Superficial parasternal intercostal plane blocks in cardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Traditional multimodal analgesic strategies have several contraindications in cardiac surgery patients, forcing clinicians to use alternative options. Superficial parasternal intercostal plane blocks, anesthetizing the anterior cutaneous branches of the thoracic intercostal nerves, are being explored as a straightforward method to treat pain after sternotomy. We sought to evaluate the literature on the effects of superficial parasternal blocks on pain control after cardiac surgery. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and Web of Science databases for RCTs evaluating superficial parasternal intercostal plane blocks in adult patients undergoing cardiac surgery via midline sternotomy published from inception to 11 March 2022. The prespecified primary outcome was opioid consumption at 12 hr. The risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool, and the quality of evidence was evaluated using the grading of recommendations, assessments, development, and evaluations. Outcomes were analyzed with a random-effects model. All subgroups were prespecified. RESULTS: We reviewed 1,275 citations. Eleven RCTs, comprising 756 patients, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Only one study reported the prespecified primary outcome, precluding the possibility of meta-analysis. This study reported a reduction in opioid consumption (-11.2 mg iv morphine equivalents; 95% confidence interval [CI], -8.2 to -14.1) There was a reduction in opioid consumption at 24 hr (-7.2 mg iv morphine equivalents; 95% CI, -5.6 to -8.7; five trials; 436 participants; moderate certainty evidence). All five studies measuring complications reported that none were detected, which included a sample of 196 blocks. CONCLUSION: The literature suggests a potential benefit of using superficial parasternal blocks to improve acute postoperative pain control after cardiac surgery via midline sternotomy. Future studies specifying dosing regimens and adjuncts are required. STUDY REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42022306914); first submitted 22 March 2022.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Il existe plusieurs contre-indications aux stratégies analgésiques multimodales traditionnelles chez la patientèle de chirurgie cardiaque, ce qui oblige les clinicien·nes à se tourner vers d'autres options. Les blocs des plans intercostaux parasternaux superficiels, anesthésiant les branches cutanées antérieures des nerfs intercostaux thoraciques, sont l'une des méthodes simples actuellement explorées pour traiter la douleur après une sternotomie. Nous avons cherché à évaluer la littérature sur les effets des blocs parasternaux superficiels sur le contrôle de la douleur après une chirurgie cardiaque. MéTHODE: Nous avons réalisé une revue systématique et une méta-analyse des études randomisées contrôlées (ERC). Nous avons fait des recherches dans les bases de données MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL et Web of Science pour en tirer les ERC évaluant les blocs des plans intercostaux parasternaux superficiels chez les patient·es adultes bénéficiant d'une chirurgie cardiaque par sternotomie médiane publiées depuis leur création jusqu'au 11 mars 2022. Le critère d'évaluation principal préspécifié était la consommation d'opioïdes à 12 heures. Le risque de biais a été évalué à l'aide de l'outil Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias, et la qualité des données probantes à l'aide de l'outil GRADE. Les résultats ont été analysés à l'aide d'un modèle à effets aléatoires. Tous les sous-groupes étaient préspécifiés. RéSULTATS: Nous avons examiné 1275 citations. Onze ERC, comprenant 756 patient·es, remplissaient les critères d'inclusion. Une seule étude a rapporté le critère d'évaluation principal préspécifié, ce qui a exclu la possibilité d'une méta-analyse. Cette étude a rapporté une réduction de la consommation d'opioïdes (−11,2 mg équivalents de morphine iv; intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 %, −8,2 à −14,1). Il y a eu une réduction de la consommation d'opioïdes à 24 heures (−7,2 mg équivalents de morphine iv; IC 95 %, −5,6 à −8,7; cinq études; 436 participant·es; données probantes de certitude modérée). Les cinq études mesurant les complications ont rapporté qu'aucune complication n'avait été détectée, en incluant un échantillon de 196 blocs. CONCLUSION: La littérature suggère un avantage potentiel de l'utilisation de blocs parasternaux superficiels pour améliorer le contrôle de la douleur postopératoire aiguë après une chirurgie cardiaque par sternotomie médiane. Des études futures précisant les schémas posologiques et les adjuvants sont nécessaires. ENREGISTREMENT DE L'éTUDE: PROSPERO (CRD42022306914); soumis pour la première fois le 22 mars 2022.

