Persistent Postsurgical Pain in Oral Cancer Patients Reconstructed with Anterolateral Thigh Free Flap.

Background and Objectives: The anterolateral thigh (ALT) flap is widely used in head and neck reconstruction, but the postoperative thigh sensory function lacks sufficient evaluation. The present study reports the postsurgical pain and cancer-related quality of life (QoL) in different stages of oral cancer patients receiving anterolateral thigh (ALT) flap reconstruction. Materials and Methods: Patients were subgrouped into postoperative early-, mid-, and late-recovery stages (postoperative 0.5-1 years, 1-2 years, and above 2 years) according to the time point of assessment. The QoL was examined using the EORTC C-30. Postsurgical donor and receipt site pain was evaluated through subjective reports and sensory tests. Results: Ninety-four patients were included in the final analysis. The functional and global health-related QoL significantly improved with time after surgery. However, spontaneous pain was reported in 57.7%, 72.3%, and 42% of patients in early-, mid-, and late-recovery stages, mainly in donor sites rather than in receipt sites. The highest incidence of donor site pain after ALT flap reconstruction in oral cancer surgery was in the mid-recovery stage but remained high in the late-recovery stage (56.8% and 36.7%, respectively). Conclusions: The postsurgical pain in the donor site might persist to or exhibit delayed onset one to two years postoperatively but is much improved after postoperatively two years later. A longer postsurgical follow-up for over two years for pain and sensory dysfunction is indicated.

Pretreatment of ankle nerve block provides better postoperative analgesia than peri-incisional local anesthetic infiltration in hallux valgus correction surgery.

Adequate postoperative analgesia after hallux valgus (HV) correction surgery improves early mobilization and decreases hospital stay. Peripheral nerve block and peri-incisional local anesthetic (LA) infiltration are both widely used for pain management in orthopedic surgeries. The aim of this study was to compare the analgesic effects between the ankle block and peri-incisional infiltration technique in patients undergoing HV correction surgery. Ninety patients scheduled for hallux valgus correction surgery were randomly allocated into three groups. In group N, patients were pretreated with tibial and peroneal nerve blocks with 8-10 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine before surgery. In group P, patients received the same LA for peri-incisional infiltration preoperatively. In group C, patients underwent surgery without regional analgesic pretreatment. All patients had intravenous fentanyl patient control analgesia as part of multimodal postoperative pain management. Fentanyl consumption, rest and moving pain scale, and adverse effects were evaluated at postoperative 6 h (Poh6), Poh12, Poh 24, and Poh36, respectively. Patients receiving bilateral feet surgeries were excluded in this study. Seventy-five patients were enrolled into final analysis. The patients in group N expressed lower resting and moving pain scores at Poh6, but the pain scores turned similarly among the three groups following Poh12 and then. The total fentanyl consumption was significantly less in group N than in group P. The postoperative activities and mood disturbance were not significantly different between groups after Poh12 and then. We conclude that ankle block is better than peri-incisional LA infiltration in HV correction surgery in pain relief and fentanyl consumption.

A comparison of the video laryngoscopes with Macintosh laryngoscope for nasotracheal intubation.

Nasotracheal intubation (NTI) is usually required in patients undergoing maxillofacial surgery. Though video-scopes have been demonstrated to perform well in oral endotracheal intubation, limited information is available concerning NTI. The aim of the study is to compare the efficiency of video-scopes and the traditional direct laryngoscopy in NTI. One hundred and eight patients scheduled for elective oro-maxillofacial surgery under nasotracheal intubation general anesthesia were randomly allocated into one of 3 groups of GlideScope, Pentax AirWay Scope, or Macintosh laryngoscope respectively. The primary outcome measures were total intubation time and each separate time interval (time A: for placement for the nasotracheal tube from selected nostril to oropharynx; time B: for use of devices to view the glottic opening; time C: for advancing nasotracheal tube from oropharynx into trachea and removing the scope from the oral cavity). The secondary outcomes were measurement of scores of modified naso-intubation difficulty scale (MNIDS) and attempts at intubation. RESULTS: Mean total intubation time and time C interval were taken with GlideScope (33.1 s and 9.7 s), Pentax (38.4 s and 12.9 s), and Macintosh (42.2 s and 14.9 s) respectively. There was a significant difference among the groups (total time, P = 0.03; time C, P = 0.02). The median score of MNIDS was significantly lower using GlideScope or Pentax compared with using Macintosh in NTI (P = 0.037) and difficult intubation grading by MNIDS presented as easier in the GlideScope group than in the Macintosh group (0.016). Using GlideScope, intubation was successful at the first attempt in 80% patients whereas only 65% and 72.5% with the Pentax and Macintosh (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: As compared with the Macintosh laryngoscope, the GlideScope video laryngoscope facilitated nasotracheal intubations with shortened intubation time and reduced intubation difficulty in patients undergoing oromaxillofacial surgery.

Techniques for the insertion of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway: comparison of the Foley airway stylet tool with the introducer tool in a prospective, randomized study.

