The use of a continuous popliteal sciatic nerve block after surgery involving the foot and ankle: does it improve the quality of recovery?

UNLABELLED: Popliteal sciatic nerve block is a commonly used technique for surgery involving the foot and ankle. However, pain can be difficult to control as the local anesthetic block wears off. Therefore, we hypothesized that extending the block by using a continuous infusion of bupivacaine (0.25%) would provide improved pain management and might facilitate the recovery process after foot or ankle surgery. In this randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study, 24 consenting patients undergoing foot or ankle surgery with a standardized general anesthetic technique were studied. Before surgery, a popliteal sciatic nerve block was performed in all patients with an 18-gauge Tuohy epidural needle and a peripheral nerve stimulator. After injection of bupivacaine 0.25% 30 mL and placement of a 20-gauge catheter, patients were randomly assigned to receive either 0.9% saline (control) or bupivacaine 0.25% at a constant rate of 5 mL/h for up to 48 h after surgery. An 11-point verbal rating scale (0 = no pain to 10 = worst pain imaginable) was used to assess the severity of pain. Opioid analgesic use was recorded at specific time intervals after surgery. Follow-up evaluations were performed at 24 h, 48 h, 72 h, and 1 week after surgery to assess pain scores, as well as patient satisfaction with their pain management and quality of recovery, by using a 100-point verbal rating scale (1 = highly dissatisfied to 100 = highly satisfied). In the bupivacaine group, there was a statistically significant reduction in the maximal pain scores (>50%) and in opioid use (>60%) during the postoperative period compared with the control group. Patient satisfaction with postoperative pain management (95 +/- 3 versus 77 +/- 13) and quality of recovery (96 +/- 7 versus 83 +/- 14) was significantly improved in the bupivacaine group (versus control). In addition, 40% of the patients in the bupivacaine group (versus none in the control group) were able to be discharged home on the day of surgery (P = 0.087). In conclusion, a continuous infusion of bupivacaine 0.25% decreased postoperative pain and the need for opioid analgesic rescue medication after orthopedic surgery involving the foot and ankle, leading to improved patient satisfaction and quality of recovery. IMPLICATIONS: A continuous infusion of bupivacaine 0.25% (versus saline) at the popliteal fossa by using a simple elastomeric pump is an effective method of decreasing postoperative pain, reducing the opioid analgesic requirement, and increasing patient satisfaction with pain management after orthopedic surgery involving the foot and ankle. More importantly, the use of the continuous sciatic nerve block in the popliteal fossa facilitated an earlier discharge after lower extremity surgery.

Use of a continuous local anesthetic infusion for pain management after median sternotomy.

BACKGROUND: The use of large doses of opioid analgesics to treat pain after cardiac surgery can prolong the time to tracheal extubation and interfere with recovery of bowel and bladder function in the postoperative period. Therefore, the authors investigated the efficacy of a continuous infusion of bupivacaine 0.25% or 0.5%, at the median sternotomy site, for 48 h after cardiac surgery in reducing the opioid analgesic requirement and improving the recovery process. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial, 36 consenting patients undergoing open-heart surgery with a standardized general anesthetic technique had two indwelling infusion catheters placed at the median sternotomy incision site at the end of surgery. The patients were randomly assigned to receive normal saline (control), bupivacaine 0.25% or bupivacaine 0.5% via an elastomeric infusion pump at a constant rate of 4 ml/h for 48 h. Patients evaluated their chest pain using an 11-point verbal rating scale, with 0 = no pain to 10 = worst pain imaginable. In addition, the postoperative opioid analgesic requirements and opioid-related adverse effects were recorded. Patient satisfaction with their pain management was assessed at specific intervals during the postoperative period using a 100-point verbal rating scale, with 1 = highly dissatisfied to 100 = highly satisfied. Finally, serum bupivacaine concentrations were measured 24 and 48 h after surgery. RESULTS: Compared with the control group, there was a statistically significant reduction in verbal rating scale pain scores and patient-controlled analgesia morphine use in the bupivacaine-0.5% group. Patient satisfaction with their pain management was also improved in the bupivacaine-0.5% (vs. control) group. However, there were no significant differences in patient-controlled analgesia morphine use between the bupivacaine-0.25% and control groups. Although the duration of the intensive care unit stay (30 vs. 34 h, respectively) was not significantly decreased, the time to ambulation (1 +/- 0.5 vs. 2 +/- 1 days, respectively) and the duration of hospital stay (4.2 vs. 5.7 days, respectively) were lower in the bupivacaine-0.5% group than in the control group. Mean +/- SD serum bupivacaine concentrations at 48 h in the bupivacaine-0.25% and bupivacaine-0.5% groups were 0.5 +/- 0.5 and 1.3 +/- 0.7 microg/ml, respectively. CONCLUSION: A continuous infusion of bupivacaine 0.5% at 4 ml/h is effective for decreasing pain and the need for opioid analgesic medication as well as for improving patient satisfaction with their pain management after cardiac surgery. Patients in the bupivacaine-0.5% group were able to ambulate earlier, leading to a reduced length of hospital stay.