Single-dose premedication enhances multimodal analgesia after knee arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: With the current trend to reduce postoperative opioid use to enhance recovery and address perioperative opioid addiction concerns, the challenge of managing pain after total knee arthroplasty has increased. This study examined the effect of adding a preoperative medication regime to a multimodal postoperative analgesia protocol that included regional anaesthesia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty patients undergoing elective first-time unilateral knee arthroplasty received celecoxib 100mg, gabapentin 600mg and dexamethasone 10mg po one hour before skin incision. They were compared to a sequential retrospective cohort of 49 patients. All patients routinely received acetaminophen 650mg po q6h, ibuprofen 400mg po q8h, patient-controlled opioid analgesia and continuous adductor canal blocks postoperatively. Pain scores and opioid consumption were recorded at 4, 8, 12, 24 and 48h. RESULTS: Pain scores and cumulative opioid use were statistically and clinically significantly reduced at all time points up to 48h. CONCLUSIONS: Combining preoperative oral celecoxib, gabapentin and dexamethasone had a clinically significantly effect in reducing pain scores and opioid use for at least 48h. Most of this effect is probably due to dexamethasone.

Association of intraoperative dexmedetomidine use with postoperative hypotension in unilateral hip and knee arthroplasties: a historical cohort study.

PURPOSE: Dexmedetomidine is frequently used as a sedative agent for orthopedic surgery patients undergoing total hip or knee arthroplasty. Although the benefits of dexmedetomidine are well described in the literature, there is also potential for harm, especially regarding the hemodynamic effects of dexmedetomidine in the postoperative setting. METHODS: This historical cohort study included all primary unilateral total hip or knee arthroplasties conducted from April 2017 to February 2020 in a single, university-affiliated, tertiary care centre (Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, QC, Canada). We used multivariable logistic regression to analyze the predictors for postoperative hypotension, defined as a systolic blood pressure < 90 mm Hg or any systolic blood pressure while on a vasopressor infusion in the postanesthesia care unit. Models were validated using calibration and discrimination with bootstrapping technique. RESULTS: One thousand five hundred and eighty-eight patients were included in this study. Postoperative hypotension occurred in 413 (26%) patients. Statistically significant predictors for postoperative hypotension included female sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.29 to 4.58), a history of transient ischemic attack or cerebrovascular accident (aOR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.04 to 3.72), and intraoperative dexmedetomidine use (aOR, 2.61; 95% CI, 1.99 to 3.42). Moreover, the risk of postoperative hypotension was approximately two times higher than baseline, with a total intraoperative dexmedetomidine dose above 50 µg (relative risk, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.63 to 2.44; P < 0.001). A higher preoperative systolic blood pressure (aOR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.97 to 0.99) was a protective factor for postoperative hypotension. CONCLUSION: In this historical cohort study, dexmedetomidine was a strong risk factor for postoperative hypotension in total hip or knee arthroplasty patients. Dexmedetomidine, and particularly at high cumulative doses above 50 µg, should be administered judiciously in high-risk surgical patients to minimize the risk of postoperative hypotension.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: La dexmédétomidine est fréquemment utilisée comme agent sédatif pour les patients en chirurgie orthopédique bénéficiant d'une arthroplastie totale de la hanche ou du genou. Bien que les avantages de la dexmédétomidine soient bien décrits dans la littérature, il existe également un potentiel de préjudice, en particulier en ce qui touche aux effets hémodynamiques de la dexmédétomidine dans un contexte postopératoire. MéTHODE: Cette étude de cohorte historique comprenait toutes les arthroplasties totales unilatérales primaires de la hanche ou du genou réalisées entre avril 2017 et février 2020 dans un seul centre de soins tertiaires universitaire (Hôpital général juif, Montréal, QC, Canada). Nous avons utilisé la régression logistique multivariable pour analyser les prédicteurs d'hypotension postopératoire, définie comme une tension artérielle systolique < 90 mmHg ou toute tension artérielle systolique pendant une perfusion de vasopresseurs en salle de réveil. Les modèles ont été validés à l'aide de l'étalonnage et de la discrimination avec une technique d'auto-amorçage. RéSULTATS: Mille cinq cent quatre-vingt-huit patients ont été inclus dans cette étude. Une hypotension postopératoire est survenue chez 413 (26 %) patients. Les prédicteurs statistiquement significatifs d'une hypotension postopératoire comprenaient le sexe féminin (rapport de cotes ajusté [RCA], 3,24; intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 %, 2,29 à 4,58), des antécédents d'accident ischémique transitoire ou d'accident vasculaire cérébral (RCA, 1,97; IC 95 %, 1,04 à 3,72) et l'utilisation peropératoire de dexmédétomidine (RCA, 2,61; IC 95 %, 1,99 à 3,42). De plus, le risque d'hypotension postopératoire était environ deux fois plus élevé que la valeur initiale, avec une dose peropératoire totale de dexmédétomidine supérieure à 50 µg (risque relatif, 1,99; IC 95 %, 1,63 à 2,44; P < 0,001). Une tension artérielle systolique préopératoire plus élevée (RCA, 0,98; IC 95 %, 0,97 à 0,99) était un facteur protecteur contre l'hypotension postopératoire. CONCLUSION: Dans cette étude de cohorte historique, la dexmédétomidine était un facteur de risque important d'hypotension postopératoire chez les patients bénéficiant d'une arthroplastie totale de la hanche ou du genou. La dexmédétomidine, et en particulier à des doses cumulatives élevées supérieures à 50 µg, devrait être administrée judicieusement chez les patients chirurgicaux à haut risque afin de minimiser le risque d'hypotension postopératoire.

