What Pain Levels Do TSA Patients Experience When Given a Long-acting Nerve Block and Multimodal Analgesia?

Optimal analgesic regimen for total shoulder arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Clinical approaches to analgesia following total shoulder arthroplasty include liposomal bupivacaine, local infiltration analgesia, single-shot interscalene block, and continuous interscalene block. However, the best method remains contentious. This study conducts a network meta-analysis comparing these four methods, aiming to identify the most effective analgesic approach.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials on analgesic regimens for total shoulder arthroplasty were identified through searches of PUBMED, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus databases, covering their inception through November 2023. Network meta-analysis was performed using STATA 15.1, and the Cochrane Handbook version 5.1.0 risk of bias tool was employed for quality assessment of the literature.

RESULTS

Twelve randomized controlled trials were included, comprising 1537 patients undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty. The interventions compared were ssISB, cISB, LIA, and LB. Regarding the quality of the literature, four studies were deemed low risk, one high risk, and seven moderate risk. The network meta-analysis revealed that in terms of VAS scores in the PACU, the ssISB group was the most effective, followed by cISB and LB, with LIA being the least effective. This pattern continued in VAS scores on the first and second postoperative days. Regarding morphine consumption, the cISB group showed the most significant reduction in the PACU and on the first postoperative day, while the LIA group performed best in total postoperative morphine consumption. The shortest average hospital stay was noted in the cISB group.

CONCLUSION

The ssISB method excels in controlling early postoperative pain, particularly during the PACU stage and early postoperative period. Additionally, the cISB method is notable for reducing postoperative morphine consumption and shortening average hospital stays. While the LIA method ranks first in reducing total morphine consumption, it is weaker in pain control. The LB method is underwhelming across most assessment parameters. These findings underscore the importance of selecting appropriate analgesic strategies for different postoperative recovery phases and provide valuable insights for clinicians to optimize postoperative pain management. Furthermore, they suggest a need for future research to explore the specific application and effectiveness of these methods in varying clinical contexts.

Liposomal bupivacaine nerve block provides better pain control post-total shoulder arthroplasty than continuous indwelling catheter

BACKGROUND

Pain control is essential to successful total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This non-blinded, randomized clinical trial compared shoulder pain, narcotic use, interscalene (IS) block application time, and costs in 76 subjects who were randomly assigned to receive either a single injection IS nerve block of 10 cc (133 mg) liposomal bupivacaine mixed with 10 cc of 0.5% bupivacaine (Group 1), or 20 cc of 0.5% ropivacaine direct injection combined with an indwelling IS nerve block catheter delivering 0.2% ropivacaine at a continual 4 cc/h infusion for the initial 3 post-operative days (Group 2). Surgical time, local anesthesia duration, hospital stay length, morphine milligram equivalents (MME) consumed, worst shoulder pain at 24, 48 and 72 h, and complications were recorded. Patient reported function, pain and activity level surveys were completed before, and 6-week post-TSA (P < 0.05).

RESULTS

Group 1 had less pain 24-h (0.72 ± 0.8 vs. 3.4 ± 2.9, p < 0.0001) and 48-h (2.5 ± 2.2 vs. 4.8 ± 2.6, p = 0.005) post-TSA. At 24-h post-TSA, MME consumption was similar (Group 1 = 4.5 ± 6.4 vs. Group 2 = 3.7 ± 3.8, p = 0.54), but was lower for Group 1 at 48 h (0.0 ± 0.0 vs. 0.64 ± 0.99, p = 0.001). Group 2 had longer IS block application time (10.00 ± 4.6 min vs. 4.84 ± 2.7 min, p < 0.0001). Only group 2 had a strong relationship between MME consumption over the first 24-h post-TSA and pain 24-h post-TSA (r = 0.76, p < 0.0001), a moderate relationship with pain 48-h post-TSA (r = 0.59, P = 0.001), and a weak relationship with pain 72-h post-TSA (r = 0.44, P = 0.02). Significant relationships for these variables were not observed for Group 1 (r ≤ 0.30, p ≥ 0.23). Group 1 IS block costs were less/patient than Group 2 ($190.17 vs. $357.12 USD).

CONCLUSION

A single shot, liposomal bupivacaine interscalene nerve block provided better post-TSA pain control with less narcotic consumption, less time for administration and less healthcare system cost compared to interscalene nerve block using a continuous indwelling catheter.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, Prospective, Randomized.

