Anesthetic and analgesic effects in patients undergoing a lumbar laminectomy of spinal, epidural or a combined spinal–epidural block with the addition of 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.

Comparative outcomes of awake spine surgery under spinal versus general anesthesia: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Awake surgery, under spinal anesthesia (SA), is an alternative to surgery under general anesthesia (GA), in neurological and spine surgery. In the literature, there seem to be some evidence supporting benefits associated with the use of this anesthetic modality, as compared to GA. Currently, there is a notable lack of updated and comprehensive review addressing the complications associated with both awake SA and GA in spine surgery. We hence aimed to perform a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis on the topic.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted to identify studies that assessed SA in spine surgery from database inception to April 14, 2023, in PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Outcomes of interest included estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, operative time, and overall complications. Meta-analysis was conducted using random effects models.

RESULTS

In total, 38 studies that assessed 7820 patients were included. The majority of the operations that were treated with SA were single-level lumbar cases. Awake patients had significantly shorter lengths of hospital stay (Mean difference (MD): - 0.40 days; 95% CI - 0.64 to - 0.17) and operative time (MD: - 19.17 min; 95% CI - 29.68 to - 8.65) compared to patients under GA. The overall complication rate was significantly higher in patients under GA than SA (RR, 0.59 [95% CI 0.47-0.74]). Patients under GA had significantly higher rates of postoperative nausea/vomiting RR, 0.60 [95% CI 0.39-0.90]) and urinary retention (RR, 0.61 [95% CI 0.37-0.99]).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing awake spine surgery under SA had significantly shorter operations and hospital stays, and fewer rates of postoperative nausea and urinary retention as compared to GA. In summary, awake spine surgery offers a valid alternative to GA and added benefits in terms of postsurgical complications, while being associated with relatively low morbidity.

A Randomised Controlled Study on Epidural Morphine and Bupivacaine for Post-Operative Analgesia After Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Randomised control study.

OBJECTIVE

Different parenteral analgesics are used to alleviate post-operative pain after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) but limited by their efficacy and side effects. We performed a RCT to evaluate the safety and efficacy of epidural Morphine-Bupivacaine on post-operative pain management after TLIF.

METHODS

Consecutive patients (n=100) of TLIF were divided randomly into study (SG) and control groups (CG). At the end of procedure, SG (n=50) received epidural instillation of morphine 5 mg and bupivacaine .25% - 2 mL, along with 6 mL of .25% bupivacaine infiltration in the deep fascia before wound closure. The functional outcomes were assessed at regular intervals (4, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 hours) with VAS, nausea and vomiting scale, Ramsay sedation scale and breakthrough analgesia needed, time to ambulation and other complications.

RESULTS

The mean VAS score at 4 hours in SG was significantly less (1.16 ± .88) than the CG (3.32 ± 1.0) (P = .000). This significant difference was maintained at each time point during the first 48 hours (P < .004). Similarly, the mean NRS score in SG at 4 hours was 1.02 ± .89, and in CG 3.3 ± .69 (P = .0000) which was maintained at all intervals of assessment till 48 hours (P = .0137). The mean time to first ambulation was significantly less in the SG (4.46 ± 1.04 hours) than CG (11.64 ± 2.3 hours) (P < .001). There were no drug-related complications.

CONCLUSION

Epidural instillation of bupivacaine and morphine is safe and enables better pain relief in the initial 48 hours which helps in early mobilisation, and enhanced functional recovery.

Management of Postoperative Pain in Patients Following Spine Surgery: A Narrative Review

Perioperative pain management is a unique challenge in patients undergoing spine surgery due to the increased incidence of both pre-existing chronic pain conditions and chronic postsurgical pain. Peri-operative planning and counseling in spine surgery should involve an interdisciplinary approach that includes consideration of patient-level risk factors, as well as pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic pain management techniques. Consideration of psychological factors and patient focused education as an adjunct to these measures is paramount in developing a personalized perioperative pain management plan. Understanding the currently available body of knowledge surrounding perioperative opioid management, management of opioid use disorder, regional/neuraxial anesthetic techniques, ketamine/lidocaine infusions, non-opioid oral analgesics, and behavioral interventions can be useful in developing a comprehensive, multi-modal treatment plan among patients undergoing spine surgery. Although many of these techniques have proved efficacious in the immediate postoperative period, long-term follow-up is needed to define the impact of such approaches on persistent pain and opioid use. Future techniques involving the use of precision medicine may help identify phenotypic and physiologic characteristics that can identify patients that are most at risk of developing persistent postoperative pain after spine surgery.