Intraoperative Pneumothorax Presenting as Abdominal Distention.

A 74-year-old man with a history of lung cancer presented for right upper lobectomy. After induction of anesthesia, it was noted that the abdomen became progressively more distended. Soon afterward, there was a significant decrease in tidal volume. Ultrasonography of the lung showed no sign of pneumothorax at the anterior second intercostal space. However, the roentgenograms showed a massive right-sided pneumothorax and extensive pneumoperitoneum. Both the pneumothorax and the pneumoperitoneum were decompressed in the operating room, and the elective lobectomy proceeded as previously planned. The patient was extubated at the end of the operation, and there were no sequelae postoperatively.

Perioperative dexamethasone does not affect functional outcome in total hip arthroplasty.

UNLABELLED: Current trends in orthopaedic surgery have explored different forms of adjuvant treatments to minimize postoperative pain and the risk of nausea and vomiting. A small single preoperative dose of dexamethasone, as part of a comprehensive multimodal analgesic regimen in low-risk patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA), provides antiemetic and opioid-sparing effects but the longer-term effects on pain, complications, or function are not known. We therefore asked whether such a routine would affect longer-term pain, complications, or function. Fifty patients undergoing elective primary THA using spinal anesthesia were initially randomized to receive either dexamethasone (40 mg intravenous) or saline placebo. The patients, anesthesiologists, nurses, and research coordinators were blinded to the study arms. The functional outcome was measured using the Harris hip score. Outcomes were assessed 6 weeks and 1 year postoperatively. We observed no difference in resting pain between the two groups at either time period. Both groups had similar functional outcome scores for the total Harris hip score and individual scoring items at each followup interval. There were no wound complications, deep infections, or osteonecrosis in the contralateral hip at 1-year followup. We recommend the addition of a small single preoperative dose of dexamethasone to a comprehensive multimodal analgesic regimen in low-risk patients given its immediate antiemetic and opioid-sparing effects, and absence of subsequent effects. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, therapeutic study (prospective comparative study). See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Functional outcome of femoral versus obturator nerve block after total knee arthroplasty.