The efficacy of celecoxib premedication on postoperative pain and recovery times after ambulatory surgery: a dose-ranging study.

UNLABELLED: Recently, the Food and Drug Administration increased the celecoxib dosage recommendation from 200 mg to 400 mg for acute pain management. No studies have directly compared the analgesic efficacy of different doses of celecoxib for the prevention of postoperative pain. In this prospective, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study, we compared oral celecoxib 200 mg to 400 mg when administered for premedication of outpatients undergoing minor ear-nose-throat surgery. A total of 93 healthy outpatients were assigned to 1 of 3 study groups: control (placebo; n = 30), celecoxib 200 mg (n = 30), or celecoxib 400 mg (n = 33). The study drug was given orally 30-45 min before surgery, and all patients received a standardized general anesthetic technique. During the postoperative period, pain scores (0-10), recovery times, the need for rescue analgesics, quality of recovery (0-100), patient satisfaction with pain management (0-100), and side effects were recorded. Pain was assessed at 30-min intervals using a verbal rating scale, with 0 = no pain to 10 = worst pain imaginable, in the postanesthesia care unit and day surgery unit recovery areas and at 24 h after surgery. Celecoxib 400 mg was significantly more effective than 200 mg (and placebo) in reducing postoperative pain. Both celecoxib 200 mg and 400 mg were more effective than placebo in reducing the postoperative fentanyl requirement (74 +/- 67 micro g and 56 +/- 62 micro g versus 120 +/- 86 micro g, respectively). The larger dose of celecoxib significantly reduced the percentage of patients with severe pain at discharge (6% versus 37% and 30% in the celecoxib 200 mg and control groups, respectively). The median number of doses of oral analgesic medication after discharge was also significantly reduced in the celecoxib 400 mg group (0 versus 2 and 2 in the celecoxib 200 mg and control groups, respectively). However, no differences were found among the three study groups with respect to recovery times and secondary outcome variables (e.g., patient satisfaction and quality of recovery). We conclude that oral premedication with celecoxib 400 mg was more effective than 200 mg in reducing severe postoperative pain and the need for rescue analgesic medication in the postoperative period. IMPLICATIONS: Oral premedication with celecoxib 400 mg was more effective than 200 mg in reducing postoperative pain and the need for rescue analgesic medication in the early postoperative period. However, neither dose of celecoxib was more effective than a placebo in facilitating the recovery process after outpatient surgery.

Costs and effectiveness of rofecoxib, celecoxib, and acetaminophen for preventing pain after ambulatory otolaryngologic surgery.

UNLABELLED: We designed this randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study to compare the analgesic effect of the cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors rofecoxib and celecoxib with acetaminophen when administered before outpatient otolaryngologic surgery in 240 healthy subjects. Patients were assigned to one of four study groups: Group 1, control (vitamin C 500 mg); Group 2, acetaminophen 2 g; Group 3, celecoxib 200 mg; or Group 4, rofecoxib 50 mg. The first oral dose of the study medication was administered 15-45 min before surgery, and a second dose of the same medication was given on the morning after surgery. Recovery times, side effects, pain scores, and the use of rescue analgesics were recorded. Follow-up evaluations were performed at 24 and 48 h after surgery to assess postdischarge pain, analgesic requirements, nausea, and patient satisfaction with their postoperative pain management and quality of recovery. The need for rescue analgesia and peak pain scores were used as the primary end points for estimating efficacy, and the costs to achieve complete satisfaction with analgesia were used for the cost-efficacy comparisons. Premedication with oral rofecoxib (50 mg) or celecoxib (200 mg) was more effective than placebo in reducing postoperative pain scores and analgesic requirements in the postoperative care unit and after discharge. The analgesic efficacy of oral acetaminophen (2 g) was limited to the postdischarge period. Patient satisfaction with pain management was improved in all three treatment groups compared with placebo but was higher with celecoxib and rofecoxib compared with acetaminophen. Rofecoxib was also more effective than celecoxib in reducing pain and improving patient satisfaction after otolaryngologic surgery. Rofecoxib achieved complete satisfaction with pain control in one additional patient, who would not have otherwise been satisfied, at lower incremental costs to the institution compared with celecoxib. We conclude that rofecoxib 50 mg orally is more cost-effective for reducing postoperative pain and improving patient satisfaction with their postoperative pain management than celecoxib (200 mg) or acetaminophen (2 g) in the ambulatory setting. IMPLICATIONS: Oral premedication with rofecoxib (50 mg) was more effective than celecoxib (200 mg) and acetaminophen (2 g) in reducing postoperative pain and in improving the quality of recovery and patient satisfaction with pain management after outpatient otolaryngologic surgery with only a small increase in cost of care.

