Reduction In Postoperative Analgesic Consumption Research Articles

Comparison of 0.5% Ropivacaine and 0.5% Levobupivacaine for Sciatic Nerve Block Using Labat Approach in Foot and Ankle Surgery.

Compared to ropivacaine, levobupivacaine is more lipophilic and a more potent vasoconstrictor. The study was conducted to compare the effect of 0.5% ropivacaine and 0.5% levobupivacaine in sciatic nerve block using conventional Labat approach in foot and ankle surgery. A prospective double-blind, randomised study was carried out in 100 patients of either sex, aged between 20 to 60 years, and American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) grades I and II. Patients were randomly allocated into groups R and L of 50 each with 0.5% ropivacaine and 0.5% levobupivacaine, respectively, for sciatic nerve block using the Labat approach. We assessed the onset and duration of sensory and motor block, duration of analgesia, consumption of analgesic, and any untoward effect over 24 hours. Both the groups were comparable with regard to demographic variables and onset of sensory and motor block (p>0.05). Group L compared to group R had significantly longer median (95% confidence interval) duration of sensory block (647.50 min [624.99-674.41] vs. 535 min [524.77-559.83], respectively; p<0.0001) as well as motor block (1065.0 min [1054.5-1068.90] and 945 min [947.13-1013.30], respectively; p<0.0001). Postoperative analgesia also lasted significantly longer in group L compared to group R (1320 min [1273.4-1321.8] vs. 840 min [759.23-812.77]; p<0.0001]). Patients in group L had significantly better visual analogue scale (VAS) score and lesser consumption of analgesics (p<0.0001). None of the groups developed any adverse effect over the observation period. Levobupivacaine provides prolonged postoperative analgesia in sciatic nerve block with reduction in postoperative analgesic consumption.

Preoperative preemptive drug administration for acute postoperative pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Preoperative administration of pharmacological substances, such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or opioids, has been gaining acclaim as a preemptive measure to minimize postoperative pain. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of this approach in adults undergoing surgical procedures. MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register were searched from inception through January 2015. Data from randomized placebo-controlled trials were screened, extracted and assessed for risk of bias according to The Cochrane Collaboration's Tool by two independent authors. The primary outcome measure was reduction in postoperative analgesic consumption during 24h post surgery; effects were described as mean differences between the drug and placebo arms with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and were pooled using random-effects models. Potential publication bias was tested using funnel plots and Egger's regression test for funnel plot asymmetry. Screened were 511 records, of which 39 were included in the final synthesis with data from 3172 patients. A significant reduction in postoperative analgesic consumption was observed using preoperative administration of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs; 95% CI, -0.61 to -0.14; 31 comparisons), chiefly by the COX-2 inhibitors class (95% CI, -0.95 to -0.33; 13 comparisons). Significant reduction was also observed for gabapentin (95% CI, -1.60 to -0.38; 6 comparisons). No significant effects were observed using opioids, propionic acids or oxicam derivatives. WHAT DOES THIS REVIEW ADD?: Current analyses endorse the effectiveness of COX-2 inhibitors and gabapentin in reducing acute postoperative pain when administered preemptively presurgery. Such corroboration is not found for opioids and other NSAID classes.

Perioperative use of pregabalin for acute pain-a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Evidence supporting postoperative pain management using pregabalin as an adjunct intervention across various surgical pain models is lacking. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate "model-specific" comparative effectiveness and harms of pregabalin following a previously published systematic review protocol. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception through August 2013. Data were screened and single extraction with independent verification and dual risk of bias assessment was performed. Quality of evidence (QoE) was rated using the GRADE approach. Primary outcomes were pain relief at rest and on movement and reduction in postoperative analgesic consumption. A total of 1423 records were screened, and 43 studies were included. Perioperative pregabalin resulted in: 16% (95% confidence interval [CI], 9%-21%) reduction in analgesic consumption (moderate QoE, 24 trials) and a small reduction in the magnitude of pain in surgeries associated with pronociceptive pain. Per 1000 patients, 10 more will experience blurred vision (95% CI, 5-20 more; moderate QoE, 17 trials) and 41 more sedation (95% CI, 13-77 more, 17 trials). To prevent 1 case of perioperative nausea and vomiting, the number needed to treat is 11 (95% CI: 7-28, 25 trials). Inadequate evidence addressed outcomes of enhanced recovery and serious harms. Pregabalin analgesic effectiveness is largely restricted to surgical procedures associated with pronociceptive mechanisms. The clinical significance of observed pregabalin benefits must be weighed against the uncertainties about serious harms and enhanced recovery to inform the careful selection of surgical patients. Recommendations for future research are proposed.