An update on pain management for elderly patients undergoing ambulatory surgery.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the drugs and techniques used for multimodal postoperative pain management in the older population undergoing surgery in the ambulatory setting. RECENT FINDINGS: Interest has grown in the possibility of adding adjuncts to a single shot nerve block in order to prolong the local anesthetic effect. The rapid and short-acting local anesthetics for spinal anesthesia are potentially beneficial for day-case surgery in the older population because of shorter duration of the motor block, faster recovery, and less transient neurologic symptoms. Another recent advance is the introduction of intravenous acetaminophen, which can rapidly achieve rapid peak plasma concentration (<15 min) following infusion and analgesic effect in ∼5 min with a duration of action up to 4 h. SUMMARY: The nonopioid analgesic therapies will likely assume an increasingly important role in facilitating the recovery process and improving the satisfaction for elderly ambulatory surgery patients. Strategies to avoid the use of opioids and minimize opioid-related side-effects is an important advance as we expand on the use of ambulatory surgery for the aging population.

Propofol versus midazolam for premedication: a placebo­controlled, randomized double­blinded study.

BACKGROUND: It has been previously reported that subhypnotic doses of propofol could offer an advantage over midazolam for premedication. This study was designed to test the hypothesis that a 20 mg IV dose of propofol would be more effective than a standard 2 mg IV dose of midazolam for reducing acute anxiety prior to induction of anesthesia. METHODS: One hundred twenty outpatients scheduled to undergo orthopedic surgery were randomly assigned to one of three study groups: control (saline); propofol (20 mg); or midazolam (2 mg). Immediately before administering the study medication, each patient evaluated their level of acute anxiety and sedation on 11­point verbal rating scales (VRSs) 0=none- 10=highest, and they were also shown a picture. Upon arrival in the OR ~5 min after administering the study medication, anxiety and sedation levels were reassessed and a second picture was shown. At discharge from the recovery area, anxiety and sedation levels and their ability to recall the two pictures were reassessed. RESULTS: Compared to the saline group, both propofol and midazolam produced significant increases in the patient's level of sedation upon entering the OR (+2.5±2.4 vs. +4.6±2.5 and +5.2±2.3, respectively [p<0.001]). Propofol was effective as midazolam compared to saline in reducing the patient's level of preinduction anxiety (from 3.2±2.2 to1.8±1.8 vs. 3.1±2.2 to 2.3±2.1 and 2.7±1.8 to 2.8±2.1, respectively). Propofol produced more pain on injection and midazolam significantly reduced recall of the second picture. CONCLUSIONS: When administered ~5 min prior to entering the OR, propofol, 20mg IV, was as effective as midazolam 2mg IV in reducing anxiety.

Comparison of the C-MAC video laryngoscope to a flexible fiberoptic scope for intubation with cervical spine immobilization.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the C-MAC video laryngoscope to the standard flexible fiberoptic scope (FFS) with an eye piece (but without a camera or a video screen) for intubation of patients undergoing cervical spine surgery with manual inline stabilization. The primary end point was the time to achieve successful tracheal intubation. Secondary end points included glottic view at intubation and number of intubation attempts. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, single-blinded study. SETTING: Cedars Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles, CA. PATIENTS: One hundred forty patients (American Society of Anaesthesiologists physical status I-III), aged 18 to 80years undergoing elective cervical spine surgery. INTERVENTION: Patients were prospectively randomized to undergo tracheal intubation using either an FFS (n=70) or the C-MAC video laryngoscope (n=70). MEASUREMENTS: After performing a preoperative airway evaluation, patients underwent a standardized induction sequence. The glottic view was assessed at the time of tracheal tube placement using the Cormack-Lehane and percentage of glottic opening scoring systems. In addition, the time required for successful insertion of the tracheal tube, number of intubation attempts to secure the airway, the need for adjuvant airway devices, hemodynamic changes, adverse events, and any airway-related trauma were recorded. MAIN RESULTS: The glottic view at the time of intubation did not differ significantly with the 2 devices; however, the C-MAC facilitated more rapid tracheal intubation compared with the FFS (P=.001). The peak heart rate response following insertion of the tracheal tube was also reduced (P=.004) in the C-MAC (vs FFS) group. CONCLUSION: The C-MAC may offer an advantage over the FFS with respect to the time required to obtain glottic view and successful placement of the tracheal tube in patients requiring cervical spine immobilization.

Comparison of three video laryngoscopy devices to direct laryngoscopy for intubating obese patients: a randomized controlled trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare three different video laryngoscope devices (VL) to standard direct laryngoscopy (DL) for tracheal intubation of obese patients undergoing bariatric surgery. HYPOTHESIS: VL (vs DL) would reduce the time required to achieve successful tracheal intubation and improve the glottic view. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized and controlled. SETTING: Preoperative/operating rooms and postanesthesia care unit. PATIENTS: One hundred twenty-one obese patients (ASA physical status I-III), aged 18 to 80 years, body mass index (BMI) >30 kg/m(2) undergoing elective bariatric surgery. INTERVENTION: Patients were prospectively randomized assigned to one of 4 different airway devices for tracheal intubation: standard Macintosh (Mac) blade (DL); Video-Mac VL; Glide Scope VL; or McGrath VL. MEASUREMENTS: After performing a preoperative airway evaluation, patients underwent a standardized induction sequence. The glottic view was graded using the Cormack Lehane and percentage of glottic opening (POGO) scoring systems at the time of tracheal intubation. Times from the blade entering the patient's mouth to obtaining a glottic view, placement of the tracheal tube, and confirmation of an end-tidal CO2 waveform were recorded. In addition, intubation attempts, adjuvant airway devices, hemodynamic changes, adverse events, and any airway-related trauma were recorded. MAIN RESULTS: All three VL devices provided improved glottic views compared to standard DL (p < 0.05). Video-Mac VL and McGrath also significantly reduced the time required to obtain the glottic view. Video-Mac VL significantly reduced the time required for successful placement of the tracheal tube (vs DL and the others VL device groups). The Video-Mac and GlideScope required fewer intubation attempts (P< .05) and less frequent use of ancillary intubating devices compared to DL and the McGrath VL. CONCLUSION: Video-Mac and GlideScope required fewer intubation attempts than standard DL and the McGrath device. The Video-Mac also significantly reduced the time needed to secure the airway and improved the glottic view compared to standard DL.

The role of multimodal analgesia in pain management after ambulatory surgery.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: As outpatient (day-case) surgery had continued to grow throughout the world, many more complex and potentially painful procedures are being routinely performed in the ambulatory setting. Opioid analgesics, once considered the standard approach to preventing acute postoperative pain, are being replaced by a combination of nonopioid analgesic drugs with diverse modes of action as part of a multimodal approach to preventing pain after ambulatory surgery. This review will provide an update on the topic of multimodal pain management for ambulatory (day-case) surgery. RECENT FINDINGS: Efficacy of multimodal analgesic regimens continues to improve; opioid analgesics are increasingly taking on the role of 'rescue analgesics' for acute pain after day-case surgery. The use of multimodal analgesia is rapidly becoming the 'standard of care' for preventing pain after ambulatory procedures at most surgery centers throughout the world. SUMMARY: This article discusses recent evidence from the peer-reviewed literature regarding the role of local anesthetics, NSAIDs, gabapentinoids, and acetaminophen, as well as alpha-2 agonists, ketamine, esmolol, and nonpharmacologic approaches (e.g., transcutaneous electrical stimulation) as parts of multimodal pain management strategies in day-case surgery.