Epidural analgesia: prospective audit of 1062 patients

ASRA Pain Medicine consensus practice infection control guidelines for regional anesthesia and pain medicine

BACKGROUND

To provide recommendations on risk mitigation, diagnosis and treatment of infectious complications associated with the practice of regional anesthesia, acute and chronic pain management.

METHODS

Following board approval, in 2020 the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine (ASRA Pain Medicine) commissioned evidence-based guidelines for best practices for infection control. More than 80 research questions were developed and literature searches undertaken by assigned working groups comprising four to five members. Modified US Preventive Services Task Force criteria were used to determine levels of evidence and certainty. Using a modified Delphi method, >50% agreement was needed to accept a recommendation for author review, and >75% agreement for a recommendation to be accepted. The ASRA Pain Medicine Board of Directors reviewed and approved the final guidelines.

RESULTS

After documenting the incidence and infectious complications associated with regional anesthesia and interventional pain procedures including implanted devices, we made recommendations regarding the role of the anesthesiologist and pain physician in infection control, preoperative patient risk factors and management, sterile technique, equipment use and maintenance, healthcare setting (office, hospital, operating room), surgical technique, postoperative risk reduction, and infection symptoms, diagnosis, and treatment. Consensus recommendations were based on risks associated with different settings and procedures, and keeping in mind each patient's unique characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

The recommendations are intended to be multidisciplinary guidelines for clinical care and clinical decision-making in the regional anesthesia and chronic interventional pain practice. The issues addressed are constantly evolving, therefore, consistent updating will be required.

Infectious complications following regional anesthesia: a narrative review and contemporary estimates of risk

INTRODUCTION

Infectious complications following regional anesthesia (RA) while rare, can be devastating. The objective of this review was to estimate the risk of infectious complications following central neuraxial blocks (CNB) such as epidural anesthesia (EA), spinal anesthesia (SA) and combined spinal epidural (CSE), and peripheral nerve blocks (PNB).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases to identify reference studies reporting infectious complications in the context of RA subtypes. Both prospective and retrospective studies providing incidence of infectious complications were included for review to provide pooled estimates (with 95% CI). Additionally, we explored incidences specifically associated with spinal anesthesia, incidences of central nervous system (CNS) infections and, the incidences of overall and CNS infections following CNB in obstetric population.

RESULTS

The pooled estimate of overall infectious complications following all CNB was 9/100 000 (95% CI: 5, 13/100 000). CNS infections following all CNB was estimated to be 2/100 000 (95% CI: 1, 3/100 000) and even rarer following SA (1/100 000 (95% CI: 1, 2/100 000)). Obstetric population had a lower rate of overall (1/100 000 (95% CI: 1, 3/100 000)) and CNS infections (4 per million (95% CI: 0.3, 1/100 000)) following all CNB. For PNB catheters, the reported rate of infectious complications was 1.8% (95% CI: 1.2, 2.5/100).

DISCUSSION

Our review suggests that the risk of overall infectious complications following neuraxial anesthesia is very rare and the rate of CNS infections is even rarer. The infectious complications following PNB catheters seems significantly higher compared with CNB. Standardizing nomenclature and better reporting methodologies are needed for the better estimation of the infectious complications.

A randomized comparison of loss of resistance versus loss of resistance plus electrical stimulation: effect on success of thoracic epidural placement

Background

Loss of resistance (LOR) for epidural catheter placement has been utilized for almost a century. LOR is a subjective endpoint associated with a high failure rate. Nerve stimulation (NS) has been described as an objective method for confirming placement of an epidural catheter. We hypothesized that the addition of NS to LOR would improve the success of epidural catheter placement.

Methods

One-hundred patients were randomized to thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) utilizing LOR-alone or loss of resistance plus nerve stimulation (LOR + NS). The primary endpoint was rate of success, defined as loss of sensation following test dose. Secondary endpoints included performance time. An intention-to-treat analysis was planned, but a per-protocol analysis was performed to investigate the success rate when stimulation was achieved.

Results

In the intention-to-treat analysis there was no difference in success rates (90% vs 82% [LOR + NS vs LOR-alone]; P = 0.39). The procedural time increased in the LOR + NS group (33.9 ± 12.8 vs 24.0 ± 8.0 min; P < 0.001). The per-protocol analysis found a statistically higher success rate for the LOR + NS group compared to the LOR-alone group (98% vs. 82%; P = 0.017) when only patients in whom stimulation was achieved were included.

Conclusions

Addition of NS technique did not statistically improve the success rate for epidural placement when analyzed in an intention-to-treat format and was associated with a longer procedural time. In a per-protocol analysis a statistically higher success rate for patients in whom stimulation was obtained highlights the potential benefit of adding NS to LOR.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03087604 on 3/22/2017; Institutional Review Board Wake Forest School of Medicine IRB00039522, Food and Drug Administration Investigational Device Exemption: G160273.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12871-022-01584-x.

Visceral versus somatic pain: an educational review of anatomy and clinical implications

Somatic and visceral nociceptive signals travel via different pathways to reach the spinal cord. Additionally, signals regulating visceral blood flow and gastrointestinal tract (GIT) motility travel via efferent sympathetic nerves. To offer optimal pain relief and increase GIT motility and blood flow, we should interfere with all these pathways. These include the afferent nerves that travel with the sympathetic trunks, the somatic fibers that innervate the abdominal wall and part of the parietal peritoneum, and the sympathetic efferent fibers. All somatic and visceral afferent neural and sympathetic efferent pathways are effectively blocked by appropriately placed segmental thoracic epidural blocks (TEBs), whereas well-placed truncal fascial plane blocks evidently do not consistently block the afferent visceral neural pathways nor the sympathetic efferent nerves. It is generally accepted that it would be beneficial to counter the effects of the stress response on the GIT, therefore most enhanced recovery after surgery protocols involve TEB. The TEB failure rate, however, can be high, enticing practitioners to resort to truncal fascial plane blocks. In this educational article, we discuss the differences between visceral and somatic pain, their management and the clinical implications of these differences.

