Efficacy of opioid-sparing analgesia after median sternotomy with continuous bilateral parasternal subpectoral plane blocks.

OBJECTIVES: Regional anesthetic techniques, traditionally underutilized in cardiac surgery, may play a role in multimodal analgesia, effectively improving pain control and reducing opioid consumption. We investigated the efficacy of continuous bilateral ultrasound-guided parasternal subpectoral plane blocks following sternotomy. METHODS: We reviewed all opioid-naïve patients who underwent cardiac surgery via median sternotomy under our enhanced recovery after surgery protocol between May 2018 and March 2020. Patients were grouped based on postoperative pain management strategy-those who received standard Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) multimodal analgesia alone (no nerve block group) versus those receiving ERAS multimodal analgesia plus continuous bilateral parasternal subpectoral plane blocks (block group). In the block group, parasternal subpectoral plane catheters were placed under ultrasound-guidance on each side of the sternum with initial 0.25% ropivacaine bolus, followed by continuous 0.125% bupivacaine infusions. Postoperative patient-reported numerical rating scale pain scores and opioid consumption in morphine milligram equivalents were compared through postoperative day 4. RESULTS: Of 281 patients included in the study, the block group comprised 125 (44%) patients. Although baseline characteristics, type of surgery, and length of stay were similar between groups, average numerical rating scale pain scores and opioid consumption were significantly lower in the block group through postoperative day 4 (all P values < .05). We also observed a 44% reduction in total opioid consumption after surgery in the block group (75.1 vs 133.1 MME; P = .001) and 1 less hospital day requiring opioids (4.2 vs 3 days; P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: Continuous bilateral parasternal subpectoral plane blocks may further reduce poststernotomy pain and opioid consumption within the context ERAS multimodal analgesia.

Impaired consciousness in partial seizures is bimodally distributed.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether impaired consciousness in partial seizures can usually be attributed to specific deficits in the content of consciousness or to a more general decrease in the overall level of consciousness. METHODS: Prospective testing during partial seizures was performed in patients with epilepsy using the Responsiveness in Epilepsy Scale (n = 83 partial seizures, 30 patients). Results were compared with responsiveness scores in a cohort of patients with severe traumatic brain injury evaluated with the JFK Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (n = 552 test administrations, 184 patients). RESULTS: Standardized testing during partial seizures reveals a bimodal scoring distribution, such that most patients were either fully impaired or relatively spared in their ability to respond on multiple cognitive tests. Seizures with impaired performance on initial test items remained consistently impaired on subsequent items, while other seizures showed spared performance throughout. In the comparison group, we found that scores of patients with brain injury were more evenly distributed across the full range in severity of impairment. CONCLUSIONS: Partial seizures can often be cleanly separated into those with vs without overall impaired responsiveness. Results from similar testing in a comparison group of patients with brain injury suggest that the bimodal nature of Responsiveness in Epilepsy Scale scores is not a result of scale bias but may be a finding unique to partial seizures. These findings support a model in which seizures either propagate or do not propagate to key structures that regulate overall arousal and thalamocortical function. Future investigations are needed to relate these behavioral findings to the physiology underlying impaired consciousness in partial seizures.

Prospective assessment of ictal behavior using the revised Responsiveness in Epilepsy Scale (RES-II).

Impaired consciousness in epilepsy has a significant negative impact on patients' quality of life yet is difficult to study objectively. Here, we develop an improved prospective Responsiveness in Epilepsy Scale-II (RES-II) and report initial results compared with the earlier version of the scale (RES). The RES-II is simpler to administer and includes both verbal and non-verbal test items. We evaluated 75 seizures (24 patients) with RES and 34 seizures (11 patients) with RES-II based on video-EEG review. The error rate per seizure by test administrators improved markedly from a mean of 2.01 ± 0.04 with RES to 0.24 ± 0.11 with RES-II. Performance during focal seizures showed a bimodal distribution, corresponding to the traditional complex partial vs. simple partial seizure classification. We conclude that RES-II has improved accuracy and testing efficiency compared with the original RES. Prospective objective testing will ultimately lead to a better understanding of the mechanisms of impaired consciousness in epilepsy.