A Ropivacaine-Lidocaine Combination for Caudal Blockade in Haemorrhoidectomy

Ultrasound-Guided peripheral nerve blocks for major amputation in critically ill patients with peripheral artery disease

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of major amputation under ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve blocks in critical peripheral artery disease (PAD) patients.

METHODS

We reviewed the medical records of consecutive patients who underwent major amputation at our center between December 2012 and December 2020. The patients' baseline demographics and comorbidities were collected. The primary outcomes were 30-day and 12-month mortality. The secondary outcomes were intraoperative events, complications and intensive care unit (ICU) admission.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients classified as American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) III and 13 ASA IV (mean age: 76.07 ± 11.78 years) were included in the study. These patients were critically ill and had many comorbidities, such as coronary artery disease. All amputations were successfully performed under ultrasound-guided PNB without conversion to GA, but intravenous analgesia was given in 7 patients during the operation. The majority of the patients had stable hemodynamics except for 2 patients who had hypoxia, so none of the patients were transferred to the ICU postoperatively. None of the patients suffered from acute cardio-cerebral events. However, 5 patients had wound infections, and 4 of 5 patients had to receive reamputation. None of the patients died within 48 h after amputation. However, the 30-day mortality was 3.57%, and the 12-month mortality was up to 35.71%.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that major amputation could be safely and effectively performed under ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve blocks for critically ill patients, and ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve blocks could be an alternative for patients at high risk of general anesthesia or spinal anesthesia.

Comparison of Ultrasound-Guided Caudal Epidural Blocks and Spinal Anesthesia for Anorectal Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study is to observe the effect of spinal anesthesia (SA) and ultrasound-guided caudal epidural blocks (CEB) on perioperative satisfaction in patients undergoing anorectal surgery.

METHODS

A group of 106 patients were randomly allocated to receive either SA (the SA group) or CEB (the CEB group), and 11 patients were excluded. Finally, 95 patients were left, with 48 in the SA group and 47 in the CEB group for data analysis. The primary endpoint was patient satisfaction with the quality of their anesthetic technique. The secondary outcome measures included postoperative pain at 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, and 48 h after surgery at rest, time to first analgesic request, analgesia requirements, incidence of phantom limb syndrome (PLS), time until return of bowel function, time to ambulation, incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), intraoperative mean arterial pressure (MAP) reduction > 20% from baseline, and surgeon satisfaction.

RESULTS

A significantly lower proportion of patients in the SA group was highly satisfied with the quality of their anesthetic technique compared with the CEB group (20.8% versus 68.1%). NRS scores at rest were significantly lower at 4, 8, 16, and 24 h after surgery in the CEB group compared with the SA group. The time to first analgesic request was significantly earlier for patients in the SA group compared with patients in the CEB group. Analgesia requirements, the incidence of PLS, the incidence of PONV, and intraoperative MAP reduction > 20% from baseline were significantly decreased in the CEB group. There were no significant differences between the groups in time until return of bowel function, surgeon satisfaction, or time to ambulation.

CONCLUSIONS

Ultrasound-guided caudal epidural blocks have higher patient satisfaction compared with spinal anesthesia.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR 2000041026) on 06/12/2020.

The minimum effective concentration (MEC90) of ropivacaine for ultrasound-guided caudal block in anorectal surgery. A dose finding study

Background

Caudal epidural block (CEB) provides reliable anesthesia for adults undergoing anorectal surgery. Despite the widely utilization, the minimum effective concentration for 90% patients (MEC₉₀) of ropivacaine for CEB remains unknown.

Objective

To estimate MEC of ropivacaine for CEB in anorectal surgery.

Design

A prospective dose-finding study using biased coin design up-and-down sequential method.

Setting

Operating room and postoperative recovery area of Chengdu Shangjin Nanfu Hospital, from October 2019 to January 2020.

Patients

50 males and 51 females scheduled for anorectal surgery.