Comparison of acustimulation and ondansetron for the treatment of established postoperative nausea and vomiting.

BACKGROUND: This study was designed to evaluate transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation (acustimulation) using the ReliefBand compared with ondansetron for the treatment of established postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after outpatient laparoscopic surgery. METHODS: After the authors obtained institutional review board approval and written informed consent, 268 outpatients were enrolled in this randomized, double-blind, placebo- and sham-controlled study. All patients received antiemetic prophylaxis with metoclopramide, 10 mg intravenously, or droperidol, 0.625 mg intravenously, after induction of anesthesia. A total of 90 patients developed PONV in the recovery units and were randomized to one of three treatment groups: (1) the ondansetron group received 4 mg intravenous ondansetron and a sham ReliefBand; (2) the acustimulation group received 2 ml intravenous saline and a ReliefBand; and (3) the combination group received 4 mg intravenous ondansetron and a ReliefBand. A rescue antiemetic (10 mg intravenous metoclopramide) was administered only if the PONV symptoms persisted for 15 min or longer after initiating the treatment. A blinded observer recorded the recovery times, emetic symptoms, rescue antiemetics, maximum nausea scores, complete response to study treatment, and time to achieve discharge criteria. Postdischarge side effects, as well as patient satisfaction and quality of recovery scores, were assessed at 24 and 72 h after surgery. RESULTS: The combination group had a significantly higher complete response rate than the acustimulation group (73% vs.40%, P <0.01). In addition, fewer patients (8 vs. 18) in the combination (vs. acustimulation) group experienced subsequent emetic events (P < 0.03). However, there were no significant differences between the three groups with respect to patient satisfaction and quality of recovery scores. CONCLUSIONS: Acustimulation with the ReliefBand can be used as an alternative to ondansetron for the treatment of established PONV. However, the use of ondansetron (4 mg intravenously) in combination with the ReliefBand device improved the complete response rate to the acustimulation therapy.

Comparative efficacy of acustimulation (ReliefBand) versus ondansetron (Zofran) in combination with droperidol for preventing nausea and vomiting.

BACKGROUND: Antiemetic drugs are costly, are associated with variable efficacy, and can produce unwanted side effects when used for prophylaxis against postoperative nausea and vomiting. This clinical study was designed to compare the efficacy of transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation using a ReliefBand to ondansetron (Zofran) when utilized alone or in combination for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting after plastic surgery. METHODS: A single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo- and sham-controlled study design was conducted to compare three prophylactic antiemetic treatment regimens in 120 outpatients undergoing plastic surgery procedures with routine low-dose droperidol prophylaxis: (1) ondansetron (n = 40), 4 mg intravenous ondansetron and a sham ReliefBand; (2) acustimulation (n = 40), 2 ml intravenous saline and an active ReliefBand; and (3) combination (n = 40), 4 mg intravenous ondansetron and an active ReliefBand. The incidences of postoperative nausea and vomiting, as well as the need for "rescue" antiemetics, were determined at specific time intervals for up to 72 h after surgery. The outcome variables assessed included recovery times, quality of recovery score, time to resumption of normal diet, and patient satisfaction with the prophylactic antiemetic therapy. RESULTS: Use of the ReliefBand in combination with ondansetron significantly reduced nausea (20 vs. 50%), vomiting (0 vs. 20%), and the need for rescue antiemetics (10 vs. 37%) compared with ondansetron alone at 24 h after surgery. Furthermore, the ability to resume a normal diet (74 vs. 35%) within 24 h after surgery was significantly improved when the ReliefBand was used to supplement ondansetron (vs. ondansetron alone). Finally, the quality of recovery (90 +/- 10 vs.70 +/- 20) and patient satisfaction (94 +/- 10 vs. 75 +/- 22) scores were significantly higher in the combination group the ondansetron group. There were no significant differences between the ReliefBand and ondansetron when administered as adjuvants to droperidol for antiemetic prophylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: The ReliefBand compared favorably to ondansetron (4 mg intravenously) when used for prophylaxis against postoperative nausea and vomiting. Furthermore, the acustimulation device enhanced the antiemetic efficacy of ondansetron after plastic surgery.

