Steroid injections in pain management: influence on coronavirus disease 2019 vaccines

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, which has been rampant since the end of 2019, has evidently affected pain management in clinical practice.Fortunately, a COVID-19 vaccination program is currently in progress worldwide.There is an ongoing discussion that pain management using steroid injections can decrease COVID-19 vaccine efficacy, although currently there is no direct evidence to support this statement. As such, the feeling of pain in patients is doubled in addition to the co-existing ill-effects of social isolation associated with the pandemic.Thus, in the COVID-19 era, it has become necessary that physicians be able to provide high quality pain management without negatively impacting COVID-19 vaccine efficacy. Steroids can alter the entire process involved in the generation of adaptive immunity after vaccination. The period of hypophysis-pituitary-adrenal axis suppression is known to be 1 to 4 weeks after steroid injection, and although the exact timing for peak efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines is slightly different for each vaccine, the average is approximately 2 weeks. It is suggested to avoid steroid injections for a total of 4 weeks (1 week before and after the two vaccine doses) for the doubleshot vaccines, and for 2 weeks in total (1 week before and after vaccination) for a single-shot vaccine. This review focuses on the basic concepts of the various COVID-19 vaccines, the effect of steroid injections on vaccine efficacy, and suggestions regarding an appropriate interval between the administration of steroid injections and the COVID-19 vaccine.

Effects of fetal position on maternal hemodynamics after spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery

BACKGROUND: Aortocaval compression by the gravid uterus is a known physiological phenomenon that is classically claimed to cause supine hypotension in full-term pregnant women. This study aimed to investigate the effects of fetal position on maternal hemodynamics after spinal anesthesia during cesarean delivery. METHODS: In total, 71 women with intrauterine pregnancy over 36 weeks of gestation who were scheduled for elective cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia were enrolled in the study. Based on the fetal position, the women were divided into two groups: right position group (group R) and left position group (group L). Occurrence of hypotension, requirement for rescue bolus injections of phenylephrine, and the total amount of infused phenylephrine before delivery were recorded in each group. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in the occurrence of hypotension between the two groups (P = 0.075); however, the amount of phenylephrine required before delivery was significantly greater in group R (P = 0.028). There was a statistically significant decrease in the systolic blood pressure compared with the baseline values in group R, and this change persisted until 15 min after spinal anesthesia. CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference according to fetal position in the number of patients who showed hypotension before delivery after spinal anesthesia.

Effectiveness of continuous hypertonic saline infusion with an automated infusion pump for decompressive neuroplasty: a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND: Hypertonic saline (HS) injections for decompressive neuroplasty (DN) can cause pain. We assessed whether a continuous infusion of HS through an infusion pump would reduce injection-related pain compared with repeated bolus administrations. METHODS: Fifty patients scheduled for DN were randomized to either the bolus injection or the continuous infusion group. After appropriately placing the epidural catheter, 4 mL of 5% NaCl was injected as four boluses of 1 mL each at 15-minute intervals or infused over 1 hour using an infusion pump. The severity of pain induced by HS injection, as measured by the 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS), was the primary outcome. The severity of low back or lower extremity pain, as measured by the 11-point NRS and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), 3 months following the procedure, was the secondary outcome. RESULTS: Data from 21 patients in the bolus group and 23 in the continuous infusion group were analyzed. No statistically significant difference in injection-related pain was identified between the two groups during the initial HS administration (P = 0.846). However, there was a statistically significant reduction in injection-related pain in the continuous infusion group compared to the bolus injection group from the second assessment onwards (P = 0.001, < 0.001, and < 0.001, respectively). No significant between-group differences in the NRS and ODI scores 3 months post-procedure were noted (P = 0.614 and 0.949, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that administering HS through a continuous infusion is a useful modality for reducing HS injection-related pain during DN.