Interventions

We conducted two independent biased coin design up-and down trials by genders. The concentration of ropivacaine administered to the first patient of male and female were 0.25% with fixed volume of 14ml for male and 12ml for female patients based on our previous study. In case of failure, the concentration was increased by 0.05% in the next subject. Otherwise, the next subject was randomized to a concentration 0.05% less with a probability of 0.11, or the same concentration with a probability of 0.89. Success was defined as complete sensory blockade of perineal area 15 min after the block evidenced by the presence of a lax anal sphincter and pain-free surgery.

Main outcome measures

The MEC of ropivacaine to achieve a successful CEB in 90%(MEC₉₀) of the patients.

Results

The MEC₉₀ of ropivacaine for CEB were estimated to be 0.35% (95% CI 0.29 to 0.4%) for male and 0.353% (95%CI 0.22 to 0.4%) for female. By extrapolation to MEC in 99% of subjects (MEC99) and pooled adjacent violators algorithm (PAVA) adjusted responses, it would be optimal to choose 0.4% ropivacaine with a volume of 14ml for male and 12ml for female.

Conclusions

A concentration of 0.35% ropivacaine with a volume of 14ml provided a successful CEB in 90% of the male patients, while 0.353% ropivacaine with a volume of 12ml provided a successful CEB in 90% of the female patients. A concentration of 0.4% and a volume of 14ml for male and 12 ml for female would be successful in 99% of the patients.

Trial registration

Chictr.org.cn identifier: No. ChiCTR 1900024315.

Haemorrhoidectomy under local anaesthesia versus spinal anaesthesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

To evaluate comparative outcomes of local anaesthesia (LA) and spinal anaesthesia (SA) in patients undergoing haemorrhoidectomy.

METHODS

A systematic online search was conducted using the following databases: PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Database, The Virtual Health Library, Clinical trials.gov , and Science Direct. Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing excisional haemorrhoidectomy under LA and SA were included. Post-operative pain score, need for rescue analgesia, urinary retention, headache, rectal bleeding, and operative time were the evaluated outcome parameters.

RESULTS

Seven RCTs reporting a total number of 440 patients of whom 222 patients underwent haemorrhoidectomy under LA and 218 patients had the procedure under SA were included. LA was associated with significantly lower post-operative pain at 6 h (mean difference (MD) - 2.25, P = 0.0001) and at 24 h (MD - 0.87, P = 0.0002), need for a rescue analgesia (risk ratio (RR) 0.18, P = 0.002), urinary retention (RR 0.17, P = 0.0001), and headache (RR 0.09, P = 0.0003) compared with SA. However, there was no significant difference in rectal bleeding (RR 0.89, P = 0.70) and operative time (MD 1.15, P = 0.19) between LA and SA.

CONCLUSION

Compared with SA, LA may be associated with significantly lower post-operative pain, need for rescue analgesia, urinary retention, and headache making it an attractive choice of anaesthesia in day-case surgery for those who are not either fit for GA or refuse such anaesthetic modality.

Perianal block with ropivacaine as a supplement to anaesthesia in proctological surgery: double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial (PERCEPT)

BACKGROUND

The benefit of a perianal block as an adjunct to general or regional anaesthesia is debated. This RCT aimed to compare pain at 24 h and up to 14 days after proctological surgery in patients with and without a perianal block.

METHODS

Between January 2018 and April 2019, patients were allocated to receive a perianal block with ropivacaine or placebo as an adjunct to anaesthesia. Patients, surgeons and assessors were blinded. The primary outcome was pain measured on a numerical rating scale (NRS) after 24 h. Secondary outcomes were need for rescue analgesia, and pain after 1, 2, 3, 6 and 12 h. The mean, rest and maximum NRS scores were measured for 14 days.