Cost-efficacy of rofecoxib versus acetaminophen for preventing pain after ambulatory surgery.

BACKGROUND: Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs are commonly administered as part of a multimodal regimen for pain management in the ambulatory setting. This randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study was designed to compare the analgesic effect of oral rofecoxib, a cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor, and acetaminophen when administered alone or in combination prior to outpatient otolaryngologic surgery. METHODS: A total of 143 healthy outpatients undergoing elective otolaryngologic surgery were assigned to one of four study groups: group 1 = control (500 mg vitamin C); group 2 = 2 g acetaminophen; group 3 = 50 mg rofecoxib; or group 4 = 2 g acetaminophen and 50 mg rofecoxib. The first oral dose of the study medication was taken 15-45 min before surgery, and a second dose of the same medication was administered on the morning after surgery. Recovery times, side effects, and the need for rescue analgesics were recorded. Follow-up evaluations were performed at 24 and 48 h after surgery to assess postdischarge pain, analgesic requirements, nausea, and patient satisfaction with their postoperative pain management and quality of recovery. Peak pain scores and the need for rescue analgesic medication were used as the endpoints for estimating efficacy of the study drugs, while cost to achieve complete satisfaction with analgesia was used in the cost-effectiveness analysis. RESULTS: Premedication with rofecoxib (50 mg) was significantly more effective than either placebo or acetaminophen (2 g) in reducing the peak postoperative pain, the need for analgesic medication, and improving the quality of recovery and patient satisfaction. Moreover, the addition of acetaminophen failed to improve its analgesic efficacy. An expenditure for rofecoxib of 16.76 US dollars (95% confidence interval, 7.89 to 21.03 US dollars) and 30.24 US dollars (95% confidence interval, 5.25 to 54.20 US dollars) would obtain complete satisfaction with pain control in one additional patient who would not have been satisfied if placebo or acetaminophen, respectively, had been administered prior to surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Rofecoxib, 50 mg administered orally, decreased postoperative pain and the need for analgesic rescue medication after otolaryngologic surgery. The addition of 2 g oral acetaminophen failed to improve its analgesic efficacy.

The efficacy of premedication with celecoxib and acetaminophen in preventing pain after otolaryngologic surgery.

UNLABELLED: Non-opioid analgesics are often used to supplement opioids for the management of perioperative pain. In this randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study, we examined the effects of acetaminophen and a cyclooxygenase type-2 inhibitor, celecoxib, when administered alone or in combination, before elective otolaryngologic surgery in 112 healthy outpatients. Subjects were assigned to 1 of 4 study groups: Group 1, placebo (vitamin C, 500 mg per os [PO]); Group 2, acetaminophen 2000 mg PO; Group 3, celecoxib 200 mg PO; or Group 4, acetaminophen 2000 mg and celecoxib 200 mg PO. All patients received a standardized anesthetic technique. During the postoperative period, pain was assessed using a 10-point verbal rating scale. Recovery times, the need for rescue analgesics, side effects, and patient satisfaction scores were also recorded. The combination of acetaminophen and celecoxib was significantly more effective than placebo in reducing postoperative pain. Celecoxib, when administered alone or in combination with acetaminophen, improved patients' satisfaction with their postoperative analgesia. With the combination of acetaminophen and celecoxib, an additional expenditure of $6.16 would be required to obtain complete satisfaction with postoperative pain management in one additional patient who would not have been completely satisfied if he/she had received the placebo. However, oral celecoxib or acetaminophen alone was not significantly more effective than placebo in reducing postoperative pain when administered before surgery. We conclude that oral premedication with a combination of acetaminophen (2000 mg) and celecoxib (200 mg) was highly effective in decreasing pain and improving patient satisfaction after outpatient surgery. IMPLICATIONS: Oral premedication with a combination of acetaminophen (2000 mg) and celecoxib (200 mg) was effective in decreasing pain and improving patient satisfaction after otolaryngologic surgery. However, acetaminophen (2000 mg) or celecoxib (200 mg) alone was not significantly more effective than placebo in reducing postoperative pain.

Initial evaluation of a new optic laryngoscope blade.

We report on a new optic laryngoscope blade that provides two views of the larynx during tracheal intubation. The availability of an alternative direct view of the larynx may improve the ability of anesthesia providers to observe the tracheal tube passing through the vocal cords when using a Macintosh laryngoscope blade. The optic port improved visualization of passage of the endotracheal tube in obese patients. However, further studies are needed in patients with difficult airways to determine whether this new blade will ease the ability of practitioners to insert a tracheal tube.