Regional Anesthesia for Spine Surgery

Recent advancements in spine surgery anesthesia techniques and pain management has led to a paradigm shift from conventional open spinal procedures to minimally invasive spine surgeries performed on an outpatient basis. Spinal anesthesia and epidural anesthesia alone or in combination with spinal are common regional anesthesia modalities used in spine surgeries. New modalities of regional analgesia have emerged recently including erector spinae and thoracolumbar interfascial plane block, aimed at decreasing perioperative pain and enhancing early recovery in patients undergoing spine surgery. In this narrative review we discuss the characteristics of regional anesthesia including its types, indications, contraindications, benefits, and potential complications along with new modalities of regional analgesia.

Pain management after laminectomy: a systematic review and procedure-specific post-operative pain management (prospect) recommendations

PURPOSE

With lumbar laminectomy increasingly being performed on an outpatient basis, optimal pain management is critical to avoid post-operative delay in discharge and readmission. The aim of this review was to evaluate the available literature and develop recommendations for optimal pain management after one- or two-level lumbar laminectomy.

METHODS

A systematic review utilizing the PROcedure-SPECific Post-operative Pain ManagemenT (PROSPECT) methodology was undertaken. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in the English language from 1 January 2008 until 31 March 2020-assessing post-operative pain using analgesic, anaesthetic and surgical interventions-were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Databases.

RESULTS

Out of 65 eligible studies identified, 39 RCTs met the inclusion criteria. The analgesic regimen for lumbar laminectomy should include paracetamol and a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) or cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 selective inhibitor administered preoperatively or intraoperatively and continued post-operatively, with post-operative opioids for rescue analgesia. In addition, surgical wound instillation or infiltration with local anaesthetics prior to wound closure is recommended. Some interventions-gabapentinoids and intrathecal opioid administration-although effective, carry significant risks and consequently were omitted from the recommendations. Other interventions were also not recommended because there was insufficient, inconsistent or lack of evidence.

CONCLUSION

Perioperative pain management for lumbar laminectomy should include paracetamol and NSAID- or COX-2-specific inhibitor, continued into the post-operative period, as well as intraoperative surgical wound instillation or infiltration. Opioids should be used as rescue medication post-operatively. Future studies are necessary to evaluate the efficacy of our recommendations.

Spinal anesthesia for lumbar spine surgery correlates with fewer total medications and less frequent use of vasoactive agents: A single center experience

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Anesthesiologists at our hospital commonly administer spinal anesthesia for routine lumbar spine surgeries. Anecdotal impressions suggested that patients received fewer anesthesia-administered intravenous medications, including vasopressors, during spinal versus general anesthesia. We hypothesized that data review would confirm these impressions. The objective was to test this hypothesis by comparing specific elements of spinal versus general anesthesia for 1-2 level open lumbar spine procedures.

DESIGN

Retrospective single institutional study.

SETTING

Academic medical center, operating rooms.

PATIENTS

Consecutive patients (144 spinal and 619 general anesthesia) identified by automatic structured query of our electronic anesthesia record undergoing lumbar decompression, foraminotomy or microdiscectomy by one surgeon under general or spinal anesthesia.

INTERVENTIONS

Spinal or general anesthesia.

MEASUREMENTS

Numbers of medications administered during the case.

