) has become popular in postoperative pain relief after total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of LIA with intrathecal morphine and epidural analgesia after THA and TKA.

METHODS

A systematic article search was performed from PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases, up to February 21, 2019. The main outcomes included visual analog scale for assessment of pain, morphine equivalent consumption, length of hospital stay, and adverse events. The data were calculated using weight mean difference (WMD) or risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs).

RESULTS

Eleven studies with a total of 707 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in this meta-analysis. LIA provided better pain control than other 2 techniques at 24-hour (WMD = 10.61, 95% CI: 3.36-17.87; P = .004), 48-hour (WMD = 16.0, 95% CI: 8.87-23.13; P < .001), and 72-hour (WMD = 11.31, 95% CI: 3.78-18.83; P < .001). Moreover, LIA had similar morphine consumption and duration of hospital stay with intrathecal morphine and epidural analgesia. There was significantly lower incidence of adverse events with LIA than with the other 2 techniques.

CONCLUSION

LIA provided better postoperative pain control and less adverse events than intrathecal morphine and epidural analgesia after THA and TKA.

Intrathecal versus local infiltration analgesia for pain control in total joint arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy of intrathecal morphine (ITM) analgesia and local infiltration analgesia (LIA) for pain control in total joint arthroplasty (TJA).

METHODS

Embase, PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). All RCTs were comparing intrathecal analgesia and local infiltration analgesia in TJA. Primary outcomes were the visual analog scale (VAS) score with rest or mobilization up to 72 h. Secondary outcomes were the total morphine consumption, length of hospital stay, and morphine-related complications.

RESULTS

Compared with the intrathecal analgesia group, the LIA group was associated with a reduction in VAS score with rest up to 72 h. Moreover, LIA was associated with a decrease in VAS score with mobilization at 6 h, 12 h, 48 h, and 72 h. Moreover, LIA significantly reduced total morphine consumption (weighted mean difference (WMD)  = - 15.37, 95% CI - 22.64 to - 8.83, P  = 0.000), length of hospital stay (WMD  =  - 1.39, 95% CI - 1.67 to - 1.11, P  = 0.000), and morphine-related complications (nausea and pruritus).

CONCLUSIONS

Local infiltration provided superior analgesia and morphine-sparing effects within the first 72 h compared with ITM following TJA.

Intravenous Dexamethasone Injection Reduces Pain From 12 to 21 Hours After Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Pain after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) affects postoperative recovery and patient satisfaction. The analgesic benefits of corticosteroids have not been well studied. We, therefore, investigated the analgesic effects of intravenous (IV) dexamethasone (DEX) in patients undergoing a TKA.

METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 0.15 mg/kg of IV DEX vs saline placebo in unilateral TKA. Fifty patients/arm were recruited. Primary outcomes were pain level, determined by a visual analog scale, and the amount of morphine consumption (mg) ≤48 hours post-TKA. Secondary outcomes were rates of nausea and vomiting, C-reactive protein concentrations, and functional outcomes.

RESULTS

The DEX group had a significantly lower mean visual analog scale score both at rest and during motion at 12, 15, 18, and 21 hours (P < .05). At 21 hours, the mean difference (Δ) in pain at rest was -11 points (95% confidence interval [CI], -21 to -2 points; P = .02) while the mean difference in pain during motion was -15 points (95% CI, -25 to -5 points; P = .004). The DEX group also had lower rates of nausea and vomiting: 29/50 (58%) vs 42/50 (84%) (P = .008) and lower mean C-reactive protein level: 89 vs 167, Δ = -78 mg/L (95% CI, -100 to -58 mg/L, P < .0001). There were no significant differences in mean morphine consumption by 48 hours, modified Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index scores, and range of motion of the knee at 3-month follow-up (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

IV DEX relieves postoperative pain between 12 to 21 hours after TKA and may be a useful adjunct for controlling pain in patients undergoing TKA.

Effectiveness of local anesthetic injection in geriatric patients following operative management of proximal and diaphyseal femur fracture

INTRODUCTION

Geriatric fracture patients are at risk for poorly controlled pain and side effects of opioid medications. The arthroplasty literature has demonstrated that infiltration of long-acting local anesthetic or anesthetic cocktails improves pain control and reduces post-operative opioid use resulting in better postoperative mobility without the deleterious effects of narcotics. Despite having a higher risk for adverse events, there is limited data among geriatric trauma patients. The aim this study was to evaluate whether local anesthetic infiltration (LAI) into the soft tissues surrounding the surgical field reduces narcotic use or pain scores in patients undergoing surgical management of proximal and diaphyseal femur fractures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of patients age >65 undergoing operative intervention for proximal and diaphyseal femur fracture. The electronic record was utilized to determine if local anesthetic was injected into the surgical wound, the amount of narcotics administered over 48 h in four-hour intervals, and to obtain visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores associated with patients post-operative course in four-hour intervals. The amount of narcotics was converted to morphine milligram equivalents (MME).

