Comparison of an Intraoperative Infusion of Dexmedetomidine, Fentanyl, and Remifentanil on Perioperative Hemodynamics, Sedation Quality, and Postoperative Pain Control

Opioid-Free Anesthesia for Upper Limb Surgery in Obese Patients as a Day Case Surgery: A Prospective Observational Study

Background

Opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) is a relatively new approach, and many studies are still needed to assess its effectiveness and compare it to opioid-based anesthesia (OBA).

Objectives

This study investigated the use of OFA in obese patients undergoing upper limb surgery and compares its outcomes with those of OBA.Methods:This prospective randomized clinical study included 76 obese patients with a Body Mass Index (BMI) ≥ 30 kg/m² who were scheduled for upper limb surgery. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either OFA (group A, n = 38) or OBA (group B, n = 38). The OBA group was administered propofol, fentanyl, and atracurium, while the OFA group received lidocaine, propofol, atracurium, and dexmedetomidine. All patients were mechanically ventilated, and anesthesia was maintained with isoflurane and atracurium. Primary outcomes monitored included postoperative pain [Visual Analog Scale (VAS) ≥ 4] and the number of rescue doses of tramadol. Secondary outcomes included extubation time, any cardiac events, hypoxia, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), intensive care unit (ICU) admission rates, and duration of hospital stay.

Results

The OFA group had significantly lower extubation time, mean arterial pressure (MAP), and heart rate (HR) compared to the OBA group. Additionally, VAS scores were significantly lower at the 30-minute and 2-hour marks after extubation (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively) in patients receiving OFA. The OFA group also experienced fewer adverse effects, required fewer rescue doses of tramadol, and had shorter hospital stays.

Conclusions

Opioid-free anesthesia may result in better and safer outcomes for obese patients undergoing upper limb surgeries, with fewer postoperative complications and shorter hospital stays. However, further research is needed to fully understand the potential benefits of OFA compared to OBA.

A Comparative Analysis of Dexmedetomidine Infusion Rates on Hemodynamic Responses During Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: An Observational Study

Background Although laparoscopic surgery is becoming more common, its anesthetic management poses challenges due to hemodynamic fluctuations. Dexmedetomidine has shown promise in mitigating these responses. In this study, we compared the effects of three different infusion doses of dexmedetomidine (0.2 µg/kg/hour, 0.4 µg/kg/hour, and 0.6 µg/kg/hour) on hemodynamic responses at the time of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Methodology An observational study was conducted among 90 adult patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Patients were divided into three groups, each receiving one of the three dexmedetomidine doses. Hemodynamic parameters (systolic and diastolic blood pressures, mean arterial pressure, etc.) were monitored at various time points throughout the procedure. Results All three dexmedetomidine doses effectively attenuated hemodynamic responses. The 0.4 µg/kg/hour dose demonstrated the most stable blood pressure control, with minimal fluctuations from baseline. The 0.6 µg/kg/hour dose consistently resulted in lower mean blood pressure values. Heart rate was also more stable in the 0.4 µg/kg/hour group, while the 0.6 µg/kg/hour group consistently maintained lower heart rates. Conclusions Dexmedetomidine is a valuable anesthetic adjuvant for laparoscopic cholecystectomy, with the 0.4 µg/kg/hour dose offering a favorable balance between hemodynamic stability and the potential risk of hypotension and bradycardia.

Opioid-free anesthesia for minimally invasive abdominal surgery: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis

PURPOSE

Opioid anesthesia is commonly employed in minimally invasive surgeries but is associated with adverse effects, including postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Opioid-free anesthesia aims to mitigate these issues. We conducted a systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis (TSA) comparing opioid and opioid-free anesthesia in minimally invasive abdominal surgeries.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and Embase for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing these approaches. Our primary outcomes were adverse effects (PONV, bradycardia), while secondary outcomes were pain, opioid consumption, and postanesthesia care unit (PACU) length of stay (LOS). We performed a TSA to investigate the conclusiveness of the results.

