Pain management after cardiac surgery via median sternotomy: A systematic review with procedure-specific postoperative pain management (PROSPECT) recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Pain after cardiac surgery via median sternotomy can be difficult to treat, and if inadequately managed can lead to respiratory complications, prolonged hospital stays and chronic pain. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate available literature and develop recommendations for optimal pain management after cardiac surgery via median sternotomy. DESIGN: A systematic review using PROcedure-SPECific Pain Management (PROSPECT) methodology. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials and systematic reviews published in the English language until November 2020 assessing postoperative pain after cardiac surgery via median sternotomy using analgesic, anaesthetic or surgical interventions. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Databases. RESULTS: Of 319 eligible studies, 209 randomised controlled trials and three systematic reviews were included in the final analysis. Pre-operative, intra-operative and postoperative interventions that reduced postoperative pain included paracetamol, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), intravenous magnesium, intravenous dexmedetomidine and parasternal block/infiltration. CONCLUSIONS: The analgesic regimen for cardiac surgery via sternotomy should include paracetamol and NSAIDs, unless contraindicated, administered intra-operatively and continued postoperatively. Intra-operative magnesium and dexmedetomidine infusions may be considered as adjuncts particularly when basic analgesics are not administered. It is not clear if combining dexmedetomidine and magnesium would provide superior pain relief compared with either drug alone. Parasternal block/surgical site infiltration is also recommended. However, no basic analgesics were used in the studies assessing these interventions. Opioids should be reserved for rescue analgesia. Other interventions, including cyclo-oxygenase-2 specific inhibitors, are not recommended because there was insufficient, inconsistent or no evidence to support their use and/or due to safety concerns.

Prospective, single center, single surgeon's experience with an atraumatic self-adhering mesh in 100 consecutive patients.

The purpose of this study was to show the short- and long-term results of a lightweight self-adhering mesh, Adhesix®. Between February 2011 and April 2013, we prospectively collected data of 100 consecutive patients who underwent incisional or inguinal hernia repair. Mean follow-up time was 23 months (range 7-33 months). Mean length of hospital stay was 1.7 days (range 0.5-16 days). No recurrences occurred. Pain was significantly reduced after 1 month (4.1 vs 1.6; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.9-3.1; P < 0.0001) as well as at the last follow-up visit (1.6 vs 0.48; 95% CI 0.6-1.7; P < 0.0001). SF 36 scaled scores, as an indicator of quality of life, were good with 86, 84, 86, 84, 83, 88, 92, 87. Only 2 patients developed clinically significant seromas. No clinically significant hematomas were observed. Neither mesh nor wound infections occurred. Four patients developed urinary retention immediately postoperative, while 2 were hospitalized 2 weeks after discharge because of pneumonia. Two patients died because of unrelated causes. Based on these results, use of the Adhesix mesh seems to be safe, feasible, and efficient in hernia repair.