RESULTS

Among 477 patients with femur fracture, 358 did not receive LAI and 119 patients received LAI. Baseline demographics, fracture types, and surgical procedure were equivalent between the groups. In the first 28 h following surgery, compared with those who did not receive LAI, those who did required significantly less opioid (57.8 MME versus 94.3 MME, p = 0.034) and despite decreased narcotics, had equal pain scores (mean difference 0.37, p = 0.22). There was no difference in rates of post-operative complications.

CONCLUSION

LAI is associated with a reduction in opioid consumption in geriatric fracture patients with equivalent pain scores. Optimizing pain control is a critical issue in caring for geriatric fracture patients since both under-treated pain and opioid medications are implicated in postoperative delirium, complications, and ability to mobilize early. More research is needed to identify effective ways to optimize pain management in this at-risk patient population.

Timing of periarticular injection has no effect on postoperative pain and functional recovery in simultaneous bilateral total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized, double-blinded trial

BACKGROUND

Given no consensus on optimal timeframe of periarticular multimodal drug injection (PMDI) in knee osteoarthritis patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA), this study was aimed to compare the postoperative pain and the functional recovery in patients who underwent simultaneous bilateral TKA (SBTKA) and received PMDI at the different intraoperative time points.

METHODS

This prospective, randomized, double-blinded controlled trial study included 48 patients who underwent SBTKA and received PMDI mixture, either before prosthetic implantation (late PMDI), or just after knee arthrotomy (early PMDI). Each subject's knees were randomly selected to different PMDI administration time points. The outcome parameters were postoperative pain assessed by using a visual analog scale (VAS), the maximal angle of knee flexion, and quadriceps function from day 1 to 6 weeks after surgery.

RESULTS

Late PMDI revealed slightly higher VAS at 6 and 12 h after the operation than early PMDI administration. Afterward, the VAS tended to be lower in the late than early PMDI administration until the end of the study, but without statistical significance. The time difference between early and late PMDI had no effect on postoperative VAS, while older age resulted in significantly less pain. No statistical differences between the two groups in all other outcome parameters were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative pain reduction and functional recovery of SBTKA with early and late PMDI administration were not significantly different. The time interval of PMDI between knees did not confound the comparison of postoperative pain and functional recovery in SBTKA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The protocol of this study was retrospectively registered in the Thai Clinical Trials Registry database No. TCTR20170617001 on 16 June 2017.

Effects of periarticular injection on analgesic effects and NSAID use in total knee arthroplasty and total hip arthroplasty

OBJECTIVES

This study examined periarticular multimodal drug injection and the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for an early analgesic effect after total knee arthroplasty and total hip arthroplasty. Patient satisfaction and benefits from the treatment were also assessed.

METHODS

A total of 110 patients who were scheduled to undergo total knee arthroplasty and 86 patients who were scheduled to undergo total hip arthroplasty were divided into two groups, the study group and the control group. The study group received a periarticular multimodal drug injection during surgery. The control group received an equal volume of normal saline. All patients received an analgesia pump and a moderate dose of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Resting and motion Numeric Rating Scale scores, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index, knee or hip joint range of motion, length of postoperative hospital stay, patient satisfaction, total nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug consumption and side effects were recorded.

RESULTS

Both study groups exhibited significant improvement in pain Numeric Rating Scale scores during rest and exercise several days after the surgery. The range of joint motion was greater in the study group, and the length of postoperative hospital stay was shorter than that in the control group. Patients in the study group consumed fewer nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and reported greater satisfaction with surgery.

CONCLUSION

Intraoperative periarticular multimodal drug injection significantly relieved pain after surgery and reduced nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug consumption. These patient had a better postoperative experience, including satisfaction and rehabilitation.

Local Efficacy of Periarticular Morphine Injection in Simultaneous Bilateral Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind Trial

BACKGROUND

The periarticular multimodal cocktail injection including morphine is currently commonly used to reduce postoperative pain following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Despite its analgesic effect, it frequently causes nausea, which is an adverse effect of opioids. It is inconclusive whether the intraoperative injection of periarticular morphine is effective peripherally. The aim of this study was to assess whether the addition of morphine to unilateral periarticular knee injections improves postoperative pain, range of motion, and swelling in patients undergoing simultaneous bilateral TKA.

METHODS

A prospective, single-center, double-blinded, randomized, controlled trial was conducted to assess the local efficacy of adding morphine to intraoperative periarticular anesthesia in patients undergoing simultaneous bilateral TKA. Fifty-three patients undergoing 106 TKAs received an intraoperative periarticular injection in randomly selected one knee with added morphine (0.1 mg/kg) and the other knee without added morphine. The periarticular injection was composed of ropivacaine (a local anesthetic), epinephrine, ketoprofen, and methylprednisolone sodium. Visual analog scale pain scores at rest and on motion, range of motion (ROM), thigh swelling, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index score, and adverse outcomes were compared between the 2 knees.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences in the visual analog scale score, ROM, thigh girth, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index score, and adverse events between the 2 sides.