MAIN RESULTS

Anesthesiologists administered in the operating room a total of 10 ± 2 intravenous medications for general anesthetics and 5 ± 2 medications for spinal anesthetics (-5, 95% CI -5 to -4, p<0.001, univariate analysis). Multivariable analysis supported this finding (spinal versus general anesthesia: -4, 95% CI -5 to -4, p<0.001). Spinal anesthesia patients were less likely to receive ephedrine, or phenylephrine (by bolus or by infusion) (all p<0.001, Chi-squared test). Spinal anesthesia patients were also less likely to receive labetolol or esmolol (both p = 0.002, Fishers' Exact test). No neurologic injuries were attributed to, or masked by, spinal anesthesia. Three spinal anesthetics failed.

CONCLUSIONS

For routine lumbar surgery in our cohort, spinal compared to general anesthesia was associated with significantly fewer drugs administered during a case and less frequent use of vasoactive agents. Safety implications include greater hemodynamic stability with spinal anesthesia along with reduced risks for medication error and transmission of pathogens associated with medication administration.

Perioperative Factors Associated with Severe Pain in Post-Anesthesia Care Unit after Thoracolumbar Spine Surgery: A Retrospective Case-Control Study

Study Design

A retrospective case-control study.

Purpose

To evaluate the effect of nitrous oxide and anesthetic and operative factors associated with severe pain in the early postoperative period after thoracolumbar spine surgery.

Overview of Literature

Thoracolumbar spine surgery is the most common procedure in spine surgery, and up to 50% of the patients suffer from moderate to severe pain. Nitrous oxide has analgesic, anxiolytic, and anesthetic effects; nevertheless, its benefits for early postoperative pain control and opioid consumption remain to be established.

Methods

The medical records of eligible participants who underwent thoracolumbar spine surgery between July 2016 and February 2017 were reviewed. Enrolment was performed consecutively until reaching 90 patients for the case (severe pain) group (patients with a pain score of >7 out of 10 at least once during the post-anesthesia care unit [PACU] admission), and 90 patients for the control (mild-to-moderate pain) group (patients with a pain score of <7 in every PACU assessment). The data collected comprised patient factors, anesthetic factors, surgical factors, PACU pain score, and PACU pain management.

Results

A total of 197 patients underwent thoracolumbar spine surgery with an incidence of early postoperative severe pain of 53.3%. The case-control study revealed no differences in the factors related to pain intensity. A subgroup analysis was performed for failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS), spinal stenosis, and spondylolisthesis. After multivariate analyses, only the age group of 19–65 years and the baseline Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were found to be significant risk factors for early postoperative severe pain in the PACU (odds ratio [OR], 2.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.32–6.25; OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01–1.05, respectively).

Conclusions

Nitrous oxide, anesthetic agents, and surgical techniques did not affect the early postoperative pain severity. Age under 66 years and the baseline ODI were the significant risk factors for pain intensity during the early postoperative period of the FBSS, spinal stenosis, and spondylolisthesis subgroups.

Dexmedetomidine-fentanyl Compared With Midazolam-fentanyl for Conscious Sedation in Patients Undergoing Lumbar Disc Surgery

PURPOSE

Patients undergoing awake lumbar disc surgery need adequate sedation and analgesia. This study investigated whether use of a dexmedetomidine-fentanyl (DF) regimen could be superior to midazolam-fentanyl (MF) for these patients.

METHODS

Sixty patients scheduled for elective lumbar laminotomy and discectomy were randomly assigned to receive either DF or MF for conscious sedation. Patient-controlled intravenous analgesia with fentanyl was used for postoperative pain management. Hemodynamic and respiratory changes, sedation scores, pain scores, fentanyl consumption, patient satisfaction, postoperative hospital stay, and adverse events were assessed.

FINDINGS

The patient and surgical characteristics, sedation levels, and pain scores were similar in the 2 groups. Compared with the MF group, heart rate was lower in the DF group at six time points from skin incision to 15 minutes in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU), they are skin incision, 15 min after the beginning of surgery, 30 min after the beginning of surgery, skin closure, entering PACU, and 15 min in PACU (P = 0.016, 0.002, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, and 0.001, respectively), whereas pulse oxygen saturation was higher at 3 time points from 15 minutes after the beginning of surgery to skin closure (P = 0.022, 0.026, and 0.025, respectively). The intraoperative, postoperative, and total consumption of fentanyl were lower in the DF group (total: mean difference = -69.3 µg; 95% CI, = -114.3 to -24.4; P = 0.003). No significant differences were found for adverse events, postoperative hospital stay, or satisfaction between the 2 groups.