Protocolo multimodal farmacológico perioperatorio para la cirugía de columna en pediatría

Introducción: La cirugía de columna es uno de los procedimientos con mayor morbimortalidad dentro de la población pediátrica; el manejo farmacológico del dolor en dicha población aún no se encuentra estandarizado. La analgesia multimodal trata de responder a esta problemática. Objetivo: Sobre la base de una revisión sistemática de la bibliografía, desarrollar un detallado protocolomultimodal farmacológico para el manejo del dolor pre- y posoperatorio intra/extrahospitalario para la cirugía de columna en niños. Materiales y Métodos: Se realizó una revisión sistemática de textos completos en inglés o español en PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library y LILACS Database publicados entre 2000 y 2021; se aplicó el diagrama de flujo PRISMA. Resultados: De 756 artículos preseleccionados, 38 fueron incluidos en la evaluación final. Dada la dificultad bioética de desarrollar trabajos en formato de ensayos clínicos con fármacos y combinaciones de ellos en la población pediátrica, desarrollamos un protocolo detallado de manejo del dolor pre- y posoperatorio por vía intravenosa/oral, intra- y extrahospitalario, para aplicar en niños sometidos a cirugía de columna. Conclusión: Logramos desarrollar un detallado protocolo multimodal farmacológico para el perioperatorio intra- y extrahospitalario de cirugía de columna en niños, sencillo y reproducible, tendiente a acelerar la recuperación funcional del paciente y disminuir los costos socioeconómicos globales.Nivel de Evidencia: II

Clinical care pathways for ambulatory total shoulder arthroplasty

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is growing in popularity and is increasingly done on an ambulatory basis. This review examines recent developments in anesthesia and analgesia for ambulatory shoulder surgery. Pathway components are discussed and a sample pathway is described.

RECENT FINDINGS

Adoption of pathways for shoulder surgery improves patient experience by reducing pain, opioid use, and side effects while improving patient satisfaction. Long-acting nerve blockade using adjuvants like dexamethasone provide long-lasting analgesia without rebound pain. Peripheral nerve blockade provides better analgesia than peri-articular injection of local anesthetic. There are multiple approaches to nerve blockade for shoulder surgery to consider, including interscalene, superior trunk, supraclavicular, and anterior suprascapular nerve blocks. Multimodal analgesia should include acetaminophen and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, but routine gabapentinoids should not be used.

SUMMARY

Anesthesiologists should lead the way to create and implement pathways for ambulatory total shoulder arthroplasty, incorporating appropriate patient selection, patient education, long-lasting nerve blockade, and multimodal analgesia.

Continuous interscalene versus phrenic nerve-sparing high-thoracic erector spinae plane block for total shoulder arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

The high-thoracic erector spinae plane block (HT-ESPB) has been reported as an effective analgesic modality for the shoulder region without phrenic nerve palsy. The goal of this study was to compare the HT-ESPB as a phrenic nerve-sparing alternative to an interscalene block for total shoulder arthroplasty.

METHODS

Thirty patients undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty at Stanford Health Care (Palo Alto, CA, USA) were enrolled in a double-blind randomized controlled trial. We randomized 28 patients to receive either an interscalene or HT-ESPB perineural catheter preoperatively; 26 patients were included in the final analysis. The study was powered for the primary outcome of incidence of hemidiaphragmatic paralysis in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU). Other outcome measures included incentive spirometry volume, brachial plexus motor and sensory exams, adverse events, pain scores, and opioid consumption.

RESULTS

The incidence of hemidiaphragmatic paralysis in the HT-ESPB catheter group was significantly lower than in the interscalene catheter group (0/12, 0% vs 14/14, 100%; P < 0.001). No statistically significant differences were found in pain scores and opioid consumption (in oral morphine equivalents) between the interscalene and HT-ESPB groups through postoperative day (POD) 2. Nevertheless, the mean (standard deviation) point estimates for opioid consumption for the HT-ESPB group were higher than for the interscalene group in the PACU (HT-ESPB: 24.8 [26.7] mg; interscalene: 10.7 [21.7] mg) and for POD 0 (HT-ESPB: 20.5 [25.0] mg; interscalene: 6.7 [12.0] mg). In addition, cumulative postoperative opioid consumption was significantly higher at POD 0 (PACU through POD 0) in the HT-ESPB group (45.3 [39.9] mg) than in the interscalene group (16.6 [21.9] mg; P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that continuous HT-ESPB can be a phrenic nerve-sparing alternative to continuous interscalene brachial plexus blockade, although the latter provided superior opioid-sparing in the immediate postoperative period. This was a small sample size study, and further investigations powered to detect differences in analgesic and quality of recovery score endpoints are needed.