CONCLUSION

Adding morphine to periarticular injections is ineffective locally for relieving pain, reducing swelling, and improving the postoperative ROM.

Anterior vs Posterior Periarticular Multimodal Drug Injections: A Randomized, Controlled Trial in Simultaneous Bilateral Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Currently, various techniques are used to overcome postoperative pain after total knee arthroplasty. A local analgesic infiltration with periarticular multimodal drug injection (PMDI) is favorable because of its simplicity, safety, and efficacy. The present study compared the efficacy of a PMDI at the anterior vs posterior compartments.

METHODS

Forty-six patients were randomized to receive the PMDI at either the anterior or posterior compartment, with the contralateral knee receiving the PMDI at the opposite compartment. The PMDI injected to the posterior capsule, medial and lateral meniscal remnant, was defined as the posterior compartment injection, whereas the injection to the medial retinaculum, quadriceps muscle, pes anserinus, and retropatellar fat pad was defined as the anterior compartment injection. Pain scores at rest, knee flexion angle, quadriceps function, and drainage blood loss were evaluated in both groups.

RESULTS

The anterior PMDI group had significantly lower pain scores at rest during 96 hours postoperatively. On the day of discharge, 19 patients (41.3%) favored the knee with the anterior PMDI, which was superior to 9 patients (19.6%) who favored the knee with the posterior PMDI. The anterior PMDI demonstrated a superior recovery of quadriceps function during the same period, but there was no significant difference in terms of other parameters.

CONCLUSION

The PMDI at the anterior compartment can reduce pain after total knee arthroplasty with potentially better quadriceps function compared with that in the PMDI at the posterior compartment. We recommend infiltrating the anterior compartment with a greater amount of PMDI than the posterior compartment.

The efficiency and safety of dexamethasone for pain control in total joint arthroplasty: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficiency and safety of dexamethasone administration in total knee and hip arthroplasties.

METHODS

Two researchers search the relevant studies independently including Embase (1980-017.04), PubMed (1966-017.04), ScienceDirect (1985-017.04), Web of Science (1950-2017.03), and Cochrane Library for potential relevant studies. After testing for heterogeneity between studies, data were aggregated for random-effects models when necessary. The results of dichotomous outcomes were expressed as risk difference (RD) with a 95% confidence intervals (CIs). For continuous various outcomes, mean difference (MD) or standard mean difference (SMD) with a 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was applied for assessment. Meta-analysis was performed using Stata 11.0 software.

RESULTS

Four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including 361 patients met the inclusion criteria. The present meta-analysis indicated that there were significant differences between groups in terms of visual analogue scale (VAS) score at 12 hours (SMD = -0.579, 95% CI: -0.780 to -0.357, P = .000), 24 hours (SMD = -0.820, 95% CI: -1.036 to -0.604, P = .000), and 48 hours (SMD = -0.661, 95% CI: -1.149 to -0.172, P = .008). Dexamethasone was associated with a lower opioid consumption at 12 hours (SMD = -0.245, 95% CI: -0.465 to -0.025, P = .029), 24 hours (SMD = -0.285, 95% CI: -0.505 to -0.064, P = .011), and 48 hours (SMD = -0.989, 95% CI: -1.710 to -0.267, P = .007).

CONCLUSION

Dexamethasone could significantly reduce postoperative pain scores and opioid consumption within the 1st 48 hours following total joint arthroplasty (TJA). The overall evidence quality was moderate to low, further high-quality RCTs are needed to identify the optimal dose of dexamethasone for reducing pain after TJA.

Comparison of local infiltration analgesia and sciatic nerve block as an adjunct to femoral nerve block for pain control after total knee arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To perform a meta-analysis to assess the efficiency and safety between local infiltration analgesia (LIA) and sciatic nerve block (SNB) when combined with femoral nerve block (FNB) for pain control following total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

METHODS

We systemically searched the following electronic databases for potentially relevant articles: Embase (1980-2017.01), Medline (1966-2017.01), PubMed (1966-2017.01), ScienceDirect (1985-2017.01), web of science (1950-2017.01) and the Cochrane Library. Only studies published in English that were accessible online were considered. Furthermore, we only considered studies that were published from 1966 to 2017. Only studies that met the following inclusion criteria were considered: (a) patients were adult human subjects who were set to undergo TKA; (b) the intervention was either SNB combined with FNB or LIA combined with FNB; (c) the outcomes of the studies, such as visual analog scale (VAS) scores, morphine consumption, length of stay and postoperative adverse effects, including the risk of nausea, vomiting and falls, were reported; (d) studies were either RCTs or non-RCT. Meta-analysis was performed using Stata 11.0 software. Modified Jadad score (7-points scale) which was based on Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions is used for assessment of RCTs. The Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies (MINORS) scale was used to assess non-RCTs with scores ranging 0 to 24. The synthesis of the outcomes for all studies was calculated as the weighted average rate by using a fixed or random effect model which depends on statistical heterogeneity. Systematic review registration number is CRD42017110661.

