Patient-reported Pain Scores Research Articles

Hyaluronic Acid Versus Platelet-Rich Plasma: A Prospective, Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Clinical Outcomes and Effects on Intra-articular Biology for the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis

Background: The use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) for the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA) has demonstrated mixed clinical outcomes in randomized controlled trials when compared with hyaluronic acid (HA), an accepted nonsurgical treatment for symptomatic OA. Biological analysis of PRP has demonstrated an anti-inflammatory effect on the intra-articular environment. Purpose: To compare the clinical and biological effects of an intra-articular injection of PRP with those of an intra-articular injection of HA in patients with mild to moderate knee OA. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: A total of 111 patients with symptomatic unilateral knee OA received a series of either leukocyte-poor PRP or HA injections under ultrasound guidance. Clinical data were collected before treatment and at 4 time points across a 1-year period. Synovial fluid was also collected for analysis of proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory markers before treatment and at 12 and 24 weeks after treatment. Several measures were used to assess results: (1) Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain subscale; (2) International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee evaluation, visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, and Lysholm knee score; and (3) difference in intra-articular biochemical marker concentrations. Results: There were 49 patients randomized to treatment with PRP and 50 randomized to treatment with HA. No difference was seen between the groups in the primary outcome measure (WOMAC pain score). In the secondary outcome measure, linear contrasts identified a significantly higher IKDC score in the PRP group compared with the HA group at 24 weeks (mean ± standard error [SE], 65.5 ± 3.6 vs 55.8 ± 3.8, respectively; P = .013) and at final follow-up (52 weeks) (57.6 ± 3.37 vs 46.6 ± 3.76, respectively; P = .003). Linear contrasts also identified a statistically lower VAS score in the PRP group versus the HA group at 24 weeks (mean ± SE, 34.6 ± 3.24 vs 48.6 ± 3.7, respectively; P = .0096) and 52 weeks (44 ± 4.6 vs 57.3 ± 3.8, respectively; P = .0039). An examination of fixed effects showed that patients with mild OA and a lower body mass index had a statistically significant improvement in outcomes. In the biochemical analysis, differences between groups approached significance for interleukin-1β (mean ± SE, 0.14 ± 0.05 pg/mL [PRP] vs 0.34 ± 0.16 pg/mL [HA]; P = .06) and tumor necrosis factor α (0.08 ± 0.01 pg/mL [PRP] vs 0.2 ± 0.18 pg/mL [HA]; P = .068) at 12-week follow-up. Conclusion: We found no difference between HA and PRP at any time point in the primary outcome measure: the patient-reported WOMAC pain score. Significant improvements were seen in other patient-reported outcome measures, with results favoring PRP over HA. Preceding a significant difference in subjective outcomes favoring PRP, there was a trend toward a decrease in 2 proinflammatory cytokines, which suggest that the anti-inflammatory properties of PRP may contribute to an improvement of symptoms. Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT02588872).

Hospitalist-vascular surgery comanagement: effects on complications and mortality

ABSTRACTObjectives: Hospitalized vascular surgery patients have multiple severe comorbidities, poor functional status, and high perioperative cardiac risk. Thus they may be ideal patients for a collaborative care model. However, there is little evidence for a comanagement model on clinical outcomes.Methods: The two-year pre-post study consisted of a comanagement model where a hospitalist actively participated in the medical care of American Society of Anesthesiologist Physical Status Classification scale 3 or 4 vascular surgery patients. Outcomes were in-hospital mortality, length of stay, 30-day readmission rate, pain scores, and patient safety metrics.Results: With comanagement, patient complications decreased from 3.5 to 2.2 events per 1000 patients. (p = 0.045). Mortality decreased from 2.01% to 1.00% (p = 0.049), corresponding to a decrease in the risk-adjusted observed to expected mortality rate ratio from 1.22 to 0.53 (p = 0.01). Patient reported pain scores improved; more patients in the comanagement cohort expressed no pain (72% vs 82.8%; p = 0.01) and there were reductions in reports of mild and moderate pain. There was no significant difference in the risk-adjusted length of stay (observed to expected ratio 0.83 to 0.88 for the pre-intervention and comanagement groups, respectively, p = 0.48). The 30-day readmission rate was unchanged (21.9 vs 20.6% p = 0.44). Patients in the intervention period were more clinically complex, as evidenced by the greater case mix index (2.21 vs 2.44).Conclusions: After two years of implementation, our comanagement service reduced complications, mortality, and pain scores among high-risk vascular surgery patients.

