Effective postoperative pain management in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty is an important part of the realization of enhanced recovery after surgery. Peripheral nerve block is of great significance to the control of postoperative pain, and clinicians are committed to finding a nerve block that has little impact on muscle strength and is conducive to the early recovery of motor function after total knee arthroplasty. Infiltration between the popliteal artery and capsule of the knee block can selectively block the sensory branch of the posterior end of the knee joint without affecting the motor branch of the common peroneal nerve, so that the muscle strength can be minimally affected under the condition of adequate analgesia. This article reviews the proposal of infiltration between the popliteal artery and capsule of the knee block, the approach and method of the block, and the advantages of combining with different nerve blocks for analgesia after total knee arthroplasty.
Objective To study the analgesic effect of a new “cocktail” of local infiltration analgesia (LIA) with Deprosone after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods In a prospective randomized controlled study, 100 patients with hip joint disease requiring unilateral primary THA in West China Hospital of Sichuan University between January 2018 and December 2018 were enrolled and randomly divided into observation group and control group, with 50 cases in each group. There was no significant difference in age, gender, operative side, disease type, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, preoperative rest and activity visual analogue scale (VAS) score, hip Harris score (HHS), quality of life scale (SF-12) score, and other general data between the two groups (P>0.05). The patients in the observation group were treated with a new “cocktail” LIA around the hip joint before suturing the incision, and the drug formula was ropivacaine 200 mg, Diprospan 1 mL, morphine 10 mg, and added normal saline to 80 mL; the patients in the control group were not treated with LIA. The operation time, postoperative hospital stay, the amount of morphine used during hospitalization, and the range of motion of hip joint at discharge were recorded, and the complications were counted. The VAS score at rest and activity, HHS score, and SF-12 score [physiological score (PCS) and psychological score (MCS)] of the hip joint were recorded before and after operation, and the postoperative analgesic effect and the recovery of hip joint function were evaluated. Results There was no significant difference in the operation time between the two groups (P>0.05), and the postoperative hospital stay in the observation group was significantly shorter than that in the control group (P<0.05). The postoperative morphine consumption in the observation group was significantly less than that in the control group (P<0.05), and the total morphine consumption in the observation group was less than that in the control group during hospitalization, but the difference was not significant (P>0.05). Patients in both groups were followed up to 6 months after operation. The resting VAS scores of the observation group were significantly lower than those of the control group at 2, 6, 12 hours after operation and in the morning and afternoon of the first day after operation, and the active VAS scores of the observation group were significantly lower than those of the control group at 6, 12 hours after operation and in the morning of the first day after operation, and the differences were significant (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the resting and active VAS scores between the two groups on the day of discharge and at 3 and 6 months after operation (P>0.05). At discharge, the flexion range of motion of hip joint in the observation group was significantly greater than that in the control group (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference in the abduction range of motion of hip joint between the two groups (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in HHS score and SF-12 score between the two groups at 3 and 6 months after operation (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in analgesic satisfaction and functional satisfaction between the two groups at last follow-up (P>0.05). There was no complication such as skin pruritus, superficial and deep infection of incision, skin necrosis, deep venous thrombosis of lower extremity, and pulmonary embolism in both groups. There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications such as nausea and vomiting, urine retention, fat liquefaction of incision, local hematoma, and large fluctuation of blood sugar between the two groups (P>0.05). ConclusionThe new “cocktail” LIA with Diprospan can effectively reduce the early postoperative pain of THA, reduce the dosage of opioids, shorten the length of hospital stay, and is conducive to the early functional rehabilitation of patients.
Objective To assess the effectiveness and safety of local versus systemic application of opioids for labor analgesia. Methods We searched PubMed (1966 to January 2008), EMBASE (1980 to January 2008), The Cochrane Library (Issue 1, 2008), CBM (1978 to January 2008), CNKI (1979 to January 2008) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving local versus systemic application of opioids for labor analgesia. Quality assessment and data extraction were conducted by two reviewers independently. Meta-analyses were conducted with The Cochrane Collaboration’s RevMan 4.2.10 software. Results A total of 12 trials involving 5909 participants met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analyses showed that local application of opioids was superior to systemic application in terms of maternal satisfaction with pain relief during labor (RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.27 to 2.09). No significant difference was found between the two groups in the incidence of low neonatal Apgar score at 5 minutes (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.01). Conclusion Local application of opioids for labor analgesia appears to be more effective than systematic use in reducing pain during labor. But as for safety concerns, maternal and neonatal adverse effects are observed in both groups. Thus, more high-quality and large-scale RCTs are needed.