RESULTS

We included 26 RCTs encompassing 2,025 patients, with 1,009 (49%) in the opioid-free anesthesia group. Opioid-free anesthesia reduced PONV significantly (risk ratio, 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40 to 0.74; P < 0.001), but we found no significant differences in bradycardia rates. We found nonclinically relevant higher pain scores for opioid anesthesia (mean difference [MD], -0.9; 95% CI, -1.7 to -0.2; P = 0.01) and opioid consumption at 2 hr post surgery (MD, -5.4 mg oral morphine equivalents; 95% CI, -9.1 to -1.8; P = 0.004). We also noted a reduced time to first analgesia (MD, 88 min; 95% CI, 18 to 159; P = 0.01). We found no differences in PACU LOS. The TSA confirmed the sample size's adequacy in showing PONV reduction with opioid-free anesthesia.

CONCLUSION

Opioid-free anesthesia showed a significant reduction in PONV and a decrease in opioid consumption during the first 2 hr postoperatively, suggesting it can be an alternative to opioid anesthesia in minimally invasive abdominal surgeries.

STUDY REGISTRATION

PROSPERO ( CRD42023492385 ); first submitted 18 December 2023.

Comparison of Opioid-Based Versus Opioid-Sparing Anesthesia in Patients Undergoing Glioma Surgery

Background In the neurosurgical population, opioids may cause respiratory depression, leading to hypercapnia, increased cerebral blood flow (CBF), and ultimately increased intracranial pressure (ICP), which can mask early signs of intracranial complications and delayed emergence. This study was designed to compare perioperative hemodynamic stability, analgesia, and recovery parameters in opioid-based (fentanyl) general anesthesia versus opioid-sparing (dexmedetomidine) general anesthesia in patients undergoing glioma surgeries. Methodology This prospective observational comparative study compared 52 patients in two groups. Twenty-six (50%) patients in group F received Inj. fentanyl IV (intravenous; bolus 2 mcg/kg 10 minutes before induction and then infusion 1 mcg/kg/hour till 30 minutes before skin closure), whereas 26 (50%) patients in group D received Inj. dexmedetomidine IV (0.5 mcg/kg infusion 10 minutes before induction and then maintenance with a 0.5 mcg/kg/hour infusion till 30 minutes before skin closure). Perioperative heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), Numerical Rating Scale for Pain (NRS) assessment and postoperative emergence time, modified Aldrete score, patient satisfaction, and surgeon satisfaction score were estimated and compared in both groups. Results The mean HR was less in group D compared to group F at following time points - 10 minutes after infusion (P = 0.006), laryngoscopy and intubation (P = 0.003), pinning of the skull (P < 0.001), one hour after dura opening (P = 0.007), two hours after dura opening (P = 0.006), five minutes after extubation (P < 0.001), and 30 minutes after extubation (P = 0.011). MAP was lower in group D compared to group F at the following time intervals: 10 minutes after infusion (P = 0.008), five minutes after extubation (P = 0.007), 30 minutes after extubation (P < 0.001), and one hour after extubation (P = 0.023). A significant decrease in emergence time in group D compared to group F (P < 0.001) was noted. NRS was lower in group D at eight hours (P = 0.005) and 12 hours (P < 0.001) post-extubation. Conclusions Dexmedetomidine can be used as an alternative to fentanyl in terms of perioperative hemodynamic stability, perioperative analgesia, smooth early recovery from anesthesia, patient satisfaction, and surgeon satisfaction.

Effect of opioid-free anesthesia on the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies

BACKGROUND

Research on opioid-free anesthesia has increased in recent years; however, it has never been determined whether it is more beneficial than opioid anesthesia. This meta-analysis was primarily used to assess the effect of opioid-free anesthesia compared with opioid anesthesia on the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting.

METHODS

We searched the electronic databases of PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science and Embase from 2014 to 2022 to identify relevant articles and extract relevant data. The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, time to extubation, pain score at 24 hours postoperatively, and time to first postoperative rescue analgesia were compared between patients receiving opioid-free anesthesia and those receiving standard opioid anesthesia. Differences in the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting were evaluated using risk ratios (95% confidence interval [CI]). The significance of the differences was assessed using mean differences and 95% CI. The heterogeneity of the subject trials was evaluated using the I2 test. Statistical analysis was performed using the RevMan 5.4 software.