Postoperative Thoracic Epidural Analgesia: Adverse Events from a Single-Center Series of 3126 Patients

Purpose

Thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) has been shown to reduce postsurgical morbidity and mortality; nevertheless, major and minor complications can occur. We report our 10-year experience with TEA and incidence of complications.

Patients and Methods

Patients received continuous infusion TEA (0.2% ropivacaine and 2 µg ml⁻¹ fentanyl) to control postoperative pain. Every 8 hours, the acute pain service recorded the analgesia regimen and occurrence of side effects. The initial infusion rate was tapered daily in response to improvement in pain symptoms or occurrence of side effects.

Results

A total of 3126 patients received TEA. The median age was 65 years (range, 18–94) and the duration of catheter placement was 3.5 days (range, 2–8). Three major complications were identified (1:1042): two subarachnoid blocks and one epidural abscess which led to permanent sequela (1:3126). Minor complications were hypotension (4.8%), pruritus (4.4%), accidental catheter removal (3.7%), insertion site inflammation (2.5%), motor weakness (2.0%), postoperative nausea and vomiting (1.8%), catheter disconnection (1.9%), catheter occlusion (0.3%), post-dural puncture headache (0.5%), and catheter fragment retention (0.06%), which were the reasons for a 7.4% rate of early discontinuation of epidural analgesia. No occurrence of epidural hematoma, local anesthetic systemic toxicity, and cardiovascular/respiratory depression was recorded.

Conclusion

Postoperative TEA is an advanced technique that poses certain difficulties that can subvert its great potential. While serious complications were rare, minor complications occurred more often and affected the postoperative course negatively. A risk/benefit evaluation of each patient should be done before employing the technique.

Regional Catheters for Postoperative Pain Control: Review and Observational Data

Context

Perioperative analgesia is an essential but frequently underrated component of medical care. The purpose of this work is to describe the actual situation of surgical patients focusing on effective pain control by discarding prejudice against ‘aggressive’ measures.

Evidence Acquisition

This is a narrative review about continuous regional pain therapy with catheters in the postoperative period. Included are the most-relevant literature as well as own experiences.

Results

As evidenced by an abundance of studies, continuous regional/neuraxial blocks are the most effective approach for relief of severe postoperative pain. Catheters have to be placed in adequate anatomical positions and meticulously maintained as long as they remain in situ. Peripheral catheters in interscalene, femoral, and sciatic positions are effective in patients with surgery of upper and lower limbs. Epidural catheters are effective in abdominal and thoracic surgery, birth pain, and artery occlusive disease, whereas paravertebral analgesia may be beneficial in patients with unilateral approach of the truncus. However, failure rates are high, especially for epidural catheter analgesia. Unfortunately, many reports lack a comprehensive description of catheter application, management, failure rates and complications and thus cannot be compared with each other.

Conclusions

Effective control of postoperative pain is possible by the application of regional/neuraxial catheters, measures requiring dedication, skill, effort, and funds. Standard operating procedures contribute to minimizing complications and adverse side effects. Nevertheless, these methods are still not widely accepted by therapists, although more than 50% of postoperative patients suffer from ‘moderate, severe or worst’ pain.

A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Epidural Analgesia Versus Continuous Local Anesthetic Infiltration Via Abdominal Wound Catheter in Open Liver Resection

AIM

To compare outcomes following open liver resection (OLR) between patients receiving thoracic epidural (EP) versus abdominal wound catheters plus patient-controlled analgesia (AWC-PCA).

METHOD

Patients were randomized 1:1 to either EP or AWC-PCA within an enhanced recovery protocol. Primary outcome was length of stay (LOS), other variables included functional recovery, pain scores, peak flow, vasopressor and fluid requirements, and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Between April 2015 and November 2017, 83 patients were randomized to EP (n = 41) or AWC-PCA (n = 42). Baseline demographics were comparable. No difference was noted in LOS (EP 6 d (3-27) vs AWC-PCA 6 d (3-66), P = 0.886). Treatment failure was 20% in the EP group versus 7% in the AWC-PCA (P = 0.09). Preoperative anesthetic time was shorter in the AWC-PCA group, 49 minutes versus 62 minutes (P = 0.003). EP patients required more vasopressor support immediately postoperatively on day 0 (14% vs 54%, P = <0.001) and day 1 (5% vs 23%, P = 0.021). Pain scores were greater on day 0, afternoon of day 1 and morning of day 2 in the AWC-PCA group however were regarded as low at all time points. No other significant differences were noted in IV fluid requirements, nausea/sedation scores, days to open bowels, length of HDU, and postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

AWC-PCA was associated with reduced treatment failure and a reduced vasopressor requirement than EP up to 2 days postoperatively. While the use of AWC-PCA did not translate into a shorter LOS in this study, it simplified patient management after OLR. EP cannot be routinely recommended following open liver resections.

Delayed Epidural Catheter Removal: The Impact of Postoperative Coagulopathy

A retrospective analysis of 413 patients who received postoperative epidural analgesia under a standardized protocol found that 84 (20%) had a duration of epidural catheterization of greater than four days. The most common reasons were significant pain (n=64, 15%) and coagulopathy (n=26, 6%). Risk factor analysis for coagulopathy showed an odds ratio of 10.1 (95% confidence interval 4.2-24.5) for prolonged epidural catheterization among patients undergoing hepatectomy. Magnetic resonance imaging, performed in four patients with clinical signs suggestive of epidural haematoma, was negative for a space-occupying lesion in all cases. Eleven patients developed fever and clinical signs suggestive of epidural catheter-related infection, necessitating early catheter removal. Sixteen patients had persistent lower limb weakness at 24 hours after catheter removal. The signs soon resolved in all except two, one of whom had neuropathy related to intraoperative positioning and the other preoperative weakness. Accidental epidural catheter dislodgement occurred in 29 patients (7%) and is potentially hazardous if coagulopathy is unresolved. The risk-benefit ratio and factors complicating catheter removal, especially coagulopathy, should be considered when deciding whether to use epidural techniques.