RESULTS

Three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 2 nonrandomized controlled trials (Non-RCTs), including 240 patients met the inclusion criteria. The present meta-analysis indicated that there were significant differences between groups in terms of visual analog scale (VAS) score at 12 hours (SMD = -0.337, 95% CI: -0.593 to -0.081, P =.010), VAS score at 24 hours (SMD = -0.337, 95% CI: -0.612 to -0.061, P =.017), morphine equivalent consumption at 24 hours (SMD = -0.371, 95% CI: -0.627 to -0.114, P = .005) and incidence of nausea (RD = 0.215, 95% CI: 0.078 to 0.353, P = .002) and vomiting (RD = 0.143, 95% CI: 0.026 to 0.260, P = .017).

CONCLUSION

FNB combined with SNB provided decreased VAS scores and less morphine consumption at 12 and 24 hours compared with FNB combined with LIA in total knee arthroplasty. In addition, it was associated with lower risks of nausea and vomiting. We assessed the quality of the evidence as low to very low; therefore, our confidence in the effect estimate is limited, and the true effect may be substantially different from our estimates. Further studies should focus on surgeries that are known to be associated with significant postoperative pain, particularly surgeries where improved pain control may deliver significant clinical benefits through reduced morbidity, or cost-effectiveness benefits through faster rehabilitation and discharge. The present meta-analysis has the following limitations: (1) only 5 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Although all of them are recently published studies, the sample sizes are relatively small; (2) Functional outcome is an important parameter; however, owing to the insufficiency of relevant data, we failed to perform a meta-analysis on functional outcome; (3) The doses of anesthetics and the concomitant pain management regimes varied between the studies, which may have influenced the results; (4) The duration of follow-up was relatively short, which might have led to an underestimating of complications; and (5) publication bias present in the meta-analysis may have influenced the results.

The efficiency and safety of fascia iliaca block for pain control after total joint arthroplasty: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis aimed to perform a meta-analysis including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the efficiency and safety of fascia iliaca block (FIB) for pain control in patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty (TJA).

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in Medline (1966-2017.03), PubMed (1966-2017.03), Embase (1980-2017.03), ScienceDirect (1985-2017.03) and the Cochrane Library. Study evaluated the efficiency and safety of FIB in TJA was selected. Meta-analysis was performed using Stata 11.0 software.

RESULTS

Five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including 270 patients met the inclusion criteria. The present meta-analysis indicated that there were significant differences between groups in terms of visual analog scale (VAS) score at 12 hours (SMD = -0.544, 95% CI: -0.806 to -0.281, P = .000) and 24 hours (SMD = -0.519, 95% CI: -0.764 to -0.273, P = .000), morphine equivalent consumption at 12 hours (SMD = -0.895, 95% CI: -1.164 to -0.626, P = .000) and 24 hours (SMD = -0.548, 95% CI:-0.793 to -0.303, P = .000). In addition, fewer adverse side effect was identified in FIB groups (RD = -0.139, 95% CI: -0.243 to -0.034, P = .009).

CONCLUSION

The application of fascia iliaca block could significantly reduce VAS scores and morphine consumption at 12 and 24 hours following total knee and hip arthroplasty. In addition, there were fewer adverse effects in FIB groups. Due to the limited quality of the evidence currently available, higher quality RCTs are required.

Efficacy of Surgical-Site, Multimodal Drug Injection Following Operative Management of Femoral Fractures: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Multimodal analgesia inclusive of periarticular injection with a local anesthetic agent has been rapidly assimilated, with demonstrated safety and efficacy, into the care of patients undergoing elective lower-extremity arthroplasty. The present study was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a surgical-site, multimodal drug injection for postoperative pain control following operative management of femoral fractures.

METHODS

There were 102 patients undergoing operative intervention (plate fixation, intramedullary device, or arthroplasty) for a broad range of femoral fracture patterns who were prospectively randomized either to receive an intraoperative, surgical-site injection into the superficial and deep tissues containing ropivacaine, epinephrine, and morphine or to receive no injection. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores were recorded at regular intervals as the primary outcome measure. Narcotic consumption and medication-related side effects were also monitored.