The Clinical Utility of Virtual Reality in Inpatient Pain Management Among Patients with Gastrointestinal Disorders

Introduction: Improvements in soft ware, design, and cost reduction have made virtual reality (VR) a practical tool for an immersive, multi-sensory experience to distract patients from painful stimuli. While the utility of VR for pain management has been evaluated among few specific conditions, to our knowledge it has not been tested among hospitalized patients with gastrointestinal (GI) disorders. Herein, we evaluated the clinical utility of VR for inpatient pain management and its effect on blood pressure and heart rate in a cohort of hospitalized patients with a variety of GI disorders. Methods: We screened patients admitted to the inpatient medicine service for GI-related illnesses during a 4-month period. We excluded patients with nausea, vomiting, dementia, motion sickness, stroke, seizure, epilepsy, and those in infectious isolation. Patients with at least one self-reported pain score of three or greater during the 24 hours preceding patient screening were selected to participate in the study. Eligible patients viewed a specific VR experience designed to reduce pain using the Samsung Gear Oculus VR goggles (Figure 1). We then compared pre and post intervention pain scores, blood pressure, and heart rate within subjects.Figure 1Results: A total of 13 patients participated in the study (Table 1). There was a statistically significant reduction in self-reported pain scores post VR intervention compared to before the intervention (pre-VR Mean = 3.8462 vs. post-VR Mean = 3.0000; P = 0.0025) corresponding to a 22% pain reduction and an observed effect size of 1.06 (Table 2). When adjusting for patients who reported no pain prior to VR intervention, similar findings were observed with a larger effect size of 1.83 (pre-VR Mean = 5.5556 vs. post-VR Mean = 4.3333; P = 0.0006). We did not observe a statistically significant change in systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, or mean heart rate (Table 2). Additionally, patients tolerated the intervention well and did not report any adverse effects.Table 1: Patient CharacteristicsTable 2: Physiological OutcomesConclusion: The use of VR for inpatients with GI disorders resulted in significant improvements in patient-reported pain scores, without influencing blood pressure and heart rate. VR is a potentially safe and practical tool to augment pain management in the acute inpatient setting. Further studies are indicated to further validate these findings, determine which subtypes of GI patients would benefit most from VR, and discover if long-term improvements in patient-reported pain scores are possible.

Patient-Controlled Analgesia Plus Background Opioid Infusion for Postoperative Pain in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.

Bolus administration of opioids via a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) device is widely used in the postoperative pediatric population. PCA devices have been shown to provide superior analgesia and greater patient satisfaction compared with intermittent administration. Studies comparing the efficacy of PCA with and without a background infusion for postoperative analgesia in children vary considerably in terms of dosing and methodologic quality, making it difficult for practitioners to derive clinically useful information. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to assess whether the addition of a background infusion to PCA bolus administration of an opioid analgesic is more effective (defined as lower pain scores) than PCA bolus alone in the postoperative population specific to children. We searched Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL from inception to January 2015 for registered and ongoing trials included in the meta-Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists of review articles and included articles. Study selection was randomized controlled studies comparing PCA bolus with PCA bolus plus background infusion for postoperative analgesia in children aged 0 to 18 years and adolescents aged 13 to 21 years undergoing any form of surgery that used patient-reported pain scores as an outcome measure. Two reviewers independently extracted data on patient and study characteristics, interventions, and outcomes from included studies using standardized data extraction forms. Seven trials met our eligibility criteria. Data were analyzed using Review Manager version 5.3. Meta-analyses were performed for outcomes that were defined similarly and reported in 2 or more studies, including patient-reported pain scores, nausea and/or vomiting, sedation, and opioid consumption. We independently assessed the risk of bias for each outcome and the certainty in the estimates of effect for critically important outcomes (pain scores, nausea and/or vomiting, excessive sedation) using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Subgroup analyses based on dose of background infusion (high versus low dose) and risk of bias (low versus high/unclear) were performed. There were no significant differences found with respect to pain scores 12 and 24 hours after surgery, opioid consumption, or risk of adverse events with the addition of a background opioid infusion to PCA opioid bolus doses. The quality of the evidence was deemed to be low to very low. There was no significant difference in outcomes with the addition of an opioid background infusion to PCA bolus doses of opioid. Further high-quality studies are required.

Intravenous Acetaminophen for Postoperative Pain Management in Patients Undergoing Living Laparoscopic Living-Donor Nephrectomy.

Postoperative pain is a common complication of laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomies (LLDNs). To determine whether intravenous (IV) acetaminophen administration post-LLDN influenced length of stay (LOS) when used for pain management. This single-center, retrospective study compared patients undergoing LLDN who had received IV acetaminophen for pain control versus those who did not between June 1, 2011, and November 30, 2015. Patient LOS, 30-day readmissions, frequency of pain assessments, patient-reported pain scores, and opioid administration were assessed. A total of 90 patients were included in the analysis (IV acetaminophen, n = 48; non-IV acetaminophen, n = 42). Patients who did not receive IV acetaminophen were more often older (48.8 ± 12.1 vs 39.3 ± 12.1 years; P = 0.012) and female (71.4% vs 47.9%; P < 0.001). The average LOS was similar between the 2 groups (median = 3.0; interquartile range = [3, 4] vs 3.5 [3, 4]; P = 0.737). The 30-day readmissions were higher in the IV acetaminophen group (16.7%) compared with the group not receiving IV acetaminophen (2.4%; P = 0.033). After the first postoperative day, the frequencies of pain assessments performed were similar among the 2 groups. There was no difference in average pain scores between the groups at any time after LLDN. Patients receiving IV acetaminophen were found to have no improvements in hospital LOS, average pain score, or opioid requirements compared with patients not receiving IV acetaminophen. Patients who received IV acetaminophen were also found to have a higher 30-day readmission rate.

Periarticular Injection of Liposomal Bupivacaine Offers No Benefit Over Standard Bupivacaine in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial

BackgroundPeriarticular injection of liposomal bupivacaine has been adopted as part of multimodal pain management after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). MethodsIn this prospective, randomized clinical trial, we enrolled 162 patients undergoing primary TKA in a single institution between January 2014 and May 2015. Eighty-seven patients were randomized to liposomal bupivacaine (experimental group), and 75 patients were randomized to free bupivacaine (control group). All patients received spinal anesthesia and otherwise identical surgical approaches, pain management, and rehabilitation protocols. Outcomes evaluated include the patient-reported visual analog pain scores, narcotic consumption, and narcotic-related side effects (Brief Pain Inventory) within 96 hours after surgery as well as functional outcomes using the Knee Society Score and the Short-Form 12 measured preoperatively and at 4-6 weeks after surgery. ResultsThere were no statistically significant differences between the groups in terms of postoperative daily pain scores, narcotic consumption (by-day and overall), or narcotic-related side effects. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in terms of surgical (P = .76) and medical complications or length of hospital stay (P = .35). There were no statistically significant differences in satisfaction between the groups (P = .56) or between the groups in postoperative Knee Society Score (P = .53) and the Short-Form 12 at 4-6 weeks (P = .82, P = .66). ConclusionAs part of multimodal pain management protocol, periarticular injection of liposomal bupivacaine compared with bupivacaine HCl did not result in any clinically or statistically significant improvement of the measured outcomes following TKA.

Armband activity monitor data do not correlate with reported pain scores in patients receiving vertebroplasty

BackgroundPrior research on the efficacy of vertebroplasty has focused primarily on subjective, patient-reported outcomes.ObjectiveTo apply an armband activity monitor (SenseWear by BodyMedia Inc, USA) to patients presenting for consideration for...

Pre-operative lumbar plexus block provides superior post-operative analgesia when compared with fascia iliaca block or general anesthesia alone in hip arthroscopy.

The objective of this study is to retrospectively examine the effects of pre-operative fascia iliaca (FI) and lumbar plexus (LPB) nerve blocks on post-operative pain and secondary post-operative variables following arthroscopic surgery of the hip. Subjects undergoing arthroscopic surgery of the hip received one of three pre-operative anesthetic techniques; general anesthesia only, general anesthesia with FI or general anesthesia with LPB. Patient reported pain scores (0–10) were recorded at 0, 30, 60, 90 and 120 min after admission to the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU). Secondary variables examined include time spent in the PACU, morphine equivalent administered, presence of nausea, persistent numbness, parasthesia, weakness, increased narcotic usage for rebound pain, ED visits and hospital admissions. The mean pain scores over all time points were significantly lower in the LPB group (2.38) than the FI group (4.08, P < 0.001) and the Gen group (3.55, P < 0.001). Patients receiving a lumbar plexus block exhibited significantly decreased pain at t = 0 (P = 0.019), t = 30 (P = 0.038), t = 60 (P = 0.013), t = 90 (P = 0.017) and t = 120 (P = 0.001) after admission to PACU. The FI group showed no improvement in any post-operative variable when compared with general anesthesia alone. There was no difference in the time to discharge or in morphine equivalent administered between groups. One patient receiving a lumbar plexus block experienced a seizure lasting about 10 s. However, there were no medium or long-term complications. Lumbar plexus block administered in concert with general anesthesia provides clinically important and statistically significant post-operative pain relief when compared with general anesthesia alone or general anesthesia plus fascia iliaca block.

Pre-operative Lumbar Plexus Block Provides Superior Post-operative Analgesia when Compared with Fascia Iliaca Block or General Anesthesia Alone in Hip Arthroscopy

Objectives:Nerve block administration in concert with general anesthesia can help manage post-operative pain and provide favorable muscle relaxation of the operative leg in hip surgery. However, the optimal nerve blockade_if any_for arthroscopic surgery of the hip remains undefined. Considerations specific to hip arthroscopy include control of intra-operative pain, adequate muscle relaxation to allow for distraction for work in the central compartment, and post-operative pain control. Dold et al. recently reported in AJSM that a pre-operative femoral nerve block administered in concert with general anesthesia led to decreased patient-reported pain scores at the 60 minute mark post-operatively. Given this demonstrated benefit of the pre-operative femoral nerve block, we hypothesized that a regional block that anesthetized the femoral nerve and the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve (as the fascia iliaca block does), or one that anesthetized the obturator nerve in addition to the femoral and lateral femoral cutaneous nerves (i.e. the lumbar plexus block), would provide additional benefit. The purpose of this study is to examine the effects of pre-operative fascia iliaca and lumbar plexus nerve blocks on post-operative pain and secondary post-operative variables following arthroscopic surgery of the hip.Methods:A retrospective chart analysis was conducted on 145 patients undergoing arthroscopic surgery of the hip in 3 groups. Group 1 (n=55) received general anesthesia only, Group 2 (n=30) received general anesthesia and a fascia iliaca nerve block, and Group 3 (n=60) received general anesthesia and a lumbar plexus nerve block. Post-operative measures were recorded, examined and compared. The primary outcome measure was patient reported pain scores (0-10) at 0, 30, 60, 90 and 120 minutes in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU). Secondary variables examined included time spent in the PACU, morphine equivalent administered, and presence of nausea requiring anti-emetic medication.Results:Mid-term analysis revealed no benefit to the fascia iliaca block; this regional anesthesia technique showed no significant effect on any of the measured post-operative variables when compared to general anesthesia alone. We therefore abandoned this block in favor of the lumbar plexus block. Patients receiving a lumbar plexus block exhibited significantly decreased pain at each time point when compared to the fascia iliaca group, and at all but one time point when compared to the general anesthesia group (P<0.05). There was no difference in the time spent in the PACU, nor in morphine equivalent administered between any of the groups.Conclusion:The results of the current study indicate that for arthroscopic surgery of the hip, a pre-operative lumbar plexus regional block performed in conjunction with general anesthesia provides significant and clinically meaningful decreases in post-operative pain reported in the PACU when compared with general anesthesia alone or general anesthesia with fascia iliaca block. This relative benefit we found in our lumbar plexus block patients is likely attributable to the more complete and proximal nervous blockade afforded by the lumbar plexus block. Pre-operative fascia iliaca block provides no benefit compared with general anesthesia alone. Consideration should be given to abandoning fascia iliaca regional nerve block for anesthesia for hip arthroscopy.

Assessment of low-dose i.v. ketamine infusions for adjunctive analgesia.

The results of a study evaluating all patients treated with adjunctive low-dose ketamine for analgesia over a three-year period are presented. A retrospective single-center analysis evaluated all adult patients who received adjunctive low-dose i.v. ketamine infusions from September 2010 to September 2013. Patients were excluded if they received concomitant oral ketamine, if ketamine was used to treat seizures, or if the patients received ketamine boluses without infusion. The primary endpoint was to identify the patient populations receiving low-dose intravenous ketamine. Secondary endpoints included an assessment of clinical variables and adverse events. Demographic information, level of care, clinical variables, adverse events, and patient outcomes were recorded. A total of 460 patients were evaluated. Of these, 396 were included in this analysis. Ketamine was administered to 69.9% of the patients in association with a surgical procedure, as opposed to 30.1% who received ketamine for medical management of pain. The percentage of patients receiving intensive care unit level care was 24%. Before initiation of ketamine, patient-reported pain scores averaged 7.1 ± 2.63 S.D.; during the ketamine infusion, patient-reported pain scores averaged 6.42 ± 2.01 S.D.; (p < 0.001). In the safety analysis, hypertension occurred in 21.4% of patients, hypotension occurred in 15.1% of patients, and respiratory depression occurred in 6.3% of patients. A retrospective review found that patients receiving continuous ketamine infusions in addition to opioid therapy saw a reduction in pain scores and experienced cardiovascular adverse effects in greater than 20% of cases.

Acceptability, Adaptation, and Clinical Outcomes of Acupuncture Provided in the Emergency Department: A Retrospective Pilot Study.

To evaluate acceptability and clinical outcomes of acupuncture on patient-reported pain and anxiety in an emergency department (ED). Observational, retrospective pilot study. Abbott Northwestern Hospital ED, Minneapolis, MN. Retrospective data was used to identify patients receiving acupuncture in addition to standard medical care in the ED between 11/1/13 and 12/31/14. Feasibility was measured by quantifying the utilization of acupuncture in a novel setting and performing limited tests of its efficacy. Patient-reported pain and anxiety scores were collected by the acupuncturist using an 11-point (0-10) numeric rating scale before (pre) and immediately after (post) acupuncture. Efficacy outcomes were change in pain and anxiety scores. During the study period, 436 patients were referred for acupuncture, 279 of whom were approached by the acupuncturist during their ED visit. Consent for acupuncture was obtained from 89% (248/279). A total of 182 patients, who had a pre-pain score >0 and non-missing anxiety scores, were included in analyses. Of the 52% (94/182) who did not have analgesics before or during the acupuncture session, the average decrease of 2.37 points (95% CI: 1.92, 2.83) was not different (p > 0.05) than the mean decrease of 2.68 points for those receiving analgesics (95% CI 2.21, 3.15). The average pre-anxiety score was 4.73 points (SD = 3.43) and the mean decrease was 2.27 points (95% CI: 1.89, 2.66). Results from this observational trial indicate that acupuncture was acceptable and effective for pain and anxiety reduction, in conjunction with standard medical care. These results will inform future randomized trials.

Effects of Continuous Peritubal Local Anesthetic Instillation on Postoperative Pain After Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Prospective, Randomized Three-Arm Study

We evaluated the effects of continuous instillation of a local anesthetic at the nephrostomy site on postoperative pain following percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). Sixty patients who underwent PCNL between August 2013 and March 2015 were enrolled in this randomized prospective study. The following three groups comprising 20 patients each were analyzed: Group A, continuous infiltration of local anesthetic at the nephrostomy site; Group B, local anesthetic injected only once; and Group C, 0.9% saline injected as a control at the end of the procedure. Postoperative patients reported pain scores, and amount of analgesic use was recorded at 2, 6, 12, 24, and 48 hours after the surgery. The mean pain scores of patients in Group A and B were significantly lower compared with Group C patients as much as 12 hours postoperatively (p = 0.001). However, at 24 hours postoperatively, the mean pain scores of Group B and C patients became comparable, while those of Group A patients remained significantly lower until 48 hours after the surgery (p < 0.001). Patients in Group A and C demanded the least and greatest amounts of analgesics, respectively, at all-time intervals (all p < 0.05). Continuous infiltration of a local anesthetic is effective for both managing pain immediately after surgery and in dealing with pain that occurs late in the recovery period.

Liposomal Bupivacaine as an Adjunct to Postoperative Pain Control in Total Hip Arthroplasty

BackgroundAlthough pain management affects rehabilitation, length of stay, and functional outcome, an optimized pain management protocol has yet to be standardized. Opioids are the primary agent used to control acute postoperative pain; however, they are associated with a wide range of side effects. Liposomal bupivacaine (LB), a long-acting analgesic agent administered intraoperatively, has been introduced as a new modality to control pain for up to 72 hours after operation without affecting motor function. MethodsSix hundred eighty-six primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) patients, who received the standard THA pain management protocol, were compared to a cohort of 586 primary THA patients, who were treated with an additional intraoperative injection of LB. All other pain management parameters and standard of care were identical. Statistical significance was set at P ≤ .05. ResultsAlthough patient-reported pain scores were statistically similar, the LB cohort demonstrated a significant decrease in total narcotic use (P < .001), specifically up to postoperative day 2 (P = .016). Physical therapy milestones were significantly achieved to a greater degree (P < .001) in the LB cohort. Operation time and hospital cost were unaffected (P = .072 and .811, respectively); however, the LB cohort exhibited a decrease in length of stay by 0.31 days (P < .001) and improvement in discharge disposition to home (P = .017). ConclusionLB is a valuable adjunct to our THA pain management protocol, as we strive to achieve improved patient outcomes, reductions in length of stay, and enhanced quality of THA care.

Protocol for a single-centre randomised controlled trial of multimodal periarticular anaesthetic infiltration versus single-agent femoral nerve blockade as analgesia for total knee arthroplasty: Perioperative Analgesia for Knee Arthroplasty (PAKA)

IntroductionTotal knee arthroplasty (TKA) surgery causes postoperative pain. The use of perioperative injections around the knee containing local anaesthetic, opiates and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs has increased in popularity to manage...

Use of local anesthetic (0.25% bupivacaine) for pain control after pediatric cardiac catheterization: A randomized controlled trial.

To investigate the effects of local infiltration of 0.25% bupivacaine on post-operative pain and analgesic use in children undergoing cardiac catheterization procedures. In pediatric catheterization procedures performed under general anesthesia, a local anesthetic is often used prior to femoral sheath removal. There are no published reports of the impact of local anesthetic infiltration on pain after pediatric procedures, and mixed reports on its effectiveness in adults. A randomized controlled trial was undertaken of 140 children, aged 7-18 years undergoing cardiac catheterization under general anesthesia via the femoral vein or artery. Participants received a subcutaneous infiltration of 0.25% bupivacaine at the access site prior to sheath removal, or usual care without bupivacaine. Outcomes included patient reported pain scores and analgesic use up to 6 hr after the procedure. Pain scores were similar between groups through the 6-hr post-procedure period. The proportion of children reporting a maximal pain score of ≤2/10 was higher in the bupivacaine group (64% vs. 44%, P = 0.03). A significantly higher proportion of children in the control group required IV morphine (18.8% vs. 4.5%, P = 0.02). Morphine use can be reduced with the use of 0.25% bupivacaine given prior to femoral sheath removal and should be considered for post-procedural pain control for pediatric patients undergoing cardiac catheterization. This study is the first to contribute evidence to the effectiveness of 0.25% bupivacaine after pediatric cardiac catheterization.

Is Decreased Insufflation Pressure During Major Robotic-Assisted Gynecologic Surgery Associated With Decreased Recovery Time and Patient Reported Pain Score.

Is Decreased Insufflation Pressure During Major Robotic-Assisted Gynecologic Surgery Associated With Decreased Recovery Time and Patient Reported Pain Score.

Does Surgical Stabilization of Lateral Compression-type Pelvic Ring Fractures Decrease Patients' Pain, Reduce Narcotic Use, and Improve Mobilization?

