Liposomal bupivacaine after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair moderately decreases early postoperative pain and demonstrