Epidural analgesia versus systemic opioids for postoperative pain management after VATS: Protocol for a systematic review.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Pub Date : 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1111/aas.14546
Jimmy H Holm, Mikkel Bak, Anne C Brøchner
{"title":"Epidural analgesia versus systemic opioids for postoperative pain management after VATS: Protocol for a systematic review.","authors":"Jimmy H Holm, Mikkel Bak, Anne C Brøchner","doi":"10.1111/aas.14546","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Postoperative pain following video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) remains a significant challenge. While epidural analgesia is still the gold standard, other types of regional analgesia are gaining popularity because of perceived less risk of complications. The efficacy of systemic opioids as an alternative to epidural analgesia has not been thoroughly explored. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate and compare the efficacy of systemic opioids versus epidural analgesia in managing postoperative pain after VATS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) checklist. A comprehensive search will be conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library supplemented with Scopus citation searches, search for gray literature using Google Scholar and a search for ongoing studies. We will include studies based on the PICO methodology without restrictions regarding study type. Two independent reviewers will screen studies, extract data, and assess study quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tools. The primary outcomes will be postoperative pain intensity at rest and during activity at 24, 48, and 72 h. Secondary outcomes will include use of \"rescue\" opioids, hospital length of stay, and adverse events. If feasible, a meta-analysis will be done, otherwise we will perform a descriptive analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results will provide a comparative analysis of the effectiveness of systemic opioids versus epidural analgesia in managing postoperative pain in VATS patients. Data synthesis will include pooled estimates for pain scores, opioid consumption, and adverse events, possibly with subgroup and sensitivity analyses conducted to explore heterogeneity across studies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This systematic review will offer valuable insights into the optimal pain management strategy for patients undergoing VATS. The findings may guide clinical practice in selecting the most effective and safe analgesic approach, improving postoperative recovery, and patient outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":6909,"journal":{"name":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.14546","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Postoperative pain following video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) remains a significant challenge. While epidural analgesia is still the gold standard, other types of regional analgesia are gaining popularity because of perceived less risk of complications. The efficacy of systemic opioids as an alternative to epidural analgesia has not been thoroughly explored. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate and compare the efficacy of systemic opioids versus epidural analgesia in managing postoperative pain after VATS.

Methods: We will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) checklist. A comprehensive search will be conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library supplemented with Scopus citation searches, search for gray literature using Google Scholar and a search for ongoing studies. We will include studies based on the PICO methodology without restrictions regarding study type. Two independent reviewers will screen studies, extract data, and assess study quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tools. The primary outcomes will be postoperative pain intensity at rest and during activity at 24, 48, and 72 h. Secondary outcomes will include use of "rescue" opioids, hospital length of stay, and adverse events. If feasible, a meta-analysis will be done, otherwise we will perform a descriptive analysis.

Results: The results will provide a comparative analysis of the effectiveness of systemic opioids versus epidural analgesia in managing postoperative pain in VATS patients. Data synthesis will include pooled estimates for pain scores, opioid consumption, and adverse events, possibly with subgroup and sensitivity analyses conducted to explore heterogeneity across studies.

Conclusions: This systematic review will offer valuable insights into the optimal pain management strategy for patients undergoing VATS. The findings may guide clinical practice in selecting the most effective and safe analgesic approach, improving postoperative recovery, and patient outcomes.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
硬膜外镇痛与全身使用阿片类药物治疗 VATS 术后疼痛:系统性综述方案。
背景:视频辅助胸腔镜手术(VATS)后的术后疼痛仍是一项重大挑战。虽然硬膜外镇痛仍是金标准,但其他类型的区域镇痛因并发症风险较低而越来越受欢迎。系统性阿片类药物作为硬膜外镇痛的替代疗法,其疗效尚未得到深入探讨。本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在评估和比较全身阿片类药物与硬膜外镇痛在处理 VATS 术后疼痛方面的疗效:我们将根据《科克伦手册》和《系统综述和荟萃分析协议首选报告项目》(PRISMA-P)清单进行系统综述和荟萃分析。我们将在 MEDLINE、EMBASE 和 Cochrane 图书馆进行全面检索,并辅以 Scopus 引文检索、使用 Google Scholar 检索灰色文献以及检索正在进行的研究。我们将根据 PICO 方法纳入研究,对研究类型不做限制。两名独立审稿人将筛选研究、提取数据,并使用 Cochrane 偏倚风险工具评估研究质量。次要结果包括 "救援 "阿片类药物的使用、住院时间和不良事件。如果可行,我们将进行荟萃分析,否则将进行描述性分析:结果:我们将对全身使用阿片类药物和硬膜外镇痛治疗 VATS 患者术后疼痛的效果进行比较分析。数据综合将包括疼痛评分、阿片类药物消耗量和不良事件的汇总估计值,并可能进行亚组和敏感性分析,以探讨不同研究之间的异质性:本系统性综述将为接受 VATS 手术的患者的最佳疼痛管理策略提供有价值的见解。研究结果可指导临床实践,选择最有效、最安全的镇痛方法,改善术后恢复和患者预后。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
9.50%
发文量
157
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica publishes papers on original work in the fields of anaesthesiology, intensive care, pain, emergency medicine, and subjects related to their basic sciences, on condition that they are contributed exclusively to this Journal. Case reports and short communications may be considered for publication if of particular interest; also letters to the Editor, especially if related to already published material. The editorial board is free to discuss the publication of reviews on current topics, the choice of which, however, is the prerogative of the board. Every effort will be made by the Editors and selected experts to expedite a critical review of manuscripts in order to ensure rapid publication of papers of a high scientific standard.
期刊最新文献
Effect of intraoperative methadone in robot-assisted cystectomy on postoperative opioid requirements: A randomized clinical trial. Epidural analgesia versus systemic opioids for postoperative pain management after VATS: Protocol for a systematic review. Time from pain assessment to opioid treatment in the Danish emergency departments-A multicenter cohort study. Viscoelastic testing of fibrinolytic capacity in acutely infected critically ill patients: Protocol for a scoping review. Does cytochrome 2D6 genotype affect the analgesic efficacy of codeine after ambulatory surgery? Prospective trial in 987 adults.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1