RESULTS

Fourteen randomized controlled trials, including 1354 participants, were evaluated in the meta-analysis. As seen in the forest plot, the OFA group had a lower risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting than the control group (risk ratios = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.33-0.51, P < .00001; n = 1354), and the meta-analysis also found that the OFA group had lower postoperative analgesia scores at 24 hours (P < .000001), but time to extubation (P = .14) and first postoperative resuscitation analgesia time (P < .54) were not significantly different.

CONCLUSIONS

Opioid-free anesthesia reduces the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting while providing adequate analgesia without interfering with postoperative awakening.

Comparison of the Efficacy of Opioid-Free Anesthesia With Conventional Opioid-Based Anesthesia for Nasal Surgeries - A Prospective Randomized Parallel Arm Triple-Blinded Study

Introduction In the setting of nasal surgeries, the use of opioid-free anesthesia involving the use of dexmedetomidine, and lignocaine is being investigated as a potential alternative to opioids. This combination of drugs provides sympatholysis, pain relief, and sedative properties, thereby aiming at reducing the negative effects commonly associated with opioid usage. The objective of this study is to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of opioid-free anesthesia using dexmedetomidine and lignocaine versus conventional opioid anesthesia with fentanyl for nasal surgeries. The comparison will be based on the primary outcome of postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) scores. Secondary outcomes assessed were the amount of rescue analgesic consumption, intraoperative sevoflurane usage, intraoperative blood loss, hemodynamic stability, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) scores, and postoperative Ramsay Sedation Scores. Methods A triple-blind, prospective, randomized, parallel arm study in which 48 patients planned for elective nasal surgery were allocated randomly to one of two groups. In the study, the population labeled as Group D, comprising 24 participants, received dexmedetomidine at a dosage of 1 mcg.kg^-1 via intravenous infusion lasting for a duration of 10 minutes prior to the induction of anesthesia. This was followed by a continuous infusion of 0.6 mcg.kg^-1 h^-1 throughout the intraoperative period, and intravenous Lignocaine 1.5 mg.kg^-1 was administered three minutes prior to induction, subsequently an intraoperative infusion of 1.5 mg.kg^-1 h^-1. In Group F, consisting of 24 participants, intravenous fentanyl of 2 mcg.kg^-1 was administered three minutes before the induction. This was subsequently followed by a fentanyl infusion of 0.5 mcg.kg^-1h^-1 in the intraoperative period. Results The study findings indicate that Group D had considerably lower postoperative VAS scores from 30 minutes to two hours compared to Group F (p<0.05). The utilization of sevoflurane during the intraoperative period was comparatively reduced in Group D in order to achieve the desired bispectral index (BIS) range of 40-60 (p<0.01). Mean intraoperative blood loss was also lower in Group D (85 ml) compared to Group F (115 ml )(p<0.01). Additionally, Group D had significantly lower rescue analgesic consumption and lower incidence of PONV up to 60 minutes compared to Group F (P-value <0.01). A statistically significant difference was observed between Group D and Group F in terms of lower mean values of both mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate in Group D (p<0.01). The results indicate that the postoperative sedation scores within the first two hours were significantly greater in Group D compared to Group F (p<0.01). Conclusion The usage of opioid-free anesthesia has been found to be superior to a traditional opioid-based approach in various aspects, including the provision of sufficient pain relief after surgery, maintenance of stable hemodynamics during the operation, and reduction in occurrences of postoperative nausea and vomiting.

Risk factors for acute postoperative hypertension in non-cardiac major surgery: a case control study

PURPOSE

Acute postoperative hypertension (APH) is a common complication during the anesthesia recovery period that can lead to adverse outcomes, including cardiovascular and cerebrovascular accidents. Identification of risk factors for APH will allow for preoperative optimization and appropriate perioperative management. This study aimed to identify risk factors for APH.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this retrospective single-center study, 1,178 cases were included. Data was entered by two investigators, and consistency analysis was performed by another. Patients were divided into APH and non-APH groups. A predictive model was built by multivariate stepwise logistic regression. The predictive ability of the logistic regression model was tested by drawing the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and calculating the area under the curve (AUC). Hosmer and Lemeshow goodness-of-fit (GOF) test was performed to reflect the goodness of fit of the model. Calibration curve was created to represent the relationship between predicted risk and observed frequency. Sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the robustness of the results.

