RESUMO
Background: Women have poorer quality of postoperative recovery from general anaesthesia than men. This persists for at least 3 days postoperatively, and is more pronounced in premenopausal women. Studies of menstrual cycle effects on pain or postoperative nausea and vomiting report conflicting results. Our aim was to determine whether menstrual cycle phase is associated with quality of recovery after surgery in premenopausal women. Methods: Eligible women aged 18-45 yr undergoing wisdom teeth extraction or laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anaesthesia with volatile agents were recruited from Epworth HealthCare Richmond in Melbourne, Australia from 2019 to 2021. Menstrual history and progesterone levels were used to determine cycle phase (luteal or non-luteal). Linear mixed and generalised linear regression models were fitted to examine differences in Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) score on postoperative days 1 (primary outcome) and 3, and secondary outcomes (pain, analgesic effectiveness, postoperative nausea and vomiting, prolonged hospital admission), between groups, adjusting for confounders. Results: A total of 177 women were recruited (74 luteal, 103 non-luteal). Six (3%) underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Estimated mean differences (95% confidence interval; P-value) in adjusted QoR-15 scores between luteal and non-luteal groups were -0.05 (-5.86 to 5.76; P=0.986) and 1.40 (-4.41 to 7.21; P=0.636) on postoperative days 1 and 3, respectively. Secondary outcomes were not different between groups. Conclusions: There was no significant difference in postoperative QoR-15 score or other outcomes between women in the luteal and non-luteal phases of their cycle. Women can be reassured that cycle phase does not impact postoperative quality of recovery when undergoing minor surgery under general anaesthesia. Clinical trial registration: ACTRN12618000240246.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Local infiltration analgesia (LIA) is commonly used in anterior total hip arthroplasty (THA) surgery; however, evidence for its efficacy is lacking. We hypothesized that LIA with 0.2% ropivacaine when compared with injection of placebo (0.9% saline) would improve patient quality of recovery on postoperative day (POD) 1, as measured by the Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) score. METHODS: Patients scheduled to have a primary unilateral anterior THA with a single surgeon in a tertiary level metropolitan hospital were randomized to receive LIA with either 2.5 mL/kg of 0.2% ropivacaine or 0.9% saline as placebo. Patients and clinical and study personnel were blinded to group allocation. Perioperative care was standardized and this included spinal anesthesia and oral multimodal analgesia. The primary outcome was a multidimensional (pain, physical comfort, physical independence, emotions, and psychological support) patient-reported quality of recovery scale, QoR-15, measured on POD 1. RESULTS: One hundred sixty patients were randomized; 6 patients were withdrawn after randomization and 2 patients had incomplete outcome data. The intention-to-treat analysis included 152 patients. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) QoR-15 score on POD 1 of the ropivacaine group was 119.5 (102-124), compared with the placebo group which had a median (IQR) of 115 (98-126). The median difference of 2 (95% confidence interval [CI], -4 to 7; P = .56) was not statistically or clinically significant. An as-per-protocol sensitivity analysis of 146 patients who received spinal anesthesia without general anesthesia, and the allocated intervention, also showed no evidence of a significant difference between groups. Secondary outcomes (worst pain numerical rating scale at rest and with movement on POD 1, opioid consumption on PODs 1 and 2, mobilization on POD 1, Brief Pain Inventory severity and interference on POD 90, and length of stay) were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: LIA with 0.2% ropivacaine when compared with 0.9% saline as placebo did not improve quality of recovery 1 day after anterior THA.