Managing epidural catheters in critical care beds: An observation analysis in the Republic of Ireland

In certain hospitals, epidural analgesia is restricted to critical care beds. Due to critical care bed strain, it is likely that many patients are unable to avail of epidural analgesia. The aims of the study were to retrospectively review the number of patients admitted to critical care beds for epidural analgesia over a two-year period 2015–16, to determine the duration of epidural analgesia, to identify the average critical care bed occupancy during this period, to get updated information on the implementation of acute pain service in the Republic of Ireland and the availability of ward-based epidural analgesia. One hundred and sixty patients had a midline laparotomy, 40 of which had an epidural (25%). Forty-two patients were admitted to a critical care bed for epidural analgesia. Aside from epidural analgesia, 12% had other indications for ICU admission. Median duration epidural analgesia was 1.64 days (IQR 0.98–2.14 days). ICU bed occupancy rates were 88.7% in 2015 and 85.1% in 2016. Acute pain service and ward-based epidural analgesia were available in 46 and 42% of hospitals, respectively. Restricting epidural use to a critical care setting is likely to result in reduced access to epidural analgesia. The implementation of acute pain service and availability of ward-based epidural analgesia in the Republic of Ireland are suboptimal.

A Randomized Comparison Between Conventional and Waveform-Confirmed Loss of Resistance for Thoracic Epidural Blocks

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Epidural waveform analysis (EWA) provides a simple confirmatory adjunct for loss of resistance (LOR): when the needle tip is correctly positioned inside the epidural space, pressure measurement results in a pulsatile waveform. In this randomized trial, we compared conventional and EWA-confirmed LOR in 2 teaching centers. Our research hypothesis was that EWA-confirmed LOR would decrease the failure rate of thoracic epidural blocks.

METHODS

One hundred patients undergoing thoracic epidural blocks for thoracic surgery, abdominal surgery, or rib fractures were randomized to conventional LOR or EWA-LOR. The operator was allowed as many attempts as necessary to achieve a satisfactory LOR (by feel) in the conventional group. In the EWA-LOR group, LOR was confirmed by connecting the epidural needle to a pressure transducer using a rigid extension tubing. Positive waveforms indicated that the needle tip was positioned inside the epidural space. The operator was allowed a maximum of 3 different intervertebral levels to obtain a positive waveform. If waveforms were still absent at the third level, the operator simply accepted LOR as the technical end point. However, the patient was retained in the EWA-LOR group (intent-to-treat analysis).After achieving a satisfactory tactile LOR (conventional group), positive waveforms (EWA-LOR group), or a third intervertebral level with LOR but no waveform (EWA-LOR group), the operator administered a 4-mL test dose of lidocaine 2% with epinephrine 5 μg/mL. Fifteen minutes after the test dose, a blinded investigator assessed the patient for sensory block to ice.

RESULTS

Compared with LOR, EWA-LOR resulted in a lower rate of primary failure (2% vs 24%; P = 0.002). Subgroup analysis based on experience level reveals that EWA-LOR outperformed conventional LOR for novice (P = 0.001) but not expert operators. The performance time was longer in the EWA-LOR group (11.2 ± 6.2 vs 8.0 ± 4.6 minutes; P = 0.006). Both groups were comparable in terms of operator's level of expertise, depth of the epidural space, approach, and LOR medium. In the EWA-LOR group, operators obtained a pulsatile waveform with the first level attempted in 60% of patients. However, 40% of subjects required performance at a second or third level.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with its conventional counterpart, EWA-confirmed LOR results in a lower failure rate for thoracic epidural blocks (2% vs 24%) in our teaching centers. Confirmatory EWA provides significant benefits for inexperienced operators.

Clinical benefits, referral practice and cost implications of an in-hospital pain service: results of a service evaluation in a London teaching hospital

BACKGROUND

In-hospital pain services (IPS) are commonplace, but evidence of efficacy is inadequate, and patients' pain management in any hospital ward remains problematic. This service evaluation aimed to measure the effect of a contemporary IPS, its appropriate use and cost-efficacy.

METHODS

Records of 249 adults reviewed by the IPS in an inner London Teaching Hospital over an 8-month period were analysed for demographic data, interventions, workload and change in pain intensity measured by numerical rating scale (NRS). Non-parametric tests were used to evaluate differences between initial and final NRS. Spearman's rank correlation analysis was used to create a correlation matrix to evaluate associations between all identified independent variables with the change in NRS. All strongly correlated variables (ρ > 0.5) were subsequently included in a binary logistic regression analysis to identify predictors of pain resolution greater than 50% NRS and improvement rather than deterioration or no change in NRS. Finally, referral practice and cost of inappropriate referrals were estimated. Referrals were thought to be inappropriate when pain was not optimised by the referring team; they were identified using a set algorithm.

RESULTS

Initial median NRS and final median NRS were significantly different when a Wilcoxon signed-rank test was applied to the whole cohort; Z = -5.5 (p = 0.000). Subgroup analysis demonstrated no significant difference in the 'mild' pain group; z = -1.1 (p = 0.253). Regression analysis showed that for every unit increase in initial NRS, there was a 62% chance of general and a 33% chance of >50% improvement in final NRS. An estimated annual cost-saving potential of £1546 to £4558 was found in inappropriate referrals and patients experiencing no benefit from the service.

DISCUSSION

Results suggest that patients with moderate to severe pain benefit most from IPS input. Also pain management resources are often distributed inefficiently. Future research is required to develop algorithms for easy identification of potential treatment responders.

Epidural Hematoma and Abscess Related to Thoracic Epidural Analgesia: A Single-Center Study of 2,907 Patients Who Underwent Lung Surgery

OBJECTIVE

To report the major complications (epidural hematoma and abscess) of postoperative thoracic epidural analgesia in patients who underwent lung surgery.

DESIGN

Prospective, monocentric study.

SETTING

A university hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

All lung surgical patients who received postoperative thoracic epidural analgesia between November 2007 and November 2015.