RESULTS

Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that age over 65 years (OR = 3.07, 95% CI: 2.14 ~ 4.42, P < 0.001), female patients (OR = 1.37, 95% CI: 1.02 ~ 1.84, P = 0.034), presence of intraoperative hypertension (OR = 2.15, 95% CI: 1.57 ~ 2.95, P < 0.001), and use of propofol in PACU (OR = 2.14, 95% CI: 1.49 ~ 3.06, P < 0.001) were risk factors for APH. Intraoperative use of dexmedetomidine (OR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.49 ~ 0.89, P = 0.007) was a protective factor. Higher baseline SBP (OR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.89 ~ 0.92, P < 0.001) also showed some correlation with APH.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of acute postoperative hypertension increased with age over 65 years, female patients, intraoperative hypertension and restlessness during anesthesia recovery. Intraoperative use of dexmedetomidine was a protective factor for APH.

Total opioid-free general anaesthesia can improve postoperative outcomes after surgery, without evidence of adverse effects on patient safety and pain management: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Opioid-based treatment is used to manage stress responses during surgery and postoperative pain. However, opioids have both acute and long-term side effects, calling for opioid-free anaesthetic strategies. This meta-analysis compares adverse events, postoperative recovery, discharge time from post-anaesthesia care unit, and postoperative pain, nausea, vomiting, and opioid consumption between strict opioid-free and opioid-based general anaesthesia.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched PubMed, Embase, Cinahl, Cochrane Library, selected reference lists, and Google Scholar. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published between January 2000 and February 2021 with at least one opioid-free study arm, i.e. no opioids administered preoperatively, during anaesthesia induction, before skin closure, or before emergence from anaesthesia.

RESULTS

The study comprised 1934 patients from 26 RCTs. Common interventions included laparoscopic gynaecological surgery, upper gastrointestinal surgery, and breast surgery. There is firm evidence that opioid-free anaesthesia significantly reduced adverse postoperative events (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.46, I²  = 56%, p < 0.00001), mainly driven by decreased nausea (OR 0.27, (0.17 to 0.42), p < 0.00001) and vomiting (OR 0.22 (0.11 to 0.41), p < 0.00001). Postoperative opioid consumption was significantly lower in the opioid-free group (-6.00 mg (-8.52 to -3.48), p < 0.00001). There was no significant difference in length of post-anaesthesia care unit stay and overall postoperative pain between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Opioid-free anaesthesia can improve postoperative outcomes in several surgical settings without evidence of adverse effects on patient safety and pain management. There is a need for more evidence-based non-opioid anaesthetic protocols for different types of surgery as well as postoperative phases.

Effect of dexmedetomidine on hemodynamics in patients undergoing hysterectomy: a meta-analysis and systematic review

Objective

We conducted a meta-analysis and systematic review to evaluate the effects of dexmedetomidine on the hemodynamics of patients undergoing hysterectomy.

Methods

We searched the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for clinical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that allowed direct or indirect comparisons of hemodynamic indicators. We also searched nine English-language databases up to April 2021 to identify relevant research. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for RCTs was applied to assess the methodological quality of the eligible studies. The meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4 software.

Results

Nine trials were included in this systematic review. The effect of dexmedetomidine on heart rate during surgery was significantly smaller than that of other sedatives. Intraoperative systolic and diastolic blood pressure and mean arterial pressure were more stable in the dexmedetomidine group compared with the control group. The postoperative modified Observer’s Assessment of Alertness Score was also better in the dexmedetomidine compared with the control group.

Conclusions

Dexmedetomidine increases hemodynamic stability in patients undergoing hysterectomy, reduces the cardiovascular stress response during surgery, and effectively prevents postoperative adverse reactions, with good safety.