UNLABELLED: Patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty often experience substantial postoperative pain, which may delay functional recovery and hospital discharge. We recently reported the short-term analgesic efficacy of a single-injection femoral nerve block after spinal anesthesia in total knee arthroplasty. We have now followed 30 patients a minimum of 1 year to determine the functional outcome and pain relief after femoral and obturator nerve block after total knee arthroplasty. Patients undergoing primary unilateral total knee arthroplasty were randomized to one of three treatment groups: (1) femoral nerve block; (2) obturator nerve block; or (3) placebo (sham block). At 6 weeks and 1 year, all three groups had similar total Hospital for Special Surgery knee scores and similar subscores such as range of motion, daily function, and resting and dynamic pain. The data support the usefulness of a peripheral nerve blockade in the context of a multimodal analgesic regimen and a tailored rehabilitation program to individual patients and institutions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Single-dose dexamethasone reduces dynamic pain after total hip arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative glucocorticoids reduce postoperative nausea but may also improve analgesia and decrease opioid consumption. METHODS: Fifty consecutive patients undergoing elective, unilateral, primary total hip arthroplasty under spinal anesthesia with propofol sedation received in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled manner either 40 mg of dexamethasone or saline placebo i.v. before the start of surgery. I.v. patient-controlled analgesia morphine, ibuprofen 400 mg p.o. q6 h and acetaminophen 650 mg p.o. q6 h were given for 48 h. Pain (0-10 numeric rating scale, NRS) at rest, side effects, and total cumulative patient-controlled analgesia morphine consumption were recorded q4 h for 48 h. Dynamic pain NRS score was recorded at 24 h. C-reactive protein levels were measured in a subgroup of 25 patients at 48 h. RESULTS: The intraoperative sedation requirement with propofol was significantly increased in the dexamethasone group (234.6 +/- 160.1 vs 138.8 +/- 122.7 mg, P = 0.02). Dynamic pain was greatly reduced in the dexamethasone group (NRS score: 2.7, 95% CI: 2.2-3.1 vs 6.8, 6.4-7.2; P < 0.0001). There was no significant effect on pain at rest or cumulative morphine consumption at any time. C-reactive protein levels at 48 h were markedly reduced by dexamethasone (52.4 mg/mL, 28.2-76.6 vs 194.2, 168.9-219.4; P < 0.0001). Seven patients in the control group, but only one in the dexamethasone group, were treated for nausea (P = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: A single, preoperative i.v. dose of dexamethasone 40 mg has a prolonged suppressive effect on the inflammatory response and decreases dynamic pain 24 h after total hip arthroplasty.

Blood gas measurements using the Bayer Rapid Point 405: are we basing our decisions on accurate data?

OBJECTIVE: Therapeutic decisions in the Operating Room (OR) are often made based solely upon results obtained from arterial blood gas machines. We evaluated how precise and accurate the results obtained from Bayer Rapid Point 405 (RP405) were vis-à-vis those of our blood gas laboratory and if they met the standards of the members of the anesthesia department. METHODS: About 3 ml of blood from an indwelling arterial catheter were drawn into a heparinized syringe (FIMS Portex Inc.) from each of 90 patients and immediately analyzed by two RP405 and the hospital's main blood gas machines (Instrumentation Laboratories GEM 3000). The remaining 2.8 ml of blood was used to measure Hematocrit and sent to the hospital's main biochemistry laboratory for electrolyte measurement using an indirect ion selective method (Roche Diagnostics Modular ISE Module). A survey was distributed to each of the 19 anesthesiologists at the Sir Mortimer B Davis Jewish General Hospital (JGH). Their opinions for accuracy and treatment thresholds for each of the 12 variables measured by the RP405 were sought. RESULTS: For all measured variables, including pH, pCO2, pO2, potassium and Hematocrit, the correlation between the measurements from the RP405 and the gold standard were all above 95.5% with a p < 0.001. The survey results demonstrate that the machine gives results that are accurate within the acceptability frame expected by our staff anesthesiologists. CONCLUSION: Anesthesiologists must be confident that the information they receive is accurate in the context of rapidly changing clinical status. Our results show that the RP405 analyzers produce reliable measurements.

Electrical stimulation of the epidural space using a catheter with a removable stylet.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Electrical stimulation can be used to verify the location of epidural catheters. With the traditional technique, the latter must be primed with saline to allow for electrical conduction: any air lock will, thus, hinder the flow of current. Therefore, we set out to explore an alternative mode of stimulation by use of a catheter containing a removable stylet. This study examines the reliability of this new technique. METHODS: In 71 patients undergoing surgery, a thoracic epidural catheter was inserted preoperatively. Loss of resistance was used to identify the epidural space. The TheraCath was introduced 5 cm into the space and connected to a neurostimulator via a 2-headed alligator clip. The intensity, pulse width, and level of myotomal contractions were recorded upon stimulation of the epidural space. A bolus of lidocaine was then injected and the patient assessed for sensory block to ice. RESULTS: The failure rate in proper epidural catheter placement was 8.5%. Epidural stimulation yielded a mean threshold of 1.90 +/- 1.80 nanocoulombs. A total of 37 catheters produced a unilateral muscular response; however, block to ice was bilateral. When compared with the ice test, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of epidural stimulation with the TheraCath were 92%, 83%, 98%, and 50%, respectively. CONCLUSION: We conclude that the TheraCath, because of the removable stylet, provides effective electrostimulation of the epidural space. Its use was simple and devoid of complications. Nonetheless, further studies are required before implementing its routine use in clinical settings.