RESULTS

The injection group demonstrated significantly lower VAS scores (p < 0.05) than the control cohort in the recovery room and at the 4, 8, and 12-hour postoperative time points. The median score (and interquartile range) was 1.6 (0 to 4.0) for the injection group and 3.2 (1.3 to 5.7) for the control group immediately postoperatively, 1.0 (0 to 3.0) for the injection group and 5.0 (2.0 to 7.0) for the control group at 4 hours, 2.0 (0 to 4.0) for the injection group and 5.0 (2.0 to 6.8) for the control group at 8 hours, and 3.5 (0 to 5.0) for the injection group and 5.0 (2.0 to 8.0) for the control group at 12 hours. Additionally, narcotic consumption was significantly lower (p = 0.007) in the injection group (5.0 mg [1.3 to 8.0 mg]) compared with the control group (9.7 mg [3.9 to 15.6 mg]) over the first 8 hours following the surgical procedure. No cardiac or central nervous system toxicity was observed secondary to infiltration of the local anesthetic.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical-site injection with a multimodal analgesic cocktail provides improved pain control and reduces narcotic utilization over the first postoperative day, with no observed adverse effects attributable to the local injection, across a diverse orthopaedic trauma population undergoing operative intervention for femoral fractures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Comparison of intrathecal and local infiltration analgesia by morphine for pain management in total knee and hip arthroplasty: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

We performed a meta-analysis from randomized controlled trials to evaluate the efficiency and safety between local infiltration analgesia and intrathecal morphine for pain control in total knee and hip arthroplasty.

METHODS

We systemically searched electronic databases including Embase (1980-2016.7), Medline (1966-2016.7), PubMed (1966-2016.7), ScienceDirect (1985-2016.7), web of science (1950-2016.7) and Cochrane Library for relevant articles. All calculation was carried out by Stata 11.0.

RESULTS

Four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 242 patients met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis showed that there were significant differences in terms of postoperative pain scores at 24 h during rest (P = 0.008) and mobilization (P = 0.049) following total knee and hip arthroplasty. Significant difference was found regarding the incidence of nausea (P = 0.030), vomiting (P = 0.005), and pruritus (P = 0.000) between two groups. There was no significant difference between groups in terms of morphine equivalent consumption at postoperative 24 or 48 h.

CONCLUSIONS

Local infiltration analgesia (LIA) provided superior analgesic effects within the first 24 h compared to intrathecal morphine (ITM) following total knee and hip arthroplasty. There were fewer adverse effects in LIA. Doses of morphine consumption were similar in the two groups.

Potential superiority of periarticular injection in analgesic effect and early mobilization ability over femoral nerve block following total knee arthroplasty

PURPOSE

Pain management after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) should permit early knee mobilization with minimal pain. Periarticular injection (PAI) with local anaesthetics has been recently discussed as a protocol of pain control. The purpose of this review of the literature was to evaluate the efficacy of PAI in comparison with femoral nerve block (FNB).

METHODS

A literature search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, the OVID database and the Cochrane Library databases. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane collaboration tool. Outcomes of interest included narcotic consumption, pain score, early mobilization ability, length of stay and adverse effects or events.

RESULTS

Research identified 918 articles, of which six with a total of 284 knees, met the inclusion criteria and were eligible for the current study. Conflicting evidence was found in terms of narcotic consumption on the postoperative day 1 and early mobilization ability. Total narcotic consumption, pain score in the first 2 days after surgery, length of stay and adverse effects or events showed no difference between two groups. Lower pain score on the day of surgery was detected after PAI. When compared to continuous FNB, patients in PAI group showed a tendency to achieving better ability of early mobilization.

CONCLUSIONS

In consideration of its relatively simple practice and its potential in analgesic effects or early mobilization ability, PAI had superiority to FNB in the management of pain control after TKA. Before PAI could be widely used in clinical practice after TKAs, further investigations would be necessary to confirm or refute our observed results and to unify the protocol of PAI.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I.

Intrathecal morphine verse femoral nerve block for pain control in total knee arthroplasty: A meta-analysis from randomized control trials

OBJECTIVE

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is usually associated with postoperative pain. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of femoral nerve block compared with intrathecal morphine for pain management after TKA.

METHODS

Potentially relevant literature was identified from electronic databases including Medline, PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect and the Cochrane Library. Gray academic studies were also identified from the reference of included literature. There was no language restriction. Pooling of data was carried out using Stata 11.0.

RESULTS

Four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 185 patients met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis indicated that there were no significant differences in terms of Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score at 6 h (standard mean difference (SMD) = -0.09, 95% CI: -1.62 to 1.43, P = 0.903), 12 h (weighted mean difference (WMD) = 1.84, 95% CI: -8.01 to 11.69, P = 0.714) or 24 h (WMD = 1.56, 95% CI: -14.31 to 17.42, P = 0.8474). No significant difference were found regarding morphine consumption at 6 h (WMD = -0.84, 95% CI: -2.52 to 0.85, P = 0.332), 12 h (WMD = 0.031, 95% CI: -3.304 to 0.3366, P = 0.985), 24 h (WMD = 0.21, 95% CI: -7.32 to 7.75, P = 0.956) or incidence of postoperative vomit and nausea (risk difference (RD) = -0.01, 95% CI: -0.15 to 0.12, P = 0.847). There was a significant difference between the groups in terms of the risk of itching postoperatively (RD = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.29 to 0.54, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Femoral nerve block provides equal postoperative pain control compared with intrathecal morphine following total knee arthroplasty, although there were fewer side effects in the FNB groups. In contrast, FNB was performed with an additional procedure and required a special apparatus. Both methods are effective at pain control following TKA.