Opioid-Free Anesthesia Benefit-Risk Balance: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) is used in surgery to avoid opioid-related side effects. However, uncertainty exists in the balance between OFA benefits and risks. We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing OFA to opioid-based anesthesia (OBA) in five international databases. The co-primary outcomes were postoperative acute pain and morphine consumption at 2, 24, and 48 h. The secondary outcomes were the incidence of postoperative chronic pain, hemodynamic tolerance, severe adverse effects, opioid-related adverse effects, and specific adverse effects related to substitution drugs. Overall, 33 RCTs including 2209 participants were assessed. At 2 h, the OFA groups had lower pain scores at rest MD (0.75 (−1.18; −0.32)), which did not definitively reach MCID. Less morphine was required in the OFA groups at 2 and 24 h, but with very small reductions: 1.61 mg (−2.69; −0.53) and −1.73 mg (p < 0.05), respectively, both not reaching MCID. The reduction in PONV in the OFA group in the PACU presented an RR of 0.46 (0.38, 0.56) and an RR of 0.34 (0.21; 0.56), respectively. Less sedation and shivering were observed in the OFA groups with an SMD of −0.81 (−1.05; −0.58) and an RR of 0.48 (0.33; 0.70), respectively. Quantitative analysis did not reveal differences between the hemodynamic outcomes, although severe side effects have been identified in the literature. No clinically significant benefits were observed with OFA in terms of pain and opioid use after surgery. A clear benefit of OFA use was observed with respect to a reduction in PONV. However, more data on the safe use of OFAs should be collected and caution should be taken in the development of OFA.

Comparison of the Effect of Dexmedetomidine and Remifentanil on Pain Control After Spinal Surgery: A Double-Blind, Randomized Clinical Trial

Background

A variety of spinal surgery procedures are performed on patients with different cardiac, vascular, and respiratory comorbidities. Postoperative pain management is a major determinant of hemodynamic and respiratory status in these patients and promotes clinical results, prevents complications, saves health services, and improves the quality of life of patients.

Objectives

We compared the effects of dexmedetomidine and remifentanil on pain control after spinal surgery.

Methods

Sixty patients aged 18 - 65 years undergoing spinal surgery were randomized into the two groups of dexmedetomidine and remifentanil. The dexmedetomidine group (group D, n = 30) received dexmedetomidine infusion (0.6 mcg/kg/h), and the remifentanil group (group R, n = 30) received remifentanil infusion (0.1 mcg/kg/min) from induction of anesthesia until extubation. Propofol (1.5 mg/kg) and fentanyl (2mcg/kg) were used to initiate anesthesia, and propofol (100 - 150 mcg/kg/min) was infused to maintain anesthesia. Postoperative pain, hemodynamic parameters, and recovery characteristics were evaluated after surgery.

Results

The mean pain intensity in the dexmedetomidine group was significantly lower than in the remifentanil group (2.98 ± 1.29 vs. 3.80 ± 1.1; P < 0.001). Hemodynamic changes in the dexmedetomidine group (MAP: 92.60 ± 5.56, HR: 73.07 ± 7) were less, and their condition was significantly more stable than in the remifentanil group (MAP: 93.85 ± 4.78, HR: 79.15 ± 7.03; P < 0.05). The mean arterial oxygen saturation (O₂ sat) in the dexmedetomidine group was significantly higher and more stable than in the remifentanil group (98.87 ± 0.51 vs. 97.92 ± 0.46; P < 0.05). The incidence of nausea and vomiting was significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group compared to the remifentanil group (P < 0.05). The administration of analgesics in the post-anesthetic care unit (PACU) was significantly higher in the remifentanil group than the dexmedetomidine group (P = 0.016).

Conclusions

Anesthetic maintenance with either dexmedetomidine or remifentanil infusion until extubation provided more smooth and hemodynamically stable conditions, without complications. However, dexmedetomidine provides better analgesia, causes a more stable hemodynamic state, and reduces postoperative nausea-vomiting, shivering, and the need for analgesics.

Evaluation of the perioperative effects of dexmedetomidine on tympanoplasty operations

PURPOSE

This randomized double-blind study aimed to evaluate the effects of dexmedetomidine on hemodynamic parameters and the quality of surgery and recovery criteria in tympanoplasty operations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 75 patients 18-55 years undergoing tympanoplasty, who were graded as American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I-II, were randomly divided into three groups. Group 1 included patients receiving remifentanil alone, Group 2 included patients receiving dexmedetomidine + remifentanil and Group 3 included patients receiving dexmedetomidine + ½ remifentanil. Anesthesia was induced with propofol and cisatracurium. For maintenance of anesthesia, a mixture of 2-2.5% sevoflurane, 40-60% oxygen/air was used. The groups were compared in terms of hemodynamic parameters, surgical area, recovery criteria, modified Aldrete, pain scores, additional analgesic requirements and adverse effects.