Documentation on the anesthetic record: Correlation with clinically important variables.

PURPOSE: A survey was undertaken at a single Academic Health Sciences Centre to document the opinions of anesthesiologists regarding what variables are important to document on the anesthetic record. A subsequent chart review of anesthetic records was undertaken to determine the extent to which these anesthesiologists record the variables they consider important. METHODS: A survey form was mailed to all practicing staff anesthesiologists at the four adult McGill University affiliated hospitals. Anesthesiologists were asked to rank 23 preoperative and 33 intraoperative variables on a scale from 1-5: (1 = essential; 2 = important; 3 = useful; 4 = not important; 5 = excessive information). All variables considered by consensus < or = 2 (important to essential) were then assessed as to whether they were recorded on 60 charts randomly selected from each of the four teaching hospitals. Only anesthetic records completed by staff anesthesiologists were evaluated. RESULTS: Ninety percent (47/52) of survey forms were completed and returned. Preoperative variables considered most important to document included examination of the patient's airway and allergy status. Intraoperative variables considered most important for documentation were the patient's vital signs. The only variable to have been recorded on all the anesthetic records was the anesthesiologist's name. The allergy status was the most recorded preoperative variable (84% of charts). The recording rates of intraoperative variables ranged from 100% (anesthesiologist's name, start time of anesthesia) to 24% (estimated blood loss). CONCLUSION: McGill anesthesiologists consider many preoperative and intraoperative variables to be important to document on the anesthetic record. However, subsequent chart review indicated that many of these variables are recorded inconsistently. The transmission of anesthesia-related medical information might be improved if anesthesiologists recorded more consistently information they consider to be important.

Documentation on the anesthetic record: correlation with clinically important variables : [Documentation sur le dossier anesthésique : corrélation avec les variables cliniques importantes].

PURPOSE: A survey was undertaken at a single Academic Health Sciences Centre to document the opinions of anesthesiologists regarding what variables are important to document on the anesthetic record. A subsequent chart review of anesthetic records was undertaken to determine the extent to which these anesthesiologists record the variables they consider important. METHODS: A survey form was mailed to all practicing staff anesthesiologists at the four adult McGill University affiliated hospitals. Anesthesiologists were asked to rank 23 preoperative and 33 intraoperative variables on a scale from 1-5: (1 = essential; 2 = important; 3 = useful; 4 = not important; 5 = excessive information). All variables considered by consensus ≤ 2 (important to essential) were then assessed as to whether they were recorded on 60 charts randomly selected from each of the four teaching hospitals. Only anesthetic records completed by staff anesthesiologists were evaluated. RESULTS: Ninety percent (47/52) of survey forms were completed and returned. Preoperative variables considered most important to document included examination of the patient's airway and allergy status. Intraoperative variables considered most important for documentation were the patient's vital signs. The only variable to have been recorded on all the anesthetic records was the anesthesiologist's name. The allergy status was the most recorded preoperative variable (84% of charts). The recording rates of intraoperative variables ranged from 100% (anesthesiologist's name, start time of anesthesia) to 24% (estimated blood loss). CONCLUSION: McGill anesthesiologists consider many preoperative and intraoperative variables to be important to document on the anesthetic record. However, subsequent chart review indicated that many of these variables are recorded inconsistently. The transmission of anesthesia-related medical information might be improved if anesthesiologists recorded more consistently information they consider to be important. OBJECTIF: Une enquête a été menée à un Centre universitaire de sciences de la santé pour connaître les opinions des anesthésiologistes sur les variables jugées importantes à inscrire au dossier anesthésique. Une revue subséquente des dossiers anesthésiques a été réalisée pour vérifier si les anesthésiologistes enregistrent les variables qu'ils considèrent importantes. MéTHODE: Un formulaire d'enquête a été posté à tous les anesthésiologistes en exercice dans les quatre hôpitaux pour adultes affiliés à l'université McGill. On leur a demandé de coter 23 variables préopératoires et 33 peropératoires sur une échelle de 1-5: (1 = essentielle, 2 = importante, 3 = utile, 4 = non importante et 5 = surinformation). Toutes les variables reconnues par la majorité ≤ 2 (importante à essentielle) ont été ensuite vérifiées pour savoir si elles étaient enregistrées dans 60 dossiers choisis au hasard dans chacun des quatre hôpitaux d'enseignement. Seuls les dossiers anesthésiques remplis par des spécialistes en service ont été évalués. RéSULTATS: Des formulaires envoyés 90 % (47/52) ont été remplis et retournés. Les variables préopératoires considérées importantes comprenaient l'examen des voies aériennes du patient et la présence d'allergie. Les variables peropératoires prioritaires ont été les signes vitaux des patients. La seule variable enregistrée dans tous les dossiers a été le nom de l'anesthésiologiste. La présence d'allergie a été la variable préopératoire la plus souvent enregistrée (84 % des dossiers). Les taux d'enregistrement des variables peropératoires allait de 100 % (nom de l'anesthésiologiste, heure du début de l'anesthésie) à 24 % (perte sanguine estimée). CONCLUSION: Les anesthésiologistes de McGill considèrent que de nombreuses variables préopératoires et peropératoires sont importantes à noter au dossier anesthésique. Une revue subséquente des dossiers a indiqué que beaucoup de ces variables ne sont pas constamment inscrites. La transmission des informations médicales liées à l'anesthésie serait améliorée si les anesthésiologistes notaient plus régulièrement les variables qu'ils jugent les plus importantes.