INTERVENTIONS

Thoracic epidural analgesia for patients who underwent lung surgery.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

During the study period, data for 2,907 patients were recorded. The following 3 major complications were encountered: 1 case of epidural hematoma (0.34 case/1,000; 95% confidence interval 0.061-1.946), for which surgery was performed, and 2 cases of epidural abscesses (0.68 case/1,000; 95% confidence interval 0.189-2.505), which were treated medically.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk range of serious complications was moderate; only the patient who experienced an epidural hematoma also experienced permanent sequelae.

Epidural analgesia provides effective pain relief in patients undergoing open liver surgery

BACKGROUND

Epidural analgesia has been the reference standard for the provision of post-operative pain relief in patients recovering from major upper abdominal operations, including liver resections. However, a failure rate of 20-32% has been reported.

AIM

The aim of the study was to analyse the success rates of epidural analgesia and the outcome in patients who underwent liver surgery.

METHODS

We collected data from a prospectively maintained database of 70 patients who underwent open liver surgery by a bilateral subcostal incision during a period of 20 months (February 2009 to September 2010). Anaesthetic consultants with expertise in anaesthesia for liver surgery performed the epidural catheter placement. A dedicated pain team assessed the post-operative pain scores on moving or coughing using the Verbal Descriptor Scale. The outcome was measured in terms of epidural success rates, pain scores, post-operative chest infection and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

The study group included 43 males and 27 females. The indication for resection was liver secondaries (70%), primary tumours (19%) and benign disease (11%). While major (≥3 segments) and minor resections (≤ 2 segments) were performed in 44% and 47% respectively, 9% of patients were inoperable. Epidural analgesia was successful in 64 patients (91%). Bacterial colonisation of epidural tip was noticed in two patients. However, no neurological complications were encountered. Five patients (7%) had radiologically confirmed chest infection. Four patients (6%) developed wound infection. One patient died due to liver failure following extended right hepatectomy and cholecystectomy for gall bladder cancer. The median length of stay was 6 days (3-27 days). The extent of liver resection (p = 0.026) and post-operative chest infection (p = 0.012) had a significant influence on the length of stay.

CONCLUSION

Our experience shows that epidural analgesia is safe and effective in providing adequate pain relief following open liver surgery.

An institutional series and contemporary review of bacterial spinal epidural abscess: current status and future directions

OBJECT

Over the past decade, the incidence of bacterial spinal epidural abscess (SEA) has been increasing. In recent years, studies on this condition have been rampant in the literature. The authors present an 11-year institutional experience with SEA patients. Additionally, through an analysis of the contemporary literature, they provide an update on the challenging and controversial nature of this increasingly encountered condition.

METHODS

An electronic medical record database was used to retrospectively analyze patients admitted with SEA from January 2001 through February 2012. Presenting symptoms, concurrent conditions, microorganisms, diagnostic modalities, treatments, and outcomes were examined. For the literature search, PubMed was used as the search engine. Studies published from January 1, 2000, through December 31, 2013, were critically reviewed. Data from articles on methodology, demographics, treatments, and outcomes were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 106 patients with bacterial SEA were identified. The mean ± SD age of patients was 63.3 ± 13.7 years, and 65.1% of patients were male. Common presenting signs and symptoms were back pain (47.1%) and focal neurological deficits (47.1%). Over 75% of SEAs were in the thoracolumbar spine, and over 50% were ventral. Approximately 34% had an infectious origin. Concurrent conditions included diabetes mellitus (35.8%), vascular conditions (31.3%), and renal insufficiency/dialysis (30.2%). The most commonly isolated organism was Staphylococcus aureus (70.7%), followed by Streptococcus spp. (6.6%). Surgery along with antibiotics was the treatment for 63 (59.4%) patients. Surgery involved spinal fusion for 19 (30.2%), discectomy for 14 (22.2%), and corpectomy for 9 (14.3%). Outcomes were reported objectively; at a mean ± SD follow-up time of 8.4 ± 26 weeks (range 0-192 weeks), outcome was good for 60.7% of patients and poor for 39.3%. The literature search yielded 40 articles, and the authors discuss the result of these studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Bacterial SEA is an ominous condition that calls for early recognition. Neurological status at the time of presentation is a key factor in decision making and patient outcome. In recent years, surgical treatment has been advocated for patients with neurological deficits and failed response to medical therapy. Surgery should be performed immediately and before 36-72 hours from onset of neurological sequelae. However, the decision between medical or surgical intervention entails individual patient considerations including age, concurrent conditions, and objective findings. An evidence-based algorithm for diagnosis and treatment is suggested.

Frequency of colonization and isolated bacteria from the tip of epidural catheter implanted for postoperative analgesia

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The increased use of epidural analgesia with catheter leads to the need to demonstrate the safety of this method and know the incidence of catheter colonization, inserted postoperatively for epidural analgesia, and the bacteria responsible for this colonization.

METHODS

From November 2011 to April 2012, patients electively operated and maintained under epidural catheter for postoperative analgesia were evaluated. The catheter tip was collected for semiquantitative and qualitative microbiological analysis.

RESULTS

Of 68 cultured catheters, six tips (8.8%) had positive cultures. No patient had superficial or deep infection. The mean duration of catheter use was 43.45 h (18-118) (p=0.0894). The type of surgery (contaminated or uncontaminated), physical status of patients, and surgical time showed no relation with the colonization of catheters. Microorganisms isolated from the catheter tip were Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Sphingomonas paucimobilis.

CONCLUSION

Postoperative epidural catheter analgesia, under these study conditions, was found to be low risk for bacterial colonization in patients at surgical wards.

[Frequency of colonization and isolated bacteria from the tip of the epidural catheter implanted for postoperative analgesia]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The increased use of epidural analgesia with catheter leads to the need to demonstrate the safety of this method and know the incidence of catheter colonization, inserted postoperatively for epidural analgesia, and the bacteria responsible for this colonization.

METHODS

From November 2011 to April 2012, patients electively operated and maintained under epidural catheter for postoperative analgesia were evaluated. The catheter tip was collected for semiquantitative and qualitative microbiological analysis.