RESULTS

Mean arterial pressure and heart rate values of Group 1 were higher at the time of intubation, incision, spontaneous breathing and extubation compared to Group 2 and Group 3. Surgical field satisfaction was higher in Group 2 and Group 3 than Group 1. Spontaneous breathing, eye opening and verbal cooperation times were shorter in Group 3 compared to Group 2. Eye opening and verbal cooperation times were longer in Group 2 compared to Group 1. The 30-minute modified Aldrete scores was higher in Group 3 compared to Group 1. There was no difference between the groups in terms of postoperative pain and adverse effects.

CONCLUSION

The use of dexmedetomidine during tympanoplasty operations may provide better hemodynamic control and surgical view, may provide faster recovery and may reduce remifentanil consumption.

Effects of Additional Intraoperative Administration of Sufentanil on Postoperative Pain, Stress and Inflammatory Responses in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Myomectomy: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial

Purpose

Although pain after laparoscopic surgery is assumed to be minor, many women still suffer from unexpected postoperative pain. Thus, we aimed to assess whether additional intraoperative administration of sufentanil could help to improve postoperative pain and related agitation, stress, and inflammation response in patients undergoing laparoscopic myomectomy.

Patients and Methods

Forty female patients with uterine myoma scheduled for laparoscopic myomectomy under general anesthesia were randomized to receive sufentanil (group T, n=20) or normal saline (group C, n=20) 1h before the end of the surgery. The postoperative pain, agitation, stress, inflammation, and adverse effects were measured.

Results

As the primary outcome, the visual analog scale (VAS) pain score was significantly reduced in group T as compared with group C at each measured time point in a post-anesthesia care unit (PACU), VAS 5 min (31.5 ± 2.7 vs 40.6 ± 5.6) (P<0.001), VAS 30 min (36.5 ± 4.5 vs 46.0 ± 2.9) (P<0.001), VAS 1h (37.8 ± 4.0 vs 48.6 ± 5.5) (P<0.001). The secondary outcomes, including the sedation agitation scale (SAS) scores, plasma concentrations of epinephrine and norepinephrine, and the levels of plasma interleukin-6 (IL-6), interleukin-8 (IL-8), and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) in group T were remarkably lower than those in group C (P < 0.001). The cough cases in group T also showed a significant reduction in comparison with group C (P < 0.05). In addition, the anesthetic recovery time, including the spontaneous breathing recovery time and extubation time, were not significantly different between the two groups, as were the cases of respiratory depression and postoperative delirium (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

For patients undergoing laparoscopic myomectomy, administration of sufentanil 1 h before the end of surgery shows excellent analgesic and sedative effects, alleviated postoperative stress and inflammatory responses, reduced incidence of cough, without prolonging anesthetic recovery time and increasing adverse reactions.

Examination of the sedative and analgesic effects of gabapentin and dexmedetomidine in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy surgery: A randomized controlled trial

Introduction:

At present, laparoscopic surgery is a very common method, especially for the removal of the gallbladder, because pain and anxiety following surgery is a major problem in surgical operations. Various studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of gabapentin and dexmedetomidine in reducing pain intensity after surgery. The present study is aimed at examining the sedative and analgesic effects of gabapentin and dexmedetomidine in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Methods:

This was a double-blinded clinical trial involving 40 patients who were candidates for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The patients were randomly allotted in two groups of dexmedetomidine (n = 20) and gabapentin (n = 20). Then, pain intensity based on the visual analog scale (VAS) and sedation level based on the Ramsay Sedation Scale (RSS) were measured at the curtained times. As the data were not normally distributed, the Mann–Whitney U test was used to analyze the data, and the significance level was set at 0.05.

Results:

Across the follow-up points, more reduction in pain intensity was observed in the dexmedetomidine group as compared with the gabapentin group. The available dissimilarities between these two groups in pain decrement at the recovery room and 3 h after being discharged from the recovery room were not significant (P ≥ 0.414). In addition, across all the time points, there was considerable growth in sedation in the dexmedetomidine group in comparison with the gabapentin group (P < 0.024). This finding indicated that dexmedetomidine was more effective than gabapentin in creating sedation.