Ketorolac analgesia for inguinal hernia repair is not improved by peripheral administration.

PURPOSE: It has been suggested that ketorolac, a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) available for parenteral use, may result in prolonged (24 hr) postoperative analgesia through a peripheral mechanism when added to local anesthetic infiltration. Our objective was to assess this effect by controlling for systemic absorption of the drug. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind trial studied 40 men undergoing elective inguinal hernia repair under spinal anesthesia. All patients received 19 mL of lidocaine 1% infiltrated in the operative field before incision. Patients were randomized into two groups of 20. The surgical site group received ketorolac 30 mg added to the lidocaine infiltration. In the control group, ketorolac 30 mg was injected subcutaneously in the contralateral abdominal wall. Numeric rating scores (0-10) of pain at rest and with movement were recorded at the time of discharge from the recovery room and at 24 hr postoperatively. Time to first analgesia, postoperative iv morphine use, total time in the recovery room, and total oral analgesic use in the first 24 hr were also compared. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between groups with respect to any of the measured variables. In both groups, pain scores were low at rest (1.9 +/- 1.4 vs 2.2 +/- 1.8, surgical site and systemic groups, respectively) and moderate with movement (5.3 +/- 2.2, 5.0 +/- 1.8) after anesthetic recovery. Pain scores were similar at 24 hr (1.1 +/- 1.3, 1.9 +/- 1.6 at rest; 5.7 +/- 2.0, 6.2 +/- 2.2 with movement). CONCLUSION: Adding ketorolac to lidocaine infiltration for hernia repair does not improve or prolong postoperative analgesia compared to systemic administration.

Seizures after epidural blood patch with undiagnosed subdural hematoma.

OBJECTIVE: We present a case of new-onset seizures in a parturient who received an epidural blood patch (EBP) in the presence of an undiagnosed cerebral subdural hematoma. We review the relevant literature and examine the implications for management. CASE REPORT: A 33-year-old parturient developed symptoms of postdural puncture headache 16 hours after initiation of epidural analgesia for labor. On the third postpartum day, she likely had an unwitnessed and unrecognized seizure. Presenting to hospital with headache and fatigue, she received an EBP. Forty-five minutes after the EBP, she had a generalized seizure followed by another 2 hours later. Imaging revealed a small cranial subdural hematoma. She had no further seizures, her headache improved, and she was discharged home on postpartum day 5. CONCLUSIONS: We believe that the subdural hematoma and not the EBP was the cause of the seizures. Earlier recognition of confusion and fatigue as a postictal state may have led to earlier diagnosis of the hematoma. Our experience suggests that EBP be avoided in the setting of subdural hematoma.