Pain Relief for Children after Adenotonsillectomy

A scoping review of randomized clinical trials for pain management in pediatric tonsillectomy and adenotonsillectomy

Objectives

To examine the volume, topics, and reporting trends in the published literature of randomized clinical trials for pharmacologic pain management of pediatric tonsillectomy and adenotonsillectomy and to identify areas requiring further research.

Data Sources

PubMed (National Library of Medicine and National Institutes of Health), Scopus (Elsevier), CINAHL (EBSCO), and Cochrane Library (Wiley).

Methods

A systematic search of four databases was conducted. Only randomized controlled or comparison trials examining pain improvement with a pharmacologic intervention in pediatric tonsillectomy or adenotonsillectomy were included. Data collected included demographics, pain-related outcomes, sedation scores, nausea/vomiting, postoperative bleeding, types of drug comparisons, modes of administration, timing of administration, and identities of the investigated drugs.

Results

One hundred and eighty-nine studies were included for analysis. Most studies included validated pain scales, with the majority using visual-assisted scales (49.21%). Fewer studies examined pain beyond 24 h postoperation (24.87%), and few studies included a validated sedation scale (12.17%). Studies have compared several different dimensions of pharmacologic treatment, including different drugs, timing of administration, modes of administration, and dosages. Only 23 (12.17%) studies examined medications administered postoperatively, and only 29 (15.34%) studies examined oral medications. Acetaminophen only had four self-comparisons.

Conclusion

Our work provides the first scoping review of pain and pediatric tonsillectomy. With drug safety profiles considered, the literature does not have enough data to determine which treatment regimen provides superior pain control in pediatric tonsillectomy. Even common drugs like acetaminophen and ibuprofen require further research for optimizing the treatment of posttonsillectomy pain. The heterogeneity in study design and comparisons weakens the conclusions of potential systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Future directions include more noninferiority studies of unique comparisons and more studies examining oral medications given postoperatively.

Does Montelukast Have an Effect on Post-tonsillectomy Pain Control in Children? A Randomized Trial Study

OBJECTIVE

Tonsillectomy surgery is associated with severe postoperative pain that usually requires analgesics including opioids. Pain control is still a big problem after tonsillectomy surgery. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of preemptive analgesia using montelukast for pediatric post-tonsillectomy pain management. This is the first-time use of montelukast in post-tonsillectomy pain.

STUDY DESIGN

Double-blind, controlled-randomized study.

SETTINGS

University teaching and research hospital.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

A total of 60 children, aged 5 to 15 years, American Society of Anesthesiologist class I-II, scheduled for elective tonsillectomy were enrolled in this clinical trial study. The patients were randomized into 2 groups: the montelukast group (group M, n = 30) and control group (group C, n = 30). Group M recieved an oral montelukast tablet and group C recieved placebo at 2400pm on the morning before surgery. Post-tonsillectomy pain was evaluated with the Wong-Baker FACES Scale during the 24 hours after surgery. Patients' intraoperative hemodynamic parameters and intraoperative and postoperative complications were recorded.

RESULTS

There were statistically significant differences between group C and group M for Wong-Baker FACES pain rating scale scores (P < .05). In the 24 hours after surgery, the total number of patients using rescue analgesics was higher in group C than in group M, and the difference was statistically significant (P < .001). There was no significant difference in demographic parameters (P > .05). There were no significant differences in postoperative nausea and vomiting, otalgia, trismus, fever, or halitosis between the groups (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

Preemptive montelukast can be used safely to reduce the serious pain caused by tonsillectomy in children.