Conclusion:

Compared with gabapentin, dexmedetomidine leads to more pain reduction after surgery and better sedation during and after surgery.

Opioid Use in the Postoperative Arena: Global Reduction in Opioids After Surgery Through Enhanced Recovery and Gynecologic Surgery

Enhanced recovery programs aim to reduce surgical stress to improve the patient perioperative experience. Through a combination of multimodal analgesia and maintaining a physiological state, postoperative recovery is improved. Many analgesic adjuncts are available that improve postoperative pain control and limit opioid analgesia requirements. Adjuncts are often used in combination, but different interventions may be incorporated for patient-specific and procedure-specific needs. Postoperative pain control can be optimized by continuing nonopioid adjuncts, and prescribing opioid analgesia to address breakthrough pain. Prescribing practices should balance optimizing pain relief, minimizing the risk of chronic pain, while limiting the potential for opioid misuse.

Intra-operative analgesia with remifentanil vs. dexmedetomidine: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

Intra-operative remifentanil is associated with increased postoperative analgesic requirements and opioid consumption. Dexmedetomidine has characteristics suggesting it may substitute for intra-operative remifentanil during general anaesthesia, but existing literature has reported conflicting results. We undertook this meta-analysis to investigate whether general anaesthesia including dexmedetomidine would result in less postoperative pain than general anaesthesia including remifentanil. The MEDLINE and PubMed electronic databases were searched up to October 2018. Only randomised trials including patients receiving general anaesthesia and comparing dexmedetomidine with remifentanil administration were included. Meta-analyses were performed mostly employing a random effects model. The primary outcome was pain score at rest (visual analogue scale, 0-10) at two postoperative hours. The secondary outcomes included: pain score at rest at 24 postoperative hours; opioid consumption at 2 and 24 postoperative hours; and rates of hypotension, bradycardia, shivering and postoperative nausea and vomiting. Twenty-one randomised trials, including 1309 patients, were identified. Pain scores at rest at two postoperative hours were lower in the dexmedetomidine group, with a mean difference (95%CI) of -0.7 (-1.2 to -0.2), I2  = 85%, p = 0.004, and a moderate quality of evidence. Secondary pain outcomes were also significantly better in the dexmedetomidine group. Rates of hypotension, shivering and postoperative nausea and vomiting were at least twice as frequent in patients who received remifentanil. Time to analgesia request was longer, and use of postoperative morphine and rescue analgesia were less, with dexmedetomidine, whereas episodes of bradycardia were similar between groups. There is moderate evidence that intra-operative dexmedetomidine during general anaesthesia improves pain outcomes during the first 24 postoperative hours, when compared with remifentanil, with fewer side effects.

Pain management after laparoscopic hysterectomy: systematic review of literature and PROSPECT recommendations

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Laparoscopic hysterectomy is increasingly performed because it is associated with less postoperative pain and earlier recovery as compared with open abdominal hysterectomy. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the available literature regarding the management of pain after laparoscopic hysterectomy.

STRATEGY AND SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials evaluating postoperative pain after laparoscopic hysterectomy published between January 1996 and May 2018 were retrieved, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, from the EMBASE and MEDLINE databases and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials. Efficacy and adverse effects of analgesic techniques were assessed.

RESULTS

Of the 281 studies initially identified, 56 were included. Of these, 31 assessed analgesic or anesthetic interventions and 25 assessed surgical interventions. Acetaminophen, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and dexamethasone reduced opioid consumption. Limited evidence hindered recommendations on alpha-2-agonists. Inconsistent evidence was found in the studies investigating pregabalin and transversus abdominis plane block, and no evidence was found for intraperitoneal local anesthetics, port site infiltration, or single-port laparoscopy. Measures to lower peritoneal insufflation pressure or humidify or heat insufflated gas seem to reduce the incidence of shoulder pain, but not abdominal pain.

CONCLUSIONS

The baseline analgesic regimen for laparoscopic hysterectomy should include acetaminophen, a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug, dexamethasone, and opioids as rescue analgesics.