IMPLICATIONS

Although awake lumbar disc surgery can be performed successfully under sedation with either MF or DF combination, the latter may be a better alternative because of less consumption of opioid analgesics. ChiCTR.org identifier: ChiCTR-TRC-13003645.

Lumbar laminectomy with segmental continuous epidural anesthesia

Lumbar laminectomies are usually performed under general anesthesia in the prone position. We report a case of lumbar laminectomy done under segmental continuous epidural anesthesia, so that direct visual intra-operative monitoring of the motor and sensory component of the lower extremities was possible.

Endogenous opiates and behavior: 2013

This paper is the thirty-sixth consecutive installment of the annual review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system. It summarizes papers published during 2013 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides, opioid receptors, opioid agonists and opioid antagonists. The particular topics that continue to be covered include the molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors related to behavior, and the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia; stress and social status; tolerance and dependence; learning and memory; eating and drinking; alcohol and drugs of abuse; sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology; mental illness and mood; seizures and neurologic disorders; electrical-related activity and neurophysiology; general activity and locomotion; gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions; cardiovascular responses; respiration and thermoregulation; and immunological responses.

Reversible paralysis and loss of deep pain sensation after topical intrathecal morphine administration following durotomy

OBJECTIVE

To report 2 dogs that developed temporary pelvic limb paralysis with loss of deep pain sensation after topical intrathecal morphine administration during spinal surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

Clinical report.

ANIMALS

Dogs (n = 2).

METHODS

A 5-year-old castrated male French Bulldog with a subarachnoid diverticulum at T9-T10 and a 9.5-year-old castrated male Belgian Shepherd dog with a herniated disc at T12-T13 and intradural component, had Gelfoam soaked with morphine placed over the dura mater defect.

RESULTS

Pelvic limb paralysis and loss of deep pain sensation was noticed immediately after recovery from anesthesia. After intravenous naloxone administration, both dogs immediately regained ambulation and normal pain sensation; however the effect was temporary lasting only a few hours. Permanent resolution of clinical signs occurred 24 hours after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Topical intrathecal morphine administration resulted in temporary pelvic limb paralysis and loss of deep pain sensation. This route of administration should be used cautiously until further determination of the efficacy and adverse effects associated with topical intrathecal morphine administration.

How much medicine do spine surgeons need to know to better select and care for patients?

Background:

Although we routinely utilize medical consultants for preoperative clearance and postoperative patient follow-up, we as spine surgeons need to know more medicine to better select and care for our patients.

Methods:

This study provides additional medical knowledge to facilitate surgeons’ “cross-talk” with medical colleagues who are concerned about how multiple comorbid risk factors affect their preoperative clearance, and impact patients’ postoperative outcomes.

Results:

Within 6 months of an acute myocardial infarction (MI), patients undergoing urological surgery encountered a 40% mortality rate: similar rates may likely apply to patients undergoing spinal surgery. Within 6 weeks to 2 months of placing uncoated cardiac, carotid, or other stents, endothelialization is typically complete; as anti-platelet therapy may often be discontinued, spinal surgery can then be more safely performed. Coated stents, however, usually require 6 months to 1 year for endothelialization to occur; thus spinal surgery is often delayed as anti-platelet therapy must typically be continued to avoid thrombotic complications (e.g., stroke/MI). Diabetes and morbid obesity both increase the risk of postoperative infection, and poor wound healing, while the latter increases the risk of phlebitis/pulmonary embolism. Both hypercoagluation and hypocoagulation syndromes may require special preoperative testing/medications and/or transfusions of specific hematological factors. Pulmonary disease, neurological disorders, and major psychiatric pathology may also require further evaluations/therapy, and may even preclude successful surgical intervention.

Conclusions:

Although we as spinal surgeons utilize medical consultants for preoperative clearance and postoperative care, we need to know more medicine to better select and care for our patients.