Debate remains over the role of surgical treatment in minimally displaced lateral compression (Young-Burgess, LC, OTA 61-B1/B2) pelvic ring injuries. Lateral compression type 1 (LC1) injuries are defined by an impaction fracture at the sacrum; type 2 (LC2) are defined by a fracture that extends through the posterior iliac wing at the level of the sacroiliac joint. Some believe that operative stabilization of these fractures limits pain and eases mobilization, but to our knowledge there are few controlled studies on the topic. (1) Does operative stabilization of LC1 and LC2 pelvic fractures decrease patients' narcotic use and lower their visual analog scale pain scores? (2) Does stabilization allow patients to mobilize earlier with physical therapy? This retrospective study of LC1 and LC2 fractures evaluated patients treated definitively at one institution from 2007 to 2013. All patients treated surgically, all nonoperative LC2, and all nonoperative LC1 fractures with complete sacral injury were included. In general, LC1 or LC2 fractures with greater than 10 mm of displacement and/or sagittal/axial plane deformity on static radiographs were treated surgically. One hundred fifty-eight patients in the LC1 group (107 [of 697 screened] nonoperative, 51 surgical) and 123 patients in the LC2 group (78 nonoperative, 45 surgical) met inclusion criteria. The surgical and nonoperative groups were matched for fracture type. To account for differences between patients treated surgically and nonoperatively, we used propensity modeling techniques incorporating treatment predictors. Propensity scores demonstrated good overlap and were used as part of multiple variable regression models to account for selection bias between the surgically treated and nonoperative groups. Patient-reported pain scores and narcotic administration were tallied in 24-hour increments during the first 24 hours of hospitalization, at 48 hours after intervention, and in the 24 hours before discharge. Time from intervention to mobilization out of bed was recorded; intervention was defined as the date of definitive surgical intervention or the day the surgeon determined the patient would be treated without surgery. There was no difference in the narcotics distributed to any of the groups with the exception that the patients with surgically treated LC2 fractures used, on average (mean [95% confidence interval]) 40.2 (-72.9 to -7.6) mg morphine less at the 48-hour mark (p = 0.016). In general, there were no differences between the groups' pain scores. The surgically treated patients with LC1 fractures mobilized 1.7 (-3.3 to -0.01) days earlier (p = 0.034) than their nonoperative counterparts. There was no difference in the LC2 cohort in terms of time to mobilization between those treated with and without surgery. There were few differences in pain scores and morphine use between the surgical and nonoperative groups, and the differences observed likely were not clinically important. We found no evidence that surgical stabilization of certain LC1 and LC2 pelvic fractures improves patients' pain, decreases their narcotic use, and improves time to mobilization. A randomized trial of patients with similar fractures and similar degrees initial displacement would help remove some of the confounders present in this study. Level III, therapeutic study.

Preoperative Delayed Gadolinium-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Cartilage (dGEMRIC) for Patients Undergoing Hip Arthroscopy: Indices Are Predictive of Magnitude of Improvement in Two-Year Patient-Reported Outcomes.

Delayed gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of cartilage (dGEMRIC) has been used in the detection of chondropathy. Our study aimed to determine whether dGEMRIC indices are predictive of two-year patient-reported outcomes and pain scores following hip arthroscopy. Between August 2008 and April 2012, sixty-five patients (seventy-four hips) underwent primary hip arthroscopy with preoperative dGEMRIC and a minimum of two years of follow-up. Exclusion criteria were previous hip surgery, slipped capital femoral epiphysis, inflammatory arthropathy, Legg-Calvé-Perthes disease, and arthritis of >1 Tönnis grade. Patients were classified in two groups on the basis of a dGEMRIC cutoff of 323 msec, which was one standard deviation (SD) below the study cohort mean dGEMRIC index of 426 msec. Patient-reported outcome tools used included the modified Harris hip score (mHHS), the Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS), the Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), and the Hip Outcome Score Sport-Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS) as well as a visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and a patient satisfaction score. There were sixty-four hips that met the inclusion criteria; fifty-two (81.3%) had a minimum of two years of follow-up. Twelve of the sixty-four hips had a dGEMRIC index of <323 msec (Group 1), and fifty-two hips had a dGEMRIC index of ≥323 msec (Group 2). There was no significant difference between the groups with respect to age, sex, and body mass index. There was no significant difference between the groups in mean preoperative patient-reported outcome scores and the VAS for pain. At the two-year follow-up, Group 1 had significant improvement in the mHHS, whereas Group 2 demonstrated significant improvement in all patient-reported outcome scores and the VAS. The improvement in all patient-reported outcome scores was significantly larger for Group 2 compared with Group 1. There was no significant difference in patient satisfaction between groups and no significant correlation between dGEMRIC indices and the patient-reported outcome measures. Patients with a dGEMRIC index of ≥323 msec (less than one SD below the cohort mean) demonstrated significantly greater improvement in patient-reported outcome scores and the VAS for pain after hip arthroscopy.