Objective To verify the feasibility and effectiveness of the modified fast-track surgery (FTS) in the perioperative period of open liver resection. Methods A prospective randomized controlled trial was carried out in 188 consecutive patients undergoing open liver resection between March and December 2014 in the Department of Liver Surgery of West China Hospital. The modified fast recovery procedure and standard rehabilitation procedure were compared in terms of length of hospital stay after operation, hospitalization cost, complications and readmission rate. Results A total of 188 consecutive patients were enrolled in the trial. The analysis included 87 patients in the modified fast recovery group and 89 in the standard rehabilitation group. Compared with the standard rehabilitation group, the modified fast recovery group had a shorter length of hospital stay [(5.70±1.47)vs. (7.26±1.96) days] and a lower cost [(42.7±6.7)vs. (47.3±12.5) thousand yuan], and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). There were 20 complication cases in the modified group and 39 in the standard group with significant difference (P=0.003). There was no significant difference in the rate of readmission between the two groups (P=1.000). Compared with the standard group, patients in the modified group had less pain 8 hours, the 1st and 2nd days after surgery, better postoperative activities of daily living, more initiative cough times and off-bed activity times, longer duration of movement, and earlier bowel recovery and exhausting, and all the above differences were significantly different (P<0.05). Stepwise regression analysis showed that postoperative complications and bowel recovery and exhausting time were independent related factors for postoperative hospital stay (P<0.001). Conclusions Multimodal analgesia-based fast recovery procedure is feasible and effective in the perioperative period of partial hepatectomy. It can shorten the time of hospitalization and reduce the cost of hospitalization.
Objective To systematically review the effectiveness and safety of thoracic epidural analesis (TEA) for postoperative complications after cardiac surgery. Methods Such databases as PubMed, Science Citation Index, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CNKI and CBM were electronically searched from inception to October 2012 for collecting the randomized controlled trials on the effectiveness and safety of thoracic epidural analgesisa for postoperative complications after cardiac surgery. Two reviewers independently screened literature according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed the methodological quality of the included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.1 software. Results Totally 14 studies were eligible, involving 1 942 patients. The results of meta-analysis showed that, TEA combined with general anesthesia (GA) was superior to GA alone in reducing the incidences of myocardial ischemia/infarction (RR=0.63, 95%CI 0.41 to 0.96, P=0.03), respiratory complications (RR=0.55, 95%CI 0.40 to 0.75, P=0.000 1), supraventricular arrhythmias (RR=0.64, 95%CI 0.47 to 0.88, P=0.005), and duration of mechanical ventilation (MD= –2.15, 95%CI –3.72 to –0.58, P=0.007), with significant differences. Conclusions Current evidence shows that, TEA after surgery is effective in reducing the incidences of myocardial ischemia/infarction, respiratory complications, supraventricular arrhythmias, and duration of mechanical ventilation. There is the lack of data on the adverse events of TEA (mainly referring to epidural hematoma). Due to limited quality and quantity of the included studies, patients’ conditions should be fully considered before applying TEA in clinical practice.