RESULTS

A total of 138 patients were included, of whom 46 and 44 received general anaesthesia with or without ropivacaine respectively, and 23 and 25 received spinal anaesthesia with or without ropivacaine respectively (P = 0·858). The mean NRS score differed significantly at 24 h (mean(s.d.) 1·1(0·1) versus 2·3(0·2); P < 0·001), but not at 1 h (1·4(0·2) versus 2·2(0·3); P = 0·051). The NRS score was lower with use of ropivacaine at 2 h (1·0(0·2) versus 1·6(0·2); P = 0·045), 3 h (0·9(0·2) versus 1·5(0·2); P = 0·022), 6 h (1·1(0·2) versus 1·8(0·2); P = 0·042) and 12 h (1·2(0·2) versus 1·8(0·2); P = 0·034). The use of oral morphine equivalents was 10·2(1·4) and 16·6(2·5) mg with and without ropivacaine respectively (P = 0·028). The mean and maximum NRS scores within 14 days were lower when ropivacaine was used (95 per cent c.i. for difference 0·14 to 0·49 (P = 0·002) and 0·39 to 0·63 (P < 0·001) respectively). There was no injection-associated morbidity.

CONCLUSION

Perianal block as an adjunct to general or regional anaesthesia should be recommended for proctological surgery. It yields a reduction in pain, a reduced need for opioids, and a faster recovery with minimal risk of adverse events. Registration number: NCT03405922 ( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

A prospective randomized double-blind study of pain control by topical calcium channel blockers versus placebo after Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy

INTRODUCTION

Post-hemorrhoidectomy pain is significantly associated with a hypertonicity of the internal anal sphincter. We evaluated the effects of topical diltiazem, a calcium channel blocker, in reducing pain after hemorrhoidectomy. Purpose of our study was to determine difference in extent of pain control by application of topical calcium channel blocker (diltiazem 2%) versus placebo ointment.

METHODS

This was a prospective randomized double-blind clinical study conducted at Sawai Man Singh Hospital, Jaipur, from May 2016 to May 2017. Sixty patients, who had undergone hemorrhoid, were randomly assigned to receive 2% diltiazem ointment (n = 30) or a placebo ointment (n = 30) postoperatively. Ointments were applied to the perianal region three times daily for 7 days. Pain scores were recorded using visual analog scale at 6, 24, and 48 h and seventh day postoperatively and number of analgesic doses consumed by patients in the first 3 days.

RESULTS

Patients using the diltiazem ointment had significantly less pain and greater benefit than those in the placebo group throughout the first postoperative week (p < 0.001) except for reading at 6 h. Also, there was significantly less number of analgesic doses consumed in the diltiazem group compared to the placebo group.

CONCLUSION

Perianal application of 2% diltiazem ointment after hemorrhoidectomy significantly reduces postoperative pain and is perceived as beneficial.

The effects of adjuvant intrathecal fentanyl on postoperative pain and rebound pain for anorectal surgery under saddle anesthesia

BACKGROUND

Intrathecal opioid has been known to enhance the quality and prolong the duration of spinal anesthesia, as well as to reduce postoperative pain. The purpose of this study was to evaluate postoperative analgesic characteristics of intrathecal fentanyl for the first 48 hours after anorectal surgery under saddle anesthesia.

METHODS

Eighty patients were recruited in our study. Forty patients were randomly allocated to group B that received 0.5% bupivacaine 5 mg with 0.3 ml normal saline. The other 40 patients were assigned to group BF which was given 0.5% bupivacaine 5 mg with fentanyl 15 μg. The primary outcome variable was a numeric rating scale (NRS) at six hours postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included changes in the NRS score between one and 48 hours postoperatively, consumption of rescue analgesics, and the frequency of rebound pain.

RESULTS

Group BF exhibited a lower mean NRS score at postoperative six hours compared to group B (P < 0.001). However, the mean NRS score was not different after postoperative six hours between the two groups. The median consumption of rescue analgesics in group BF was less than that of group B (P = 0.028) and the frequency of rebound pain decreased in group BF when compared to group B (P = 0.021). The levels of sensory block were S1 dermatome and motor block scores were 0 for both groups. There was no significant difference in adverse effects between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Intrathecal fentanyl 15 μg for anorectal surgery under saddle anesthesia led to an improved pain score for the first six hours after surgery and decreased postoperative analgesic use. Rebound pain diminished with intrathecal fentanyl and adverse effects did not increase.

Topical diltiazem ointment in post-hemorrhoidectomy pain relief: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Hemorrhoidectomy is commonly associated with postoperative pain. Calcium channel blockers are known to cause relaxation of gastrointestinal smooth muscle and oral diltiazem has also been shown to reduce the resting anal pressure.