Local Infiltration Analgesia Versus Continuous Femoral Nerve Block in Pain Relief After Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Although both local infiltration analgesia (LIA) and continuous femoral nerve block (FNB) are common analgesic modalities for pain relief after total knee arthroplasty (TKA), we are aware of no parallel-group, randomized controlled trial that has solely compared the efficacy of LIA and continuous FNB.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, 2-arm, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial involving patients scheduled for TKA. A total of 45 patients were randomly assigned to either the LIA or the continuous FNB group. Except for the analgesic modality, perioperative managements were identical in both groups. The primary outcome was postoperative pain score at rest 1 day after surgery, measured using a 100-mm visual analog scale.

RESULTS

Patients in the LIA group had a significantly lower visual analog scale score at rest 1 day after surgery than those in the continuous FNB group (34 ± 10 vs 42 ± 13 mm; P = .028). The opioid consumption during the initial 24 hours was significantly lower in the LIA group (12 ± 4 vs 16 ± 7 mg; P = .031). There were no differences in the rate of complications between the groups.

CONCLUSION

LIA was associated with better pain relief with a comparable complications rate for patients undergoing TKA than FNB. We recommend LIA for pain relief after TKA.

The impact of including corticosteroid in a periarticular injection for pain control after total knee arthroplasty: a double-blind randomised controlled trial

There is conflicting evidence about the benefit of using corticosteroid in periarticular injections for pain relief after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We carried out a double-blinded, randomised controlled trial to assess the efficacy of using corticosteroid in a periarticular injection to control pain after TKA. A total of 77 patients, 67 women and ten men, with a mean age of 74 years (47 to 88) who were about to undergo unilateral TKA were randomly assigned to have a periarticular injection with or without corticosteroid. The primary outcome was post-operative pain at rest during the first 24 hours after surgery, measured every two hours using a visual analogue pain scale score. The cumulative pain score was quantified using the area under the curve. The corticosteroid group had a significantly lower cumulative pain score than the no-corticosteroid group during the first 24 hours after surgery (mean area under the curve 139, 0 to 560, and 264, 0 to 1460; p = 0.024). The rate of complications, including surgical site infection, was not significantly different between the two groups up to one year post-operatively. The addition of corticosteroid to the periarticular injection significantly decreased early post-operative pain. Further studies are needed to confirm the safety of corticosteroid in periarticular injection.

TAKE HOME MESSAGE

The use of corticosteroid in periarticular injection offered better pain relief during the initial 24 hours after TKA.

Regional analgesia for improvement of long-term functional outcome after elective large joint replacement

BACKGROUND

Regional analgesia is more effective than conventional analgesia for controlling pain and may facilitate rehabilitation after large joint replacement in the short term. It remains unclear if regional anaesthesia improves functional outcomes after joint replacement beyond three months after surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of regional anaesthesia and analgesia on long-term functional outcomes 3, 6 and 12 months after elective major joint (knee, shoulder and hip) replacement surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed an electronic search of several databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL), and handsearched reference lists and conference abstracts. We updated our search in June 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing regional analgesia versus conventional analgesia in patients undergoing total shoulder, hip or knee replacement. We included studies that reported a functional outcome with a follow-up of at least three months after surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We contacted study authors for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six studies with 350 participants followed for at least three months. All of these studies enrolled participants undergoing total knee replacement. Studies were at least partially blinded. Three studies had a high risk of performance bias and one a high risk of attrition bias, but the risk of bias was otherwise unclear or low.Only one study assessed joint function using a global score. Due to heterogeneity in outcome and reporting, we could only pool three out of six RCTs, with range of motion assessed at three months after surgery used as a surrogate for joint function. All studies had a high risk of detection bias. Using the random-effects model, there was no statistically significant difference between the experimental and control groups (mean difference 3.99 degrees, 95% confidence interval (CI) - 2.23 to 10.21; P value = 0.21, 3 studies, 140 participants, very low quality evidence).We did not perform further analyses because immediate adverse effects were not part of the explicit outcomes of any of these typically small studies, and long-term adverse events after regional anaesthesia are rare.None of the included studies elicited or reported long-term adverse effects like persistent nerve damage.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

More high-quality studies are needed to establish the effects of regional analgesia on function after major joint replacement, as well as on the risk of adverse events (falls).

The Chitranjan Ranawat Award: Periarticular injections and femoral & sciatic blocks provide similar pain relief after TKA: a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Two of the more common methods of pain management after TKA are peripheral nerve blocks and intraarticular/periarticular injections. However, we are not aware of any study directly comparing the commonly used combination of a continuous femoral block given with a single-shot sciatic block with that of a periarticular injection after TKA.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

This randomized clinical trial compared a combined femoral and sciatic nerve block with periarticular injection as part of a multimodal pain protocol after total knee arthroplasty with respect to (1) pain; (2) narcotic use; (3) quadriceps function and length of stay; and (4) peripheral nerve complications.