RESULTS

Of 68 cultured catheters, six tips (8.8%) had positive cultures. No patient had superficial or deep infection. The mean duration of catheter use was 43.45hours (18-118) (p=0.0894). The type of surgery (contaminated or uncontaminated), physical status of patients, and surgical time showed no relation with the colonization of catheters. Microorganisms isolated from the catheter tip were Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Sphingomonas paucimobilis.

CONCLUSION

Postoperative epidural catheter analgesia, under this study conditions, was found to be low risk for bacterial colonization in patients at surgical wards.

Consensus guidelines for enhanced recovery after gastrectomy: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society recommendations

BACKGROUND

Application of evidence-based perioperative care protocols reduces complication rates, accelerates recovery and shortens hospital stay. Presently, there are no comprehensive guidelines for perioperative care for gastrectomy.

METHODS

An international working group within the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society assembled an evidence-based comprehensive framework for optimal perioperative care for patients undergoing gastrectomy. Data were retrieved from standard databases and personal archives. Evidence and recommendations were classified according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system and were discussed until consensus was reached within the group. The quality of evidence was rated 'high', 'moderate', 'low' or 'very low'. Recommendations were graded as 'strong' or 'weak'.

RESULTS

The available evidence has been summarized and recommendations are given for 25 items, eight of which contain procedure-specific evidence. The quality of evidence varies substantially and further research is needed for many issues to improve the strength of evidence and grade of recommendations.

CONCLUSION

The present evidence-based framework provides comprehensive advice on optimal perioperative care for the patient undergoing gastrectomy and facilitates multi-institutional prospective cohort registries and adequately powered randomized trials for further research.

Early postoperative analgesic effects of a single epidural injection of ropivacaine administered preoperatively in posterior lumbar interbody spinal arthrodesis: a pilot randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Despite the suitable characteristics of ropivacaine as an epidural analgesic agent, such as better preservation of motor function and less neurotoxicity, we are aware of no data on its clinical application in pain management following lumbar spine surgery. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the preemptive analgesic effects and safety of a single epidural injection of ropivacaine during lumbar arthrodesis.

METHODS

We performed a randomized, double-blinded, intention-to-treat study. Patients with planned one-level posterior lumbar interbody arthrodesis were randomly assigned to either the injection group (n = 32) or the control group (n = 34). The injection group received a 10-mL epidural injection of 0.1% ropivacaine twenty minutes before the skin incision at the planned vertebral level, and the control group received an epidural injection of 10 mL of 0.9% saline solution. A numeric rating scale (from 0 to 10) was measured at seven time points after surgery (at two, four, eight, twelve, twenty-four, and forty-eight hours and at the time of discharge), and the frequency of pushed-button patient-controlled analgesia and total fentanyl consumption were assessed at similar time points (up to two, up to four, up to eight, up to twelve, up to twenty-four, and up to forty-eight hours after surgery). Postoperative nausea and vomiting, the duration of the hospital stay, and the Likert satisfaction score at the time of discharge were evaluated.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the two groups preoperatively. The numeric rating scale score was higher until twelve hours (p < 0.05) and the frequency of button pushes was higher at every time point except eight to twelve hours (p < 0.05) in the control group as compared with the injection group. Fentanyl consumption until eight to twelve hours (p < 0.05) and total consumption (p < 0.001) at discharge were higher in the control group. There were no differences between the two groups in terms of postoperative nausea and vomiting, the duration of hospital stay, or the mean satisfaction score, and no transient motor weakness was seen in relation to epidural injection of ropivacaine.

CONCLUSIONS

A single-dose epidural injection of 0.1% ropivacaine before lumbar spine surgery is effective for reducing early postoperative pain without related complications such as transient motor weakness.

Patient-controlled Epidural Analgesia with Ropivacaine and Fentanyl: Experience with 2,276 Surgical Patients

Background

Good postoperative pain control is an important part of adequate postoperative care. Patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) provided better postoperative analgesia compared to other conventional analgesic methods, but several risks have been observed as well. We therefore surveyed the efficacy and safety of PCEA in this retrospective observational study.

Methods

We analyzed collected data on 2,276 elective surgical patients who received PCEA with ropivacaine and fentanyl. Patients were assessed by a PCA service team in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU), at 1-6 h, 6-24 h, and 24-48 h postoperatively for adequate pain control. The presence of PCEA-related adverse events was also assessed.

Results

Numerical pain score (median [interquartile range]) were 3 [1-4], 5 [4-7], 4 [3-5], and 3 [3-5] in the PACU, at 1-6 h, 6-24 h, and 24-48 h postoperatively. Median pain scores in patients underwent major abdominal or thoracic surgery were higher than other surgical procedure in the PACU, at 1-6 h after surgery. Nausea and vomiting (20%) and numbness and motor weakness (15%) were revealed as major PCEA-related adverse events during the postoperative 48 h period. There were 329 patients (14%) for whom PCEA was ceased within 48 h following surgery.

Conclusions

Our data suggest that the use of PCEA provides proper analgesia in the postoperative 48 h period after a wide variety of surgical procedures and that is associated with few serious complications. However, more careful pain management and sustainable PCEA monitoring considering the type of surgical procedure undergone is needed in patients with PCEA.

Randomized clinical trial of local infiltration plus patient-controlled opiate analgesia vs. epidural analgesia following liver resection surgery

OBJECTIVES

Epidural analgesia is recommended for the provision of analgesia following major abdominal surgery. Continuous local anaesthetic wound infiltration may be an effective alternative. A prospective randomized trial was undertaken to compare these two methods following open liver resection. The primary outcome was length of time required to fulfil criteria for discharge from hospital.

METHODS

Patients undergoing open liver resection were randomized to receive either epidural (EP group) or local anaesthetic wound infiltration plus patient-controlled opiate analgesia (WI group) for the first 2 days postoperatively. All other care followed a standardized enhanced recovery protocol. Time to fulfil discharge criteria, pain scores, physical activity measurements and complications were recorded.