Tramadol for postoperative pain treatment in children

BACKGROUND

According to current recommendations a multimodal approach is believed to be the gold standard for postoperative pain treatment in children. However, several surveys in the last few years demonstrated that postoperative pain in children is still a serious problem, mainly because opioids are avoided. One of the reasons for this is the fear of severe adverse events following opioid administration. Tramadol is a weak mu-opioid agonist and inhibits reuptake of noradrenaline and serotonin (5HT). Because of a relatively wide therapeutic window and a ceiling effect with a lower risk for severe adverse events (for example respiratory depression) tramadol is a widely used opioid in children. However, the exact efficacy and occurrence of adverse events following tramadol (in comparison with placebo or other opioids) for postoperative pain treatment in children and adolescents are currently not clear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and side effect profile of tramadol for postoperative pain relief in children and adolescents undergoing different surgical procedures.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 6), MEDLINE via PubMed (January 1966 to July 2014) and EMBASE via Ovid (January 1947 to July 2014). There were no restrictions regarding language or date of publication. The reference lists of all included trials were checked for additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled clinical trials investigating the perioperative administration of tramadol compared to placebo or other opioids for postoperative pain treatment in children and adolescents were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently assessed the study eligibility, performed the data extraction and assessed the risk of bias of included trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty randomised controlled trials involving 1170 patients were included in this systematic review. The overall risk of bias in included trials was assessed as unclear, because concealment of allocation processes and blinding of outcome assessors were poorly described. Due to inconsistent outcome reporting, data from 17 included trials could be pooled for some endpoints only. Eight trials compared tramadol administration with placebo and five trials found that the need for rescue analgesia in the postoperative care unit (PACU) was reduced in children receiving tramadol (RR 0.40; 95% CI 0.20 to 0.78; low quality evidence). Only one trial investigated the number of patients with moderate to severe pain, but a non-validated pain scale was used (very low quality evidence). Four trials compared morphine with tramadol administration. There was no clear evidence of difference in the need for rescue analgesia in the PACU (RR 1.25; 95% CI 0.83 to 1.89; low quality evidence) with tramadol compared with morphine. No trials could be pooled for the outcome 'number of patients with moderate to severe pain'. Three trials were included for the comparison of tramadol with nalbuphine. There was no clear evidence for the need for rescue analgesia in the PACU (RR 0,63; 95% CI 0.16 to 2.45; low quality evidence). Only one trial reported the number of patients with moderate to severe pain, but used a non-validated pain scale (very low quality evidence). Two out of six included trials, which compared pethidine with tramadol, reported the number of children with a need for rescue analgesia within the PACU and showed no clear evidence (RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.43 to 2.02; very low quality evidence). Two trials reported the number of patients with moderate to severe pain and showed a lower RR in patients treated with tramadol (RR 0.64; 95% CI 0.36 to 1.16; low quality evidence). Only one trial was included, which compared tramadol with fentanyl, reporting the number of patients with the need for rescue analgesia (very low quality evidence). Generally, adverse events were poorly reported. Most data could be pooled for the comparison with placebo focusing on the RR for postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in the postoperative care unit and 24 h postoperation. Children treated with tramadol, compared to placebo, did not show clear evidence of benefit for PONV in the postoperative care unit (RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.28 to 2.52; moderate quality evidence) and 24 h postoperation (RR 0.78; 95% CI 0.54 to 1.12; moderate quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The overall evidence regarding tramadol for postoperative pain in children is currently low or very low and should be interpreted with caution due to small studies and methodological problems (different validated and non-validated pain scales with different pain triggers, missing sample size calculations and missing intention-to-treat analysis). Nevertheless, we demonstrated that tramadol administration might provide appropriate analgesia when compared to placebo; this is based on results showing reduced rescue analgesia in children treated with tramadol compared to placebo. In contrast, the evidence regarding the comparison with other opioids (for example morphine) was uncertain. Adverse events were only poorly reported, so an accurate risk-benefit analysis was not possible.

Effects of sevoflurane versus other general anaesthesia on emergence agitation in children

BACKGROUND

Sevoflurane is an inhaled volatile anaesthetic that is widely used in paediatric anaesthetic practice. Since its introduction, postoperative behavioural disturbance known as emergence agitation (EA) or emergence delirium (ED) has been recognized as a problem that may occur during recovery from sevoflurane anaesthesia. For the purpose of this systematic review, EA has been used to describe this clinical entity. A child with EA may be restless, may cause self-injury or may disrupt the dressing, surgical site or indwelling devices, leading to the potential for parents to be dissatisfied with their child's anaesthetic. To prevent such outcomes, the child may require pharmacological or physical restraint. Sevoflurane may be a major contributing factor in the development of EA. Therefore, an evidence-based understanding of the risk/benefit profile regarding sevoflurane compared with other general anaesthetic agents and adjuncts would facilitate its rational and optimal use.