METHODS

One hundred sixty patients completed randomization into two treatment arms: (1) peripheral nerve blocks (PNB; n=79) with an indwelling femoral nerve catheter and a single shot sciatic block; or (2) periarticular injection (PAI; n=81) using ropivacaine, epinephrine, ketorolac, and morphine. All patients received standardized general anesthesia and oral medications. The primary outcome was postoperative pain, on a 0 to 10 scale, measured on the afternoon of postoperative day 1 (POD 1). Secondary outcomes were narcotic use, quadriceps function, length of stay, and peripheral nerve complications.

RESULTS

Mean pain scores on the afternoon of POD 1 were not different between groups (PNB group: 2.9 [SD 2.4]; PAI group: 3.0 [SD 2.2]; 95% confidence interval, -0.8 to 0.6; p=0.76). Mean pain scores taken at three times points on POD 1 were also similar between groups. Hospital length of stay was shorter for the PAI group (2.44 days [SD 0.65] versus 2.84 days [SD 1.34] for the PNB group; p=0.02). Narcotic consumption was higher the day of surgery for the PAI group (PAI group: 11.7 mg morphine equivalents [SD 13.1]; PNB group: 4.6 mg [SD 9.1]; p<0.001), but thereafter, there was no difference. More patients in the PNB group had sequelae of peripheral nerve injury (mainly dysesthesia) at 6-week followup (nine [12%] versus one [1%]; p=0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients receiving periarticular injections had similar pain scores, shorter lengths of stay, less likelihood of peripheral nerve dysesthesia, but greater narcotic use on the day of surgery compared with patients receiving peripheral nerve blocks. Periarticular injections provide adequate pain relief, are simple to use, and avoid the potential complications associated with nerve blocks.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Efficacy of periarticular multimodal drug injection after medial opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy: a randomized, controlled study

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of periarticular multimodal drug injection after medial opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy regarding the postoperative pain level.

METHODS

From January 2011 to January 2012, 70 patients underwent medial opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy. Thirty-five patients were randomly assigned to receive no injection (group I), and 35 patients were assigned to receive periarticular multimodal drug injection (group II). These 2 groups were compared regarding the postoperative pain level, frequency of additional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug injections, total amount of patient-controlled analgesia, and number of times that patients pushed the patient-controlled analgesia button at each time interval. Statistical results were based on multivariate analysis of variance and repeated-measures analyses.

RESULTS

Multivariate analysis of variance of mean visual analog scale (VAS) scores over the 2-week postoperative period showed statistical significance (P < .001). Repeated-measures analysis yielded a statistically significant difference (P = .001) for the time-by-treatment interaction, showing a clear periarticular multimodal drug injection benefit over time based on VAS scores. In addition, the mean number of times that patients pushed the patient-controlled analgesia button differed significantly between groups over time (P = .01). The VAS scores, frequency of additional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug injections, mean number of times that patients pushed the patient-controlled analgesia button, and mean total amount of fentanyl consumption differed significantly within each group over time (P < .001 for all variables). However, the frequency of additional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug injections and mean total amount of fentanyl consumption did not differ significantly between groups over time (P = .822, P = .529, and P = .282). Opioid- and injection-related complications were not found.

CONCLUSIONS

This prospective randomized study shows that intraoperative periarticular multimodal drug injections in patients undergoing medial opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy for unicompartmental osteoarthritis of the knee could result in significant reductions in VAS scores at 2 weeks postoperatively.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, high-quality randomized controlled trial with statistically significant differences.

Analgesic efficacy of local infiltration analgesia in hip and knee arthroplasty: a systematic review

In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in local infiltration analgesia (LIA) as a technique to control postoperative pain. We conducted a systematic review of randomized clinical trials investigating LIA for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) to evaluate the analgesic efficacy of LIA for early postoperative pain treatment. In addition, the analgesic efficacy of wound catheters and implications for length of hospital stay (LOS) were evaluated. Twenty-seven randomized controlled trials in 756 patients operated on with THA and 888 patients operated on with TKA were selected for inclusion in the review. In THA, no additional analgesic effect of LIA compared with placebo was reported in trials with low risk of bias when a multimodal analgesic regimen was administered perioperatively. Compared with intrathecal morphine and epidural analgesia, LIA was reported to have similar or improved analgesic efficacy. In TKA, most trials reported reduced pain and reduced opioid requirements with LIA compared with a control group treated with placebo/no injection. Compared with femoral nerve block, epidural or intrathecal morphine LIA provided similar or improved analgesia in the early postoperative period but most trials had a high risk of bias due to different systemic analgesia between groups. Overall, the use of wound catheters for postoperative administration of local anaesthetic was not supported in the included trials, and LOS was not related to analgesic efficacy. Despite the many studies of LIA, final interpretation is hindered by methodological insufficiencies in most studies, especially because of differences in use of systemic analgesia between groups. However, LIA provides effective analgesia in the initial postoperative period after TKA in most randomized clinical trials even when combined with multimodal systemic analgesia. In contrast, LIA may have limited additional analgesic efficacy in THA when combined with a multimodal analgesic regimen. Postoperative administration of local anaesthetic in wound catheters did not provide additional analgesia when systemic analgesia was similar and LOS was not related to use of LIA with a fast-track set-up.