STUDY REGISTRATION

www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov (NCT03807505); registered 17 January 2019.

Ultrasound-guided bilateral superficial cervical plexus block enhances the quality of recovery of uremia patients with secondary hyperparathyroidism following parathyroidectomy: a randomized controlled trial

Background

Parathyroidectomy has been proposed as a method for reducing parathyroid hormone levels. We evaluated the effects of ultrasound-guided bilateral superficial cervical plexus block (BSCPB) on the quality of recovery of uremia patients with secondary hyperparathyroidism (SHPT) following parathyroidectomy.

Methods

Eighty-two uremia patients who underwent parathyroidectomy and exhibited SHPT were randomly allocated to the BSCPB group or the control group (CON group). The patients received ultrasound-guided BSCPB with 7.5 ml of ropivacaine 0.5% on each side (BSCPB group) or equal amount of 0.9% normal saline (CON group). The primary outcome of the Quality of Recovery-40(QoR-40) score was recorded on the day before surgery and postoperative day 1(POD1). Secondary outcomes including total consumption of remifentanil, time to first required rescue analgesia, number of patients requiring rescue analgesia, and total consumption of tramadol during the first 24 h after surgery were recorded. The occurrence of postoperative nausea or vomiting (PONV) and the visual analogue scale (VAS) scores were assessed and recorded.

Results

The scores on the pain and emotional state dimensions of the QoR-40 and the total QoR-40 score were higher in the BSCPB group than in the CON group on POD1 (P = 0.000). Compared with the CON group, the total consumption of remifentanil was significantly decreased in the BSCPB group (P = 0.000). The BSCPB group exhibited longer time to first required rescue analgesia (P = 0.018), fewer patients requiring rescue analgesia (P = 0.000), and lower postoperative total consumption of tramadol during the first 24 h after surgery (P = 0.000) than the CON group. The incidence of PONV was significantly lower in the BSCPB group than in the CON group (P = 0.013). The VAS scores in the BSCPB group were lower than those in the CON group at all time-points after surgery (P = 0.000).

Conclusion

Ultrasound-guided BSCPB with ropivacaine 0.5% can enhance the quality of recovery, postoperative analgesia, and reduce the incidence of PONV in uremia patients with SHPT following parathyroidectomy.

Trial registration

ChiCTR1900027185 . (Prospective registered). Initial registration date was 04/11/2019.

The effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medications after rotator cuff surgery: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are frequently used for postoperative pain management. However, animal studies have demonstrated negative effects of NSAIDs on bone and tendon healing after commonly performed procedures such as rotator cuff repair. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of postoperative NSAID use on opioid use, pain control, and shoulder outcomes after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

METHODS

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of postoperative NSAID use was performed in patients undergoing primary arthroscopic rotator cuff surgery at a single institution. Patients were randomized to receive ibuprofen or placebo for 2 weeks postoperatively, in addition to opioid medication. They were instructed to keep a daily pain diary for the first week after surgery, which was returned at their first postoperative visit for analysis. Visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores, shoulder range of motion, and 12-item Short Form Survey, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores were collected. Assessment of rotator cuff healing was performed using ultrasound at 1 year postoperatively.

RESULTS

A total of 50 patients in the placebo group and 51 patients in the ibuprofen group were included for analysis. There were no differences in age, race, sex, history of preoperative NSAID or opioid use, or operative findings between groups. The amount of mean total morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) used in the first postoperative week was lower in the ibuprofen group than in the placebo group (168 MMEs vs. 211 MMEs, P = .04). Early VAS scores on postoperative days 3, 4, 5, and 6 were lower in the ibuprofen group, but there was no difference in mean VAS scores between groups by 6 weeks after surgery. At 6 months, mean forward flexion and the mean ASES score were higher in the ibuprofen group than in the placebo group: 162° vs. 153° (P = .03) and 86 vs. 78 (P = .02), respectively. There were no differences in shoulder motion or 12-item Short Form Survey, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand, or ASES scores at 1 year. At 1 year after surgery, 7 patients in the ibuprofen group had evidence of tendon retear diagnosed on ultrasound (5 partial and 2 full thickness) compared with 13 patients in the placebo group (5 partial and 8 full thickness), but this difference was not statistically significant (P = .20).