RESULTS

Between August 2009 and July 2010, 65 patients were randomized to EP (n = 32) or WI (n = 33). The mean time required to fulfil discharge criteria was 4.5 days (range: 2.5-63.5 days) in the WI group and 6.0 days (range: 3.0-42.5 days) in the EP group (P = 0.044). During the first 48 h following surgery, pain scores were significantly lower in the EP group both at rest and on movement. Resting pain scores within both groups were rated as mild (range: 0-3). There was no significant difference between the groups in time to first mobilization or overall complication rate (48.5% in the WI group vs. 58.1% in the EP group; P = 0.443).

CONCLUSIONS

Local anaesthetic wound infiltration combined with patient-controlled opiate analgesia reduces the length of time required to fulfil criteria for discharge from hospital compared with epidural analgesia following open liver resection. Epidural analgesia provides superior analgesia, but does not confer benefits in terms of faster mobilization or recovery.

Epidemiology of central nervous system infection

In cases of central nervous system infection, it is crucial for the neuroradiologist to provide an accurate differential diagnosis of the possible pathogens involved so that treating physicians can be aided in the choice of empiric therapy. This approach requires the radiologist to be aware of local epidemiology and have knowledge of infectious agents that are endemic to their area of practice. This article reviews and discusses the changing epidemiology of pathogens most often observed in meningitis, brain abscess, epidural abscess, postoperative infections, and human immunodeficiency virus infection.

Effectiveness of epidural analgesia following open liver resection

OBJECTIVES

Epidural analgesia is often considered the reference standard for pain relief following major abdominal surgery; however, the provision of analgesia in the context of liver surgery raises unique challenges. This study investigated the effectiveness of analgesia and the postoperative course of patients who did or did not receive epidural analgesia following liver resection.

METHODS

Data were collected retrospectively on 177 patients who underwent open liver resection between June 2007 and June 2009. Patients were divided into two groups consisting, respectively, of those who received epidural analgesia (Epidural group, n= 148) and those who did not (No-Epidural group, n= 29).

RESULTS

In the Epidural group, 27 patients (18%) required i.v. opiate analgesia on the day of surgery (DoS) or the first postoperative day (POD1). The Epidural group received significantly more i.v. colloid solution on the DoS (median: 1500 ml vs. 750 ml, range: 0-12,000 ml vs. 0-3500 ml; P= 0.004) and POD1 (median: 0 ml vs. 0 ml, range: 0-5000 ml vs. 0-1000 ml; P= 0.018), and total fluid on the DoS and POD1 combined (median: 6522 ml vs. 5453 ml, range: 2150-21 300 ml vs. 2875-15,886 ml; P= 0.032).

CONCLUSIONS

Epidural analgesia provided inadequate postoperative pain relief in approximately 20% of liver resection patients and was associated with the administration of significantly greater volumes of i.v. colloid solution.

Colonização e infecção em pacientes com cateter peridural não tunelizado para analgesia

OBJETIVO: Correlacionar a colonização e a infecção no paciente em uso do cateter peridural não tunelizado para analgesia. MÉTODOS: Estudo prospectivo realizado com 109 pacientes clínicos ou cirúrgicos e com tempo de permanência do cateter >72 horas em um hospital privado do Município de São Paulo. A cultura de vigilância foi realizada com base na coleta da ponta do cateter peridural, swab pericateter e hemocultura periférica. RESULTADOS: Dentre os 109 acompanhados 109 pacientes, 106 (97,2%) foram cirúrgicos e 3 (2,8%) clínicos. O tempo de permanência do cateter variou de 3 a 18 dias e a taxa de colonização foi de 11%. Doze pacientes apresentaram colonização do cateter peridural e o principal micro-organismo isolado foi o Staphylococcus coagulase-negativa. CONCLUSÕES: A cultura positiva do cateter peridural constituiu um fator preditor para a colonização, porém nenhum paciente com positividade evoluiu com infecção.

The safety of concurrent administration of opioids via epidural and intravenous routes for postoperative pain in pediatric oncology patients

Supplementation of epidural opioid analgesia with intravenous opioids is usually avoided because of concern about respiratory depression. However, the choice of adjunct analgesic agents for pediatric oncology patients is limited. Antipyretic drugs may mask fever in neutropenic patients, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents may exert antiplatelet effects and interact with chemotherapeutic agents. We examined the safety of concurrent use of epidural and intravenous opioids in a consecutive series of 117 epidural infusions in pediatric patients and compared our findings to those reported by other investigators. We observed a 0.85% rate of clinically significant respiratory complications. The single adverse event was associated with an error in dosage. In our experience, the supplementation of epidural opioid analgesia with intravenous opioids has been a safe method of postoperative pain control for pediatric patients with cancer.

Impact of audit systems on the quality of care

Audit and other means of scrutiny are an essential part of professional clinical practice. However, if we and our patients are to benefit fully from audit, its processes must be supported by the necessary organizational changes to allow improvements to be made to our systems of care.

An Analysis of Postoperative Epidural Analgesia Failure by Computed Tomography Epidurography

In this prospective study involving 125 patients, we analyzed epidural analgesia failure after major abdominal surgery using computed tomography (CT) epidurographies to compare the incidence of dislodgement of epidural catheters and leakage of solution from the epidural space between two groups of patients: patients with successful or failed epidural analgesia. Our hypothesis was that the incidence of dislodgement and leakage should be low when epidural analgesia is successful. A thoracic epidural catheter was inserted before general anesthesia and secured by subcutaneous tunneling. Bupivacaine (0.25%) was administered during surgery followed by continuous epidural analgesia with 0.125% bupivacaine (10 mL/h) and morphine (0.25 mg/h) for 48 h. Failure was defined as a visual analog scale pain score at rest more than 30 mm and/or interruption of epidural analgesia before 48 h for any reason. When failure was not due to unintentionally withdrawn, kinked catheters or adverse events (n = 11), a CT scan with contrast injection was performed. Control CT scans were also performed in patients with adequate analgesia (i.e., the success group). The incidence of failure was 24.8% (n = 31). CT scans in the failure group (n = 20) showed seven patients with catheters outside the epidural space, nine with normal distribution, one with unilateral spread, and three with leakage of solution outside the epidural space. In the success group, CT scans (n = 19) showed 11 patients with normal distribution, five with unilateral spread, and three with leakage. We conclude that the major cause of epidural analgesia failure was dislodgment of the catheter. CT scans were mostly useful for detecting leakage of injectate, which may be the early phase of dislodgment.