OBJECTIVE

We attempted to analyze efficacy and side effects of topical diltiazem oint. in post-operative pain control.

METHODS

This is a meta-analysis of patients who underwent hemorrhoidectomy using topical diltiazem oint. versus placebo (Vaseline) for pain control. Patients with third or fourth degree hemorrhoids undergoing traditional hemorrhoidectomy were included. Procedures took place in the colorectal division of a hospital in 5 countries. Five randomized control trials (RCTs) published between 2005 and 2016 including 227 patients were included our meta-analysis (Diltiazem (calcium channel block) group = 137; Placebo (Vaseline) group = 90). Pain assessment was performed using a standardized Visual Analogue Scale. Any side effects of surgery or medication use, which were noted by the patient or the surgeon, also were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 227 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The results revealed that Diltiazem ointment was statistically significant in reducing pain within 48 h, at 72 h, and more than 96 h after operation compared to the placebo group. Regarding overall complications (including headache), there was no statistical significance between diltiazem and placebo group.

CONCLUSIONS

Topical application of diltiazem effectively relieves pain after hemorrhoidectomy with minimal side effects. Further large studies are needed to substantiate its value in clinical practice.

Effective Concentration of Lidocaine Plus Fentanyl for Caudal Block in Patients Undergoing Transrectal Ultrasound Guided Prostate Biopsy

Objective. This study determined the effective concentration (EC) of lidocaine plus 75 μg fentanyl for caudal block in patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy. Methods. Consecutive male patients scheduled for TRUS guided prostate biopsy were enrolled. The mixed solution for caudal block contained lidocaine and 75 μg fentanyl, in total 20 mL. The concentration of lidocaine was determined using the up-and-down method, starting at 0.8% (a step size of 0.1%). A successful caudal block was defined by no pain perception during biopsy. The EC50 of lidocaine for successful caudal block was calculated and side effects were evaluated. Results. A total of 23 patients were recruited. The EC50 of lidocaine for successful caudal block was 0.53%. Conclusions. Lidocaine of 0.53% combined with 75 μg fentanyl resulted in excellent caudal block in 50% of male patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy.

Application of parecoxib in post-uvulopalatopharyngoplasty analgesia

Objective

To investigate the postoperative analgesic effects of parecoxib for uvulopalatopharyngoplasty (UPPP).

Methods

Patients with obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome who underwent UPPP were randomly divided into two groups. In group A, the incision-local block was performed with 5 ml of 0.5% ropivacaine injected subcutaneously before the end of surgery, then 20 ml of physiological saline was injected intravenously every 12 h for 2 days. In group B, in addition to the incision-local block, 40 mg parecoxib was injected intravenously 30 min before the end of UPPP and 40 mg parecoxib was injected intravenously every 12 h for 2 days. Postoperative pain was measured using a visual analogue scale (VAS). Adverse reactions were recorded.

Results

A total of 40 patients were randomized ( n = 20 per group). Under resting conditions, the mean ± SD VAS pain scores were significantly higher in group A compared with group B at 24 h and 48 h after UPPP (24 h 4.0 ± 0.8 versus 2.6 ± 0.6; 48 h 3.8 ± 0.7 versus 2.4 ± 0.5; respectively). Under swallowing conditions, the mean ± SD VAS pain scores were significantly higher in group A compared with group B at 8 h, 24 h and 48 h after UPPP. Postoperative adverse reactions were similar in the two groups.

Conclusion

Intravenous parecoxib combined with incision-local ropivacaine provided effective postoperative analgesia for patients with obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome, undergoing UPPP.

Ropivacaine, articaine or combination of ropivacaine and articaine for epidural anesthesia in cesarean section: a randomized, prospective, double-blinded study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Initiation of epidural anesthesia with long-lasting local anesthetics consumes a significant amount of time, which could be problematic in busy obstetric anesthesia suites. We have hypothesized that a combination of articaine and ropivacaine provides faster onset and even an early recovery of sensory-motor block characteristics.