CONCLUSION

Postoperative ibuprofen use reduces opioid requirements and decreases patient pain levels in the first week after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. In addition, ibuprofen use after rotator cuff repair does not lead to an increased risk of tendon retear.

A Comprehensive Enhanced Recovery Pathway for Rotator Cuff Surgery Reduces Pain, Opioid Use, and Side Effects

BACKGROUND

Patients often have moderate to severe pain after rotator cuff surgery, despite receiving analgesics and nerve blocks. There are many suggested ways to improve pain after rotator cuff surgery, but the effects of adopting a pathway that includes formal patient education, a long-acting nerve block, and extensive multimodal analgesia are unclear.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) Does adoption of a clinical pathway incorporating patient education, a long-acting nerve block, and preemptive multimodal analgesia reduce the worst pain during the first 48 hours after surgery compared with current standard institutional practices? (2) Does adoption of the pathway reduce opioid use? (3) Does adoption of the pathway reduce side effects and improve patient-oriented outcomes?

METHODS

From September 2018 to January 2020, 281 patients scheduled for arthroscopic ambulatory rotator cuff surgery were identified for this paired sequential prospective cohort study. Among patients in the control group, 177 were identified, 33% (58) were not eligible, for 11% (20) staff was not available, 56% (99) were approached, 16% (29) declined, 40% (70) enrolled, and 40% (70) were analyzed (2% [4] lost to follow-up for secondary outcomes after postoperative day 2). For patients in the pathway cohort, 104 were identified, 17% (18) were not eligible, for 11% (11) staff was not available, 72% (75) were approached, 5% (5) declined, 67% (70) enrolled, and 67% (70) were analyzed (3% [3] lost to follow-up for secondary outcomes after postoperative day 2). No patients were lost to follow-up for primary outcome; for secondary outcomes, four were lost in the control group and three in the pathway group after postoperative day 2 (p = 0.70). The initial 70 patients enrolled received routine care (control group), and in a subsequent cohort, 70 patients received care guided by a pathway (pathway group). Of the 205 eligible patients, 68% (140) were included in the analysis. This was not a study comparing two tightly defined protocols but rather a study to determine whether adoption of a pathway would alter patient outcomes. For this reason, we used a pragmatic (real-world) study design that did not specify how control patients would be treated, and it did not require that all pathway patients receive all components of the pathway. We developed the pathway in coordination with a group of surgeons and anesthesiologists who agreed to apply the pathway as much as was viewed practical for each individual patient. Patients in both groups received a brachial plexus nerve block with sedation. Major differences between the pathway and control groups were: detailed patient education regarding reasonable pain expectations with a goal of reducing opioid use (no formal educational presentation was given to the control), a long-acting nerve block using bupivacaine with dexamethasone (control patients often received shorter-acting local anesthetic without perineural dexamethasone), and preemptive multimodal analgesia including intraoperative ketamine, postoperative acetaminophen, NSAIDs, and gabapentin at bedtime, with opioids as needed (control patients received postoperative opioids but most did not get postoperative NSAIDS and no controls received gabapentin or separate prescriptions for acetaminophen). The primary outcome was the numerical rating scale (NRS) worst pain with movement 0 to 48 hours after block placement. The NRS pain score ranges from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain possible). The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) [12] for NRS that was used for calculation of the study sample size was 1.3 [18], although some authors suggest 1 [13] or 2 [5] are appropriate; if we had used an MCID of 2, the sample size would have been smaller. Secondary outcomes included NRS pain scores at rest, daily opioid use (postoperative day 1, 2, 7, 14), block duration, patient-oriented pain questions (postoperative day 1, 2, 7, 14), and patient and physician adherence to pathway.