OBJECTIVES

To compare sevoflurane with other general anaesthetic (GA) agents, with or without pharmacological or non-pharmacological adjuncts, with regard to risk of EA in children during emergence from anaesthesia. The primary outcome was risk of EA; secondary outcome was agitation score.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases from the date of inception to 19 January 2013: CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) (EBSCOhost), Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews (EBMR) and the Web of Science, as well as the reference lists of other relevant articles and online trial registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized (or quasi-randomized) controlled trials investigating children < 18 years of age presenting for general anaesthesia with or without surgical intervention. We included any study in which a sevoflurane anaesthetic was compared with any other GA, and any study in which researchers investigated adjuncts (pharmacological or non-pharmacological) to sevoflurane anaesthesia compared with no adjunct or placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently searched the databases, decided on inclusion eligibility of publications, ascertained study quality and extracted data. They then resolved differences between their results by discussion. Data were entered into RevMan 5.2 for analyses and presentation. Comparisons of the risk of EA were presented as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Sevoflurane is treated as the control anaesthesia in this review. Sensitivity analyses were performed as appropriate, to exclude studies with a high risk of bias and to investigate heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 158 studies involving 14,045 children. Interventions to prevent EA fell into two broad groups. First, alternative GA compared with sevoflurane anaesthesia (69 studies), and second, use of an adjunct with sevoflurane anaesthesia versus sevoflurane without an adjunct (100 studies). The overall risk of bias in included studies was low. The overall Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group (GRADE) assessment of the quality of the evidence was moderate to high. A wide range of EA scales were used, as were different levels of cutoff, to determine the presence or absence of EA. Some studies involved children receiving potentially inadequate or no analgesia intraoperatively during painful procedures.Halothane (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.63, 3534 participants, high quality of evidence) and propofol anaesthesia were associated with a lower risk of EA than sevoflurane anaesthesia. Propofol was effective when used throughout anaesthesia (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.51, 1098 participants, high quality of evidence) and when used only during the maintenance phase of anaesthesia after sevoflurane induction (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.76, 738 participants, high quality of evidence). No clear evidence was found of an effect on risk of EA of desflurane (RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.92 to 2.31, 408 participants, moderate quality of evidence) or isoflurane (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.23, 379 participants, moderate quality of evidence) versus sevoflurane.Compared with no adjunct, effective adjuncts for reducing the risk of EA during sevoflurane anaesthesia included dexmedetomidine (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.47, 851 participants, high quality of evidence), clonidine (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.66, 739 participants, high quality of evidence), opioids, in particular fentanyl (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.50, 1247 participants, high quality of evidence) and a bolus of propofol (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.89, 394 participants, moderate quality of evidence), ketamine (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.69, 231 participants, moderate quality of evidence) or midazolam (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.81, 116 participants, moderate quality of evidence) at the end of anaesthesia. Midazolam oral premedication (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.12, 370 participants, moderate quality of evidence) and parental presence at emergence (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.60, 180 participants, moderate quality of evidence) did not reduce the risk of EA.One or more factors designated as high risk of bias were noted in less than 10% of the included studies. Sensitivity analyses of these studies showed no clinically relevant changes in the risk of EA. Heterogeneity was significant with respect to these comparisons: halothane; clonidine; fentanyl; midazolam premedication; propofol 1 mg/kg bolus at end; and ketamine 0.25 mg/kg bolus at end of anaesthesia. With investigation of heterogeneity, the only clinically relevant changes to findings were seen in the context of potential pain, namely, the setting of adenoidectomy/adenotonsillectomy (propofol bolus; midazolam premedication) and the absence of a regional block (clonidine).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Propofol, halothane, alpha-2 agonists (dexmedetomidine, clonidine), opioids (e.g. fentanyl) and ketamine reduce the risk of EA compared with sevoflurane anaesthesia, whereas no clear evidence shows an effect for desflurane, isoflurane, midazolam premedication and parental presence at emergence. Therefore anaesthetists can consider several effective strategies to reduce the risk of EA in their clinical practice. Future studies should ensure adequate analgesia in the control group, for which pain may be a contributing or confounding factor in the diagnosis of EA. Regardless of the EA scale used, it would be helpful for study authors to report the risk of EA, so that this might be included in future meta-analyses. Researchers should also consider combining effective interventions as a multi-modal approach to further reduce the risk of EA.

Comparison of pre-emptive tonsillar lodge infiltration with ropivacaine versus intravenous tramadol in pediatric tonsillectomies: a randomized placebo-controlled study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the placebo controlled effect of pre-emptive local infiltration of ropivacaine and intravenous tramadol in postoperative pain and nausea-vomiting in pediatric tonsillectomy cases.

METHODS

90 children at ASA I-II physical status, who are between 2 and 9 years old, underwent tonsillectomy were included to the study. Patients were randomized into one of three study groups. Group I was i.v. saline group (placebo group), Group II was preemptive 1.5 ml 0.75% ropivakain to the tonsil lodge and Group III was preemptive 1mg/kg i.v. tramadol. Hemodynamic parameters and synchronized Maunuksela pain scores were evaluated in the post anesthetic care unit.

RESULTS

There was no difference in age, weight, sex and hemodynamic parameters of children included to the study groups. Postoperative nausea vomiting was significantly lower in Group II and pain scores at resting and swallowing are significantly lower than the other study groups. Maunuksela pain scores at 2nd, 3rd, 6th and 9th hours while resting were significantly lower in Group II compared with Groups I and III (p<0.001). The comparison of scores between groups I and III were similar. Maunuksela pain scores during swallowing were significantly lower in Group II compared with Group I and III at 2nd, 3rd, 6th, 9th, 12th, 21st and 24th hours postoperatively (p<0.001). While comparing Maunuksela pain scores of Groups I and III, significantly lower scores are determined at 2nd and 24th hours in Group III (p<0.001). Analgesic needs were significantly low in Group II at postoperative period (150 ± 30 mg paracetamol) (p<0.05). It was similar in Groups I and III (Group I: 400 ± 40 mg, Group III: 360 ± 40 mg paracetamol).

CONCLUSION

This study showed that peritonsillar ropivacaine infiltration might produce an effective postoperative analgesia probably due to a preventing effect on sensitization of the pain pathways.