METHODS

Sixty term parturients scheduled to have elective cesarean section were randomly allocated into three groups to receive either 20 mL 2% articaine (Group A), 10 mL 2% articaine + 10 mL 0.75% ropivacaine (Group AR) or 20 mL 0.75% ropivacaine (Group R) via lumbar epidural catheter. The onset time of sensory block to T₁₀, T₆ and maximum sensory block level, time to two segments regression from maximum sensory block level, onset time and duration of motor block were all recorded. Intraoperative and postoperative additional analgesic requirements were also recorded.

RESULTS

Demographic data were similar. The onset times of sensorial block to T₁₀ and T₆ were significantly shorter in Groups A and AR in comparison with Group R (p<0.05). The onset times of motor block were similar in all groups, but a more intense motor block was observed in Group R (p<0.05). Two segments regression time and motor block durations were significantly shorter in Groups A and AR in comparison with Group R (p<0.05). Intraoperative supplementary analgesic requirements were higher in Group A than in the other two groups (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

A combination of 2% articaine and 0.75% ropivacaine for epidural anesthesia in a cesarean section should be preferred over epidural 0.75% ropivacaine alone.

Meta-analysis of the use of glyceryl trinitrate ointment after haemorrhoidectomy as an analgesic and in promoting wound healing

INTRODUCTION

Glyceryl Trinitrate (GTN) ointment has been used to treat anal fissure and pain relief in haemorrhoids, but the value of its use post-haemorrhoidectomy as an analgesic and in wound healing is unclear. The side effect of headache has often been an associated problem. Therefore, a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials was carried out investigating the role of GTN post-haemorrhoidectomy as an analgesic, its role in would healing and the unwanted incidence of headache.

METHOD

A structured literature search from 1966 to 2009, both paper and online, with no language barrier was carried out. 760 papers were identified and 5 randomised control trials which met the entry criteria were included in this study.

RESULTS

A total of 333 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The results revealed that GTN ointment was statistically significant in reducing pain on Day 3 and 7 compared to the placebo group. Day 3 shows a pain score of - 1.51 (p value of 0.029) and Day 7 by - 1.66 (p value of 0.014) respectively. However, it was not significant in reducing pain on Day 1. The Odds ratio for wound healing after GTN treatment at 3 weeks was 3.57 (P < 0.0001) when compared to the placebo group. Side effect of headache was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis has shown that GTN ointment used post-haemorrhoidectomy has a significant analgesic effect in the intermediate time period (ie. Days 3-7). It also significantly improved wound healing at 3 weeks.

Randomized clinical trial comparing day-care open haemorrhoidectomy under local versus general anaesthesia

Background

Day-care open haemorrhoidectomy under local anaesthesia (LH) may be the most cost-effective approach to haemorrhoidectomy. This prospective randomized trial compared outcome after LH from patients' and clinical perspectives with that after day-care open haemorrhoidectomy under general anaesthesia (GH).

Methods

Forty-one patients with third-degree haemorrhoids were randomized to LH (19) or GH (22). Patient demographics were comparable. A single haemorrhoid was excised in 15 patients, and two and three haemorrhoids in 13 each. Independent nurse-led assessment and clinical evaluation were carried out for 6 months. Outcome measures were mean and expected pain scores at 30, 60 and 90 min, then daily for 10 days, and satisfaction scores at 10 days, 6 weeks and 6 months. Secondary outcomes were journey time within the day-surgery unit and overall cost.

Results

Pain was worse following LH than GH at 90 min after surgery (P = 0·028), but pain scores on reaching home were similar. Maximum pain was experienced on day 3 after LH and on day 6 after GH. From day 1 onwards, daily pain scores were lower in the LH group, and there was a significant difference on day 8 (mean (95 per cent confidence interval) 3·61 (2·74 to 4·48) for LH versus 5·29 (4·12 to 6·45) for GH; P = 0·027). Mean pain over 10 days, expectation and satisfaction scores were similar in the two groups. LH had a shorter journey time and was less expensive than GH.

Conclusion

LH has similar tolerance and clinical outcome to GH, and is associated with a shorter journey time and lower cost. Registration number: NCT00503269 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).