Objective Sedation and/or analgesia is often applied during noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) to make patients comfortable, and thus improve the synchronization between patients and ventilator. Nevertheless, the effect of sedation and/or analgesia on the clinical outcome of the patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) after extubation remains controversial. Methods A retrospective study was conducted on patients with AECOPD who received NIPPV after extubation in seven intensive care units in West China Hospital, Sichuan University between December 2013 and December 2017 . A logistic regression model was used to analyze the association between the use of sedation and/or analgesia and clinical outcomes including rate of NIPPV failure (defined as the need for reintubation and mechanical ventilation), hospital mortality, and length of intensive care unit stay after extubation. Results A total of 193 patients were included in the analysis, and 62 cases of these patients received sedation and/or analgesia during NIPPV. The usage of sedation and/or analgesia could result in failure of NIPPV (adjusted odd ratio [OR] 0.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.02 - 0.52, P=0.006) and death (adjusted OR=0.13, 95%CI 0.04 - 0.42, P=0.001). Additionally, intensive care unit stay after extubation was longer in the patients who did not receive sedation and/or analgesia than those who did (11.02 d vs. 6.10 d, P< 0.01). Conclusion The usage of sedation and/or analgesia during NIPPV can decrease both the rate of NIPPV failure and hospital mortality in AECOPD patients after extubation.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy of opioid-sparing analgesic techniques in terms of analgesic potential, incidence of complications and quality of recovery in liver surgery. MethodsThe PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to the objectives from inception to August 2023. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. Meta-analysis was then performed by using RevMan 5.3 software. ResultsA total of 20 RCTs involving 1 347 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that opioid-sparing techniques could significantly reduce pain scores at rest and during movement from 2h to 48h postoperatively, opioid consumption within 24h (MD=?11.17, 95%CI ?14.62 to ?7.71, P<0.01) and 48h (MD=?7.19, 95%CI ?10.06 to ?4.33, P<0.01), postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) (OR=0.68, 95%CI 0.50 to 0.91, P=0.01) and wound infection (OR=0.42, 95%CI 0.18 to 0.98, P=0.04), as well as reduced time to bowel recovery (MD=?12.92, 95%CI ?21.24 to ?4.61, P<0.01) and decreased length of hospital stay (LOS) (MD=?0.90, 95%CI ?1.32 to ?0.49, P<0.01). No significant difference was observed between the two groups in the incidence of excessive sedation, pruritus, hypotension, headache and respiratory depression. Time to out-of-bed activity and patient satisfaction were also similar between groups. ConclusionOpioid-sparing techniques are effective in relieving postoperative pain and reducing opioid use, with additional potential in reducing postoperative nausea or vomiting, wound infection, time to bowel recovery and length of hospital stay.
[Abstract]The number of lung transplantation is gradually increasing worldwide, which brings new challenges to the multi-disciplinary team of lung transplantation. The prognosis of lung transplant recipients is seriously affected by the pathophysiological state of specific lung diseases and perioperative risk factors. It is of great significance for these patients to optimize perioperative management according to these factors. Recently, several expert consensus have been published regarding anesthesia management of lung transplantation. Based on the current evidence and clinical practice of West China Hospital, this review summarizes the key points of anesthesia management for lung transplant recipients to guide anesthesiologists' clinical practice.
Objective To summarize the research progress of the analgesic effect of adductor canal block (ACB) applied to knee arthroplasty, in order to find the ACB mode that can obtain better effectiveness. MethodsThe research progress of the analgesic effect of ACB after knee arthroplasty was reviewed by widely consulting the related literature on ACB at home and abroad in recent years. Results In recent years, multimodal analgesia has become the mainstay of postoperative pain management after knee arthroplasty. Among these, ACB replaces the once “gold standard” femoral nerve block (FNB) by offering comparable and effective analgesia with better preservation of quadriceps function. It is generally safe and efficient to use 0.2% ropivacaine ACB with initial loading doses of 15-30 mL and continual loading doses of less than 8 mL/hour to give analgesia comparable to FNB with minimal impact on lower extremity muscular strength. However, the risk of patient falls must still be taken into consideration by medical staff. Adjuvants like dexmedetomidine and dexamethasone used in ACB can increase the analgesic duration and postoperative analgesic impact. As a perineural adjunct for ACB, 1 μg/kg dexmedetomidine may strike a balance between safety and analgesic efficacy. Conclusion ACB is a safe and effective analgesia method after knee arthroplasty. The adductor canal anatomy, the optimum blocking strategy and blocking site of ACB are all hotly debated and still require additional study due to the significant variety of the nerve structures in adductor canal.
Objective To review the research progress of injection sites of local infiltration analgesia (LIA) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). MethodsThe relevant domestic and foreign literature in recent years was extensively reviewed. The neuroanatomy of the knee, and the research progress of the selection and the difference of effectiveness between different injection sites of LIA in clinical studies were summarized. ResultsLarge concentrations of nociceptors are present throughout the various tissues of the knee joint. Patellar tendon, subpatellar fat pad, lateral collateral ligament insertions, iliotibial band insertions, suprapatellar capsule, and posterior capsule were more sensitive to pain. Most current studies support injections into the lateral capsule, collateral ligament, retinaculum, quadriceps tendon, fat pad, and subcutaneous tissue. Whether to inject into the back of the knee and subperiosteum is controversial. ConclusionThe relative difference of knee tissue sensitivity to pain has guiding significance for the selection of LIA injection site after TKA. Although researchers have conducted clinical trials on injection site and technique of LIA in TKA, there are certain limitations. The optimal scheme has not been determined yet, and further studies are needed.