Postoperative pain management in the postanesthesia care unit: an update

Acute postoperative pain remains a major problem, resulting in multiple undesirable outcomes if inadequately controlled. Most surgical patients spend their immediate postoperative period in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU), where pain management, being unsatisfactory and requiring improvements, affects further recovery. Recent studies on postoperative pain management in the PACU were reviewed for the advances in assessments and treatments. More objective assessments of pain being independent of patients' participation may be potentially appropriate in the PACU, including photoplethysmography-derived parameters, analgesia nociception index, skin conductance, and pupillometry, although further studies are needed to confirm their utilities. Multimodal analgesia with different analgesics and techniques has been widely used. With theoretical basis of preventing central sensitization, preventive analgesia is increasingly common. New opioids are being developed with minimization of adverse effects of traditional opioids. More intravenous nonopioid analgesics and adjuncts (such as dexmedetomidine and dexamethasone) are introduced for their opioid-sparing effects. Current evidence suggests that regional analgesic techniques are effective in the reduction of pain and stay in the PACU. Being available alternatives to epidural analgesia, perineural techniques and infiltrative techniques including wound infiltration, transversus abdominis plane block, local infiltration analgesia, and intraperitoneal administration have played a more important role for their effectiveness and safety.

Managing Postoperative Pain After Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery in the Era of the Opioid Epidemic

In this review, we examine the evidence behind nonopioid medication alternatives, peripheral nerve blocks, surgical techniques, and postoperative recovery protocols that can help minimize and effectively treat postoperative pain after minimally invasive gynecologic surgery (MIGS). Because of the depth and heterogeneity of the data, a narrative review was performed of reported interventions. A comprehensive review was performed of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Database with a focus on randomized controlled trials. In the absence of literature specific to benign gynecology, similar specialty or procedural data were reviewed. A variety of nonopioid medications, surgical techniques, and postoperative recovery protocols have shown significant improvements in postoperative pain after gynecologic surgery. Nonopioid medication options that are beneficial include acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories, and antiepileptics. Incision infiltration with local anesthesia also significantly reduces pain. Surgically, minimally invasive approaches, reducing the laparoscopic trocar size to <10 mm, and evacuating the pneumoperitoneum at the end of the case all have significant benefits. Lastly, enhanced recovery pathways show promise in reducing pain after MIGS. By using a multimodal approach, minimally invasive gynecologic surgeons can help to minimize and manage postoperative pain with less reliance on opioid pain medications.

Non-opioid pain management in benign minimally invasive hysterectomy: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Less postoperative pain typically is associated with a minimally invasive hysterectomy compared with a laparotomy approach; however, poor pain control can still be an issue. Multiple guidelines exist for managing postoperative pain, yet most are not specialty-specific and are based on procedures that bear little relevance to a minimally invasive hysterectomy.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine whether there is enough quality evidence within the benign gynecology literature to make non-opioid pain control recommendations for women who undergo a benign minimally invasive hysterectomy.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

We queried PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane databases using MeSH terms: "postoperative pain," "perioperative pain," "postoperative analgesia," "pain management," "pain control," "minimally invasive gynecologic surgery," and "hysterectomy." A manual examination of references from identified studies was also performed. All PubMed published studies that involved minimally invasive hysterectomies through November 9, 2016, were included. This systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Studies were restricted to benign minimally invasive hysterectomies evaluating non-opioid pharmacologic therapies. Primary outcomes included amount of postoperative analgesics consumed and postoperative pain scores. Two reviewers independently completed an in-depth evaluation of each study for characteristics and results using an established database, according to inclusion/exclusion criteria. A risk assessment was performed, and a quality rating was assigned with the use of the Cochrane Collaboration's Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.

RESULTS

Initially 1155 studies were identified, and 24 studies met all inclusion criteria. Based on limited data of varying quality, intravenous acetaminophen, anticonvulsants and dexamethasone demonstrate opioid-sparing benefits; ketorolac shows mixed results in laparoscopic hysterectomies. Paracervical blocks provide pain-reducing benefits in vaginal hysterectomies.

CONCLUSIONS

Convincing conclusions are difficult to draw because of the heterogeneous and contradictory nature of the literature. There is a clear need for more high-quality research that will evaluate each medication type for posthysterectomy pain control.