Effect of Intraperitoneal Bupivacaine on Postoperative Pain in the Gynecologic Oncology Patient.

To evaluate if the administration of intraperitoneal bupivacaine decreased postoperative pain in patients undergoing minimally invasive gynecologic and gynecologic cancer surgery. Retrospective cohort study (Canadian Task Force classification II-3). University-based gynecologic oncology practice operating at a tertiary medical center. All patients on the gynecologic oncology service undergoing minimally invasive surgery between September 2011 and June 2013. Starting August 2012, intraperitoneal administration of .25% bupivacaine was added to all minimally invasive surgeries. These patients were compared with historical control subjects who had surgery between September 2011 and July 2012 but did not receive intraperitoneal bupivacaine. One-hundred thirty patients were included in the study. The patients who received intraperitoneal bupivacaine had lower median narcotic use on the day of surgery and the first postoperative day compared with those who did not receive intraperitoneal bupivacaine (day 0: 7.0 mg morphine equivalents vs 11.0 mg, p = .007; day 1: .3 mg vs 1.7 mg, p = .0002). The median patient-reported pain scores were lower on the day of surgery in the intraperitoneal bupivacaine group (2.7 vs 3.2, p = .05) CONCLUSIONS: The administration of intraperitoneal bupivacaine was associated with improved postoperative pain control in patients undergoing minimally invasive gynecologic and gynecologic cancer surgery and should be further evaluated in a prospective study.

Pre-Operative Femoral Nerve Block for Hip Arthroscopy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Objectives:: Arthroscopy has become a standard method of treatment for a variety of intra-articular hip pathologies. While most arthroscopic hip procedures are performed as day-surgeries, patients can still experience significant post-operative pain and opioid-associated side-effects. Our group has shown the potential benefits of preoperative femoral nerve block (FNB) in a previous retrospective review. It was our objective to confirm these findings in a prospective study.Methods:Fifty patients undergoing hip arthroscopy were included in this prospective, single centre, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial. All patients received a pre-operative ultrasound-guided femoral nerve block with either 20 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine (treatment group, n=27) or normal saline (control group, n=23). Nerve blockade was confirmed via standardized sensory testing prior to the induction of general anaesthesia. Groups were compared with respect to patient sex, age, body mass index (BMI), physical status classification according to the American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA); procedure performed; and opioid requirements. The primary endpoint was total oral morphine equivalent consumption in 24 hours. Secondary endpoints included visual analog pain scores; Quality of Recovery (QoR-27) score at 24 hours; incidence of nausea and vomiting; patient satisfaction; and block-related complications.Results:There were no significant differences between groups with respect to sex, age, weight, height, BMI, ASA classification, or type of procedures performed. Total oral morphine consumption at 24 hours was similar between groups. Patient-reported pain scores were lower at all times points in the femoral nerve block group compared to the placebo group with statistical significance reached at 30 minutes, 1 hour, 2 hour, 4 hour, and 6 hours post-operatively. There was no difference in the rates of nausea and vomiting after surgery, Quality of Recovery score at 24 hours, time to discharge, or symptoms of itching, weakness, and injection site bruising and pain. The placebo group had a significantly higher rate of reported constipation at 48 hours. 6 out of 27 patients in the femoral nerve block reported falls (without injury) at 24 hours compared to 0 out of 23 patients in the placebo group. The satisfaction score, however, was similarly high in both groups at all time-points.Conclusion:Pre-operatively administered femoral nerve blocks lead to decreased pain scores in the early post-operative phase without affecting opioid consumption or opioid-related side effects. Patient satisfaction with pain control was similarly high between groups. Given the rate of falls observed in this study, we cannot recommend the routine use of femoral nerve blocks for outpatient hip arthroscopy.