Clinical implication of routine bacterial culture from epidural catheter tips in postoperative cancer patients: a prospective study

We conducted a prospective study to determine the epidural tip culture pattern and its clinical implication in postoperative cancer patients. All patients scheduled to undergo various cancer surgeries requiring epidural analgesia were included. Epidural catheter tips were sent for culture on removal. Of the 466 epidural catheter tips sent for culture, 27 showed a positive culture (5.7%). The commonest organism identified was Staphylococcus aureus. There were no signs of local or epidural space infection in any of the patients. The rates of epidural catheter tip cultures in cancer patients are comparable to those in the general patients and the presence of a positive tip culture is not a predictor of epidural space infection. Hence, we recommend that even in cancer patients, routine culture of epidural catheters is not advisable, provided strict asepsis is maintained at the time of insertion, and patients are constantly monitored for early signs of epidural infection.

Emerging techniques in the management of acute pain: epidural analgesia

Epidural analgesia, often using opioids intraoperatively and postoperatively, is widely accepted as a valuable modality for perioperative pain management. In this review I present data from meta-analyses and recently published trials that evaluate the perioperative use of opioids administered epidurally or parenterally (as-needed or by patient-controlled analgesia) and their effect on outcome. Published effects of perioperative epidural techniques on cardiac and pulmonary function are reviewed. Clinical and practical issues associated with epidural anesthesia and analgesia include the existence of analgesic gaps (often related to technical difficulties with the pump or use of an indwelling catheter), the occurrence of hypotension, and compatibility with anticoagulation therapy. A new treatment option, a single epidural injection of morphine for continuous perioperative analgesia (DepoDur; Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc, Chadds Ford, PA), may reduce some of these problems. Data from recent clinical studies are presented.

Spinal epidural abscess: clinical presentation, management, and outcome

BACKGROUND

We sought to describe the clinical characteristics of patients with spinal epidural abscess and to relate presentation and treatment to short-term clinical and neurologic outcome.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the records and radiographic images of all patients admitted to our institution with a diagnosis of spinal epidural abscess between January 1995 and March 2001.

RESULTS

Thirty males and 18 females were admitted with spinal epidural abscess. Median age was 61 years (range, 31-84). Twenty-three of 48 patients were febrile at presentation and the mean white blood cell (WBC) count was 15.5 (range, 4.0-38.7). Twenty-seven patients presented with motor deficits, 17 with pain alone, 2 with sepsis, 1 with dysphagia, and 1 incidentally on spinal imaging. Intravenous drug abuse was the most common risk factor (13 patients) followed by the presence of nonspinal infection, including endocarditis (10 patients). Blood cultures were positive in 29 patients. Staphylococcus aureus was the most common organism cultured from abscesses. Collections were located in the cervical spine in 11 patients, cervicothoracic in 4, thoracic in 7, thoracolumbar in 4, and lumbosacral in 22. One patient harbored both cervical and lumbar epidural abscesses. Twenty-three patients initially received nonoperative therapy with antibiotics alone; 25 underwent urgent surgery. Eleven patients initially treated with antibiotics eventually deteriorated and required delayed surgery. Patients receiving antibiotics suffered a significantly greater number of unfavorable outcomes (clinical deterioration or death) than those in the early surgical group (P < 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with spinal epidural abscess may be normothermic and have normal WBC counts. Urgent surgery was more likely to be offered to patients presenting with neurologic deficits than with pain alone. Patients treated without early surgery were significantly more likely to deteriorate and suffer poor outcomes.

Incidência de infecção em pacientes com cateter peridural tunelizado

O cateter peridural tunelizado como via de administração de opiáceos vem sendo utilizado desde o início de 1980. Pacientes com dor crônica, que não obtêm alívio com medicamentos por outras vias, são muito beneficiados com infusão de opiáceo associado a um anestésico local por via peridural. Entretanto, ainda existem dúvidas sobre a eficácia do método, no manuseio e, conseqüentemente, quanto ao risco de infecção e outras complicações. Sendo a equipe de enfermagem fundamental para efetivar o tratamento para o alívio da dor, esse estudo propõe demonstrar como manter a técnica segura. Foram acompanhados 27 pacientes com dor crônica entre 2002 e 2004, que utilizaram o cateter peridural por 18 dias em média, implantados em nível torácico ou lombar. Não houve complicações como abcesso peridural, meningite ou hematoma peridural. A satisfação dos pacientes quanto a analgesia foi evidente.

Incidence and Characteristics of Naloxone Use in Postoperative Pain Management: A Critical Examination of Naloxone Use as a Potential Quality Measure

The administration of naloxone may be an important monitor of the quality and safety of postoperative pain management. However, studies that support the use of naloxone as a quality measure are absent. The purposes of this study are to determine the incidence and factors associated with naloxone administration in the postoperative setting and to critically examine naloxone as a potential quality measure. Participants included all postoperative adult inpatients at an academic hospital who received naloxone and an equal number of matched control patients who did not receive naloxone during the calendar year 2003. Medical record audits were performed to examine patient demographics, relevant medical history, postoperatively administered analgesics and central nervous system depressants, documented sedation and respiratory assessments, reason provided for naloxone administration, and patient outcome. Naloxone was administered to .53% (56/10,511) of all adult inpatient postoperative patients. Patients who received naloxone were significantly older and received more central nervous system depressants than cohorts. No significant differences were found in comorbidities, route of opioid administration, or amount of opioids taken by the two groups. Reversal of excessive opioid-induced sedation was the primary reason provided for naloxone administration. However, 25% of the patients were later determined to have a new diagnosis that contributed to sedation. Examination of naloxone administration proved useful in uncovering deficits in structures and processes of care. However, caution is warranted when using naloxone as a quality measure to avoid the implication that higher use indicates opioid analgesic over-treatment or error.