BACKGROUND: Many tools have been developed to facilitate the insertion of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (LMA) insertion, which can be impeded by folding of its soft cuff. The aim of this study was to compare the efficiency of ProSeal LMA insertion guided by a soft, direct optical Foley Airway Stylet Tool (FAST) with the standard introducer tool (IT). METHODS: One hundred sixty patients undergoing general anesthesia using the ProSeal LMA as an airway management device were randomly allocated to either FAST-guided or IT-assisted groups. Following ProSeal LMA insertion, the glottic and esophageal openings were identified using a fiberoptic bronchoscope introduced through the airway and the drain tube. The primary outcomes were time taken to insert the ProSeal LMA and the success rate at the first attempt. Secondary end points included ease of insertion, hemodynamic response to insertion, and postoperative adverse events recorded in the recovery room and on the first postoperative morning. RESULTS: One hundred forty patients were included in the final analysis: 66 in the FAST-guided group and 74 in the IT-assisted group. The success rate of FAST device-guided ProSeal LMA insertion (95.7%) was broadly comparable with IT-assisted insertion (98.7%). However, the time taken to insert the ProSeal LMA was significantly longer when the FAST technique was used (p <0.001). The incidence of correct alignment of the airway tube and the drain tube did not differ significantly between the groups. There were no significant differences in ease of insertion or hemodynamic responses to insertion, except that the incidence of postoperative sore throat was significantly higher in the FAST group on the first postoperative day (22.2% compared with 6.8% in the IT group; p = 0.035). CONCLUSION: Both FAST-guided and IT-assisted techniques achieved correct ProSeal LMA positioning, but the IT technique was significantly quicker and less likely to cause a sore throat. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02048657.

Dose-dependent attenuation of intravenous nalbuphine on epidural morphine-induced pruritus and analgesia after cesarean delivery.

Epidural morphine in patient-controlled analgesia regimens controls postoperative pain well but easily induces pruritus and other epidural morphine-related side effects. With 90 pregnant American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status II females scheduled for elective cesarean delivery, the present study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety profile of patient-controlled antipruritus (PCP) use of intravenous nalbuphine-based regimens for attenuation of postoperative pruritus and related side effects in combination with epidural morphine patient-controlled analgesia with regard to the quality of postoperative pain management. Patients were randomly assigned to two nalbuphine groups (5 µg/kg/hour, Group N5 or 10 µg/kg/hour, Group N10) and bolus dose of 1.6 µg/kg for PCP or the control (normal saline) group. Comparable visual analog scale scores for rest pain at each measured time interval among the three groups demonstrated that adequate pain relief was offered; however, the cumulative dose of nalbuphine administered to the patients in Group N10 attenuated the analgesic effect of epidural morphine in moving pain at POh24 only. Fewer episodes and milder severity of pruritus were observed in patients in Groups N5 and N10 at all postoperative time intervals. Epidural morphine provided good postoperative pain relief but with incommodious side effects. In addition, intravenous nalbuphine not only attenuated the incidence of pruritus but also decreased total morphine consumption. In conclusion, intravenous administration of low-dose nalbuphine (5 µg/kg/hour) for PCP maintained analgesia produced by epidural morphine and offered low pruritus incidence.

Equal volumes of undiluted nalbuphine and lidocaine and normal diluted saline prevents nalbuphine-induced injection pain.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if the intravenous co-administration of equal volumes of lidocaine and nalbuphine, with undiluted normal saline, prevents injection pain caused by nalbuphine. METHODS: Eighty adult patients who were scheduled for minor surgeries under general anesthesia delivered via a laryngeal mask airway (LMA) were enrolled in this prospective, randomized, single-blind clinical trial. In the saline group (control) (n = 40), 1 mL (10 mg) nalbuphine was diluted with 9 mL normal saline. In the lidocaine group (experimental) (n = 40), 1 mL (10 mg) nalbuphine was diluted with 1 mL lidocaine (20 mg). The two respective nalbuphine solutions were injected into the cephalic vein at a rate of 20 mL/minute (0.33 mL/second). Pain scores were categorized into five grades. Pain responses upon intravenous injection of nalbuphine, site of cannulation, size of the catheter, and hemodynamic responses to nalbuphine were also recorded. RESULTS: Overall, the median pain score of patients in the lidocaine group was lower than that of the saline group (p < 0.001). In addition, the incidence of injection pain was lower in the lidocaine group than the saline group (2.5% vs. 30%, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: A solution of equal volumes of lidocaine and nalbuphine can decrease intravenous nalbuphine-induced injection pain.

A modified lightwand-guided nasotracheal intubation technique for oromaxillofacial surgical patients.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficiency of a double curve nasotracheal tube on lightwand-guided nasotracheal intubation. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: University medical center hospital. PATIENTS: 60 ASA physical status I and II patients undergoing oromaxillofacial surgery. INTERVENTIONS AND MEASUREMENTS: Patients undergoing surgery with nasotracheal intubation and general anesthesia were randomly enrolled in the laryngoscopy group or the lightwand group. The same type of double curve nasotracheal tube was used in both groups. In the laryngoscopy group, intubation was assisted with a Macintosh No. 3 standard curved blade and Magill forceps. In the lightwand group, intubation was aided with a flexible lightwand device (without the inner stiff stylet). Intubation time was divided into two parts: Part one, from selected naris to oropharynx; Part two, from oropharynx into trachea. Part one, Part two, and total intubation time, hemodynamic responses to nasotracheal intubation, and adverse events or complications were recorded. MAIN RESULTS: Total intubation times in the lightwand group and the laryngoscopy group were 22.8 +/- 8.0 sec vs 30.3 +/- 8.2 sec (P < 0.001), respectively. The lightwand group had comparable hemodynamic responses to those of the laryngoscopy group. Adverse events and complications were all self-limited, with similar occurrence in both groups. CONCLUSION: For patients undergoing oromaxillofacial surgery, modified lightwand-guided nasotracheal intubation is feasible with a double curve nasotracheal tube and is an efficient alternative technique.