RESULTS

On postoperative day 1, pathway patients had lower worst pain with movement (3.3 ± 3.1) compared with control patients (5.6 ± 3.0, mean difference -2.7 [95% CI -3.7 to -1.7]; p < 0.001); lower scores were also seen for pain at rest (1.9 ± 2.3 versus 4.0 ± 2.9, mean difference -2.0 [95% CI -2.8 to -1.3]; p < 0.001). Cumulative postoperative opioid use (0-48 hours) was reduced (pathway oral morphine equivalent use was 23 ± 28 mg versus 44 ± 35 mg, mean difference 21 [95% CI 10 to 32]; p < 0.01). The greatest difference in opioid use was in the first 24 hours after surgery (pathway 7 ± 12 mg versus control 21 ± 21 mg, mean difference -14 [95% CI -19 to -10]; p < 0.01). On postoperative day 1, pathway patients had less interference with staying asleep compared with control patients (0.5 ± 1.6 versus 2.6 ± 3.3, mean difference -2.2 [95% CI -3.3 to -1.1]; p < 0.001); lower scores were also seen for interference with activities (0.9 ± 2.3 versus 1.9 ± 2.9, mean difference -1.1 [95% CI -2 to -0.1]; p = 0.03). Satisfaction with pain treatment on postoperative day 1 was higher among pathway patients compared with control patients (9.2 ± 1.7 versus 8.2 ± 2.5, mean difference 1.0 [95% CI 0.3 to 1.8]; p < 0.001). On postoperative day 2, pathway patients had lower nausea scores compared with control patients (0.3 ± 1.1 versus 1 ± 2.1, mean difference -0.7 [95% CI -1.2 to -0.1]; p = 0.02); lower scores were also seen for drowsiness on postoperative day 1 (1.7 ± 2.7 versus 2.6 ± 2.6, mean difference -0.9 [95% CI - 1.7 to -0.1]; p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Adoption of the pathway was associated with improvement in the primary outcome (pain with movement) that exceeded the MCID. Patients in the pathway group had improved patient-oriented outcomes and fewer side effects. This pathway uses multiple analgesic drugs, which may pose risks to elderly patients, in particular. Therefore, in evaluating whether to use this pathway, clinicians should weigh the effect sizes against the potential risks that may emerge with large scale use, consider the difficulties involved in adapting a pathway to local practice so that pathway will persist, and recognize that this study only enrolled patients among surgeons and the anesthesiologists that advocated for the pathway; results may have been different with less enthusiastic clinicians. This pathway, based on a long-lasting nerve block, multimodal analgesia, and patient education can be considered for adoption.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, therapeutic study.

Factors Influencing Press Ganey Ambulatory Surgery Scores in Patients Undergoing Upper Extremity Procedures

We sought to determine whether patient and surgical factors are associated with the Press Ganey Ambulatory Surgery Survey (PGAS) satisfaction scores in patients undergoing outpatient upper extremity procedures.

Perioperative Pain Management in Ambulatory and Inpatient Shoulder Surgery

»

Acetaminophen is an effective addition to a multimodal pain regimen; however, evidence to support intravenous versus oral administration requires further evaluation.

»

While nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are a valuable addition to a multimodal pain strategy, concerns regarding their effect on healing after certain procedures (i.e., rotator cuff repair) in select patients may preclude their use.

»

The use of perioperative gabapentinoids have varied results for pain control, and additional research is warranted to support their use after certain shoulder procedures.

»

Opioid-prescribing should be limited and reserved for severe postoperative pain. When prescribed, opioids should be taken at the lowest possible dose and for the shortest period.

»

Centrally acting analgesics such as tramadol have been shown to be as effective as opioids and have a lower risk of complications.

»

Nerve blocks are an excellent addition to multimodal pain management strategies. Longer-lasting formulations of perioperative single-shot injections and indwelling catheters may reduce rebound pain.

Outpatient versus inpatient anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty: outcomes and complications

Background

Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is an effective treatment option for glenohumeral arthritis. Historically, this surgical procedure was performed on an inpatient basis. There has been a recent trend in performing TSA on an outpatient basis in the proper candidates.

Methods

All patients who underwent outpatient TSA performed by a single surgeon between 2015 and 2017 were included. Demographic information and clinical outcome scores, as well as data on complications, readmissions, and revision surgical procedures, were recorded. This group of patients was then compared with a matched cohort of patients who underwent inpatient TSA over the same period.

Results

Overall, 94 patients (average age, 60.4 years; 67.0% male patients) underwent outpatient TSA and were included. Patients who underwent outpatient TSA showed significant improvement in all clinical outcome scores at both 1 and 2 years postoperatively. The control group consisted of 77 patients who underwent inpatient TSA (average age, 62.6 years; 53.2% male patients). No significant differences in complications or improvements in clinical outcome scores were found between the inpatient and outpatient groups.

Conclusion

TSA performed in an outpatient setting is a safe and reliable procedure that provides significant improvement in clinical outcome scores and no difference in complication rates compared with inpatient TSA.