Epidural Analgesia for Postoperative Pain

Epidural analgesia provides superior analgesia compared with other postoperative analgesic techniques. Additionally, perioperative epidural analgesia confers physiologic benefits, which may potentially decrease perioperative complications and improve postoperative outcome. However, there are many variables (eg, choice of analgesics, catheter-incision congruency, and duration of analgesia) that may influence the efficacy of epidural analgesia. In addition, the use of epidural analgesia should be evaluated on an individual basis because there are risks associated with this technique.

Respiratory and haemodynamic effects of acute postoperative pain management: evidence from published data

BACKGROUND

This study examines the evidence from published data concerning the adverse respiratory and haemodynamic effects of three analgesic techniques after major surgery; i.m. analgesia, patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), and epidural analgesia.

METHODS

A MEDLINE search of the literature was conducted for publications concerned with the management of postoperative pain. Information relating to variables indicative of respiratory depression and of hypotension was extracted from these studies. Over 800 original papers and reviews were identified. Of these papers, 212 fulfilled the inclusion criteria but only 165 provided usable data on adverse effects. Pooled data obtained from these studies, which represent the experience of a total of nearly 20,000 patients, form the basis of this study.

RESULTS

There was considerable variability between studies in the criteria used for defining respiratory depression and hypotension. The overall mean (95% CI) incidence of respiratory depression of the three analgesic techniques was: 0.3 (0.1-1.3)% using requirement for naloxone as an indicator; 1.1 (0.7-1.7)% using hypoventilation as an indicator; 3.3 (1.4-7.6)% using hypercarbia as an indicator; and 17.0 (10.2-26.9)% using oxygen desaturation as an indicator. For i.m. analgesia, the mean (95% CI) reported incidence of respiratory depression varied between 0.8 (0.2-2.5) and 37.0 (22.6-45.9)% using hypoventilation and oxygen desaturation, respectively, as indicators. For PCA, the mean (95% CI) reported incidence of respiratory depression varied between 1.2 (0.7-1.9) and 11.5 (5.6-22.0)%, using hypoventilation and oxygen desaturation, respectively, as indicators. For epidural analgesia, the mean (95% CI) reported incidence of respiratory depression varied between 1.1 (0.6-1.9) and 15.1 (5.6-34.8)%, using hypoventilation and oxygen desaturation, respectively, as indicators. The mean (95% CI) reported incidence of hypotension for i.m. analgesia was 3.8 (1.9-7.5)%, for PCA 0.4 (0.1-1.9)%, and for epidural analgesia 5.6 (3.0-10.2)%. Whereas the incidence of respiratory depression decreased over the period 1980-99, the incidence of hypotension did not.

CONCLUSIONS

Assuming a mixture of analgesic techniques, Acute Pain Services should expect an incidence of respiratory depression, as defined by a low ventilatory frequency, of less than 1%, and an incidence of hypotension related to analgesic technique of less than 5%.

Bacterial contamination of epidural catheters: microbiological examination of 502 epidural catheters used for postoperative analgesia

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To investigate the frequency of bacterial colonization of epidural catheters used for postoperative pain treatment longer than 24 hours in abdominal, thoracic, or trauma surgery patients.

DESIGN

Retrospective study.

SETTING

Intermediate care facility and general ward of a university hospital.

PATIENTS

502 patients who received epidural catheters after abdominal, thoracic, or vascular surgery at our institution from January 1996 to December 2000.

INTERVENTIONS

Placement of an epidural catheter, which was used for postoperative pain treatment, for more than 24 hours. The puncture site dressing included saturation each day with povidone-iodine.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Microbiologic monitoring of epidural catheter tips and daily examination of puncture sites with regard to signs of inflammation took place. Four times daily patients were examined to check adequacy of pain treatment and neurologic deficits. Catheter tip cultures were positive in 29 patients (5.8%). Staphylococcus epidermidis was isolated in 22 cases (76%). No case of spinal epidural abscess was observed within 6 months after epidural catheterization. The average catheterization time was 5 days (quartile range: 4 to 6 days).

CONCLUSIONS

Meticulous management ensures a relatively low level of bacterial contamination in epidural catheters applied for postoperative pain treatment greater than 5 days. Contamination rarely leads to spinal epidural infection.

Outcome of epidural catheterization for delivery of analgesics in horses: 43 cases (1998-2001)

OBJECTIVE

To determine reasons for epidural catheter placement among horses examined at a veterinary teaching hospital, efficacy of epidural administration of analgesics, duration of catheter placement, reasons for catheter removal, and complications encountered.

DESIGN

Retrospective study.

ANIMALS

43 horses.

PROCEDURE

Medical records were reviewed.

RESULTS

A total of 50 epidural catheters were placed in the 43 horses. Underlying conditions included fractures, lacerations, septic arthritis, myositis, perineal injuries, and cellulitis. Horses ranged from 2 to 21 years old and weighed between 365 and 795 kg (803 and 1,749 lb). Median duration of catheter placement was 96 hours (range, 1.5 to 480 hours). The response to epidural drug administration was reported as positive in 34 horses and negative in 4. There was no apparent response in 2 horses, and response could not be determined in 3. Three temporary patient-related complications associated with epidural catheter administration were observed. Technical problems associated with the epidural catheters included dislodgement of the catheter itself (7 catheters) or of the adapter or filter (5), obstruction (5), and leakage (5). Twenty-two catheters were removed because of resolution of the underlying condition, and 10 were removed because of complications. For 6 catheters, the reason for catheter removal was not recorded. The remaining 12 catheters were in place when the horses were euthanatized.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Results suggest that epidural catheterization can be used successfully for repeated epidural delivery of analgesics and anesthetics in horses with various clinical conditions. Complications associated with epidural catheters or epidural drug administration were infrequent and transient.