Comparison of 2 Methods of Local Anesthetic-Based Injection as Part of a Multimodal Approach to Pain Management After Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

It is estimated that up to 50% of patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) receive suboptimal postoperative pain management.

METHODS

In a retrospective study, 224 patients who underwent TKA between January 1, 2011, and September 30, 2012, were identified by surgical records for 2 surgeons at Community Medical Center in Missoula, Montana. Patient records were reviewed and data collected for patient hospital length of stay (LOS), postoperative opioid use, opioid-associated adverse events, and nonopioid analgesic use. Data were analyzed for differences in outcomes between patients who received an intraoperative intra-articular (IOIA) injection followed by a postoperative infusion (0.25%-0.5% bupivacaine) or an intraoperative periarticular (IOPA) injection (ropivacaine, ketorolac, epinephrine, and clonidine) for sustained analgesia after TKA.

RESULTS

Patients who received an IOPA injection had a statistically significant decrease in hospital LOS (67.0 vs 75.9 hours; P = .027) and postoperative nausea and vomiting (39.3% vs 54.9%; P = .023) when compared to patients who received an IOIA infusion. The incidence of having either oversedation or pruritus did not differ between groups (9.8% vs 9.8%; P = 1.00).

CONCLUSION

The use of IOPA injections containing ropivacaine, epinephrine, ketorolac, and clonidine during TKA offered some benefit over IOIA infusions containing 0.25% to 0.5% bupivacaine at our institution.

Local anaesthetic infiltration for peri-operative pain control in total hip and knee replacement: systematic review and meta-analyses of short- and long-term effectiveness

Background

Surgical pain is managed with multi-modal anaesthesia in total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR). It is unclear whether including local anaesthetic infiltration before wound closure provides additional pain control.

Methods

We performed a systematic review of randomised controlled trials of local anaesthetic infiltration in patients receiving THR or TKR. We searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane CENTRAL to December 2012. Two reviewers screened abstracts, extracted data, and contacted authors for unpublished outcomes and data. Outcomes collected were post-operative pain at rest and during activity after 24 and 48 hours, opioid requirement, mobilisation, hospital stay and complications. When feasible, we estimated pooled treatment effects using random effects meta-analyses.

Results

In 13 studies including 909 patients undergoing THR, patients receiving local anaesthetic infiltration experienced a greater reduction in pain at 24 hours at rest by standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.61 (95% CI -1.05, -0.16; p = 0.008) and by SMD -0.43 (95% CI -0.78 -0.09; p = 0.014) at 48 hours during activity.

In TKR, diverse multi-modal regimens were reported. In 23 studies including 1439 patients undergoing TKR, local anaesthetic infiltration reduced pain on average by SMD -0.40 (95% CI -0.58, -0.22; p < 0.001) at 24 hours at rest and by SMD -0.27 (95% CI -0.50, -0.05; p = 0.018) at 48 hours during activity, compared with patients receiving no infiltration or placebo. There was evidence of a larger reduction in studies delivering additional local anaesthetic after wound closure. There was no evidence of pain control additional to that provided by femoral nerve block.

Patients receiving local anaesthetic infiltration spent on average an estimated 0.83 (95% CI 1.54, 0.12; p = 0.022) and 0.87 (95% CI 1.62, 0.11; p = 0.025) fewer days in hospital after THR and TKR respectively, had reduced opioid consumption, earlier mobilisation, and lower incidence of vomiting.

Few studies reported long-term outcomes.

Conclusions

Local anaesthetic infiltration is effective in reducing short-term pain and hospital stay in patients receiving THR and TKR. Studies should assess whether local anaesthetic infiltration can prevent long-term pain. Enhanced pain control with additional analgesia through a catheter should be weighed against a possible infection risk.

Multimodal therapy in perioperative analgesia

This article reviews the current evidence for multimodal analgesic options for common surgical procedures. As perioperative physicians, we have come a long way from using only opioids for postoperative pain to combinations of acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), selective Cyclo-oxygenase (COX-2) inhibitors, local anesthetics, N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists, and regional anesthetics. As discussed in this article, many of these agents have decreased narcotic requirements, improved patient satisfaction, and decreased postanesthesia care unit (PACU) times, as well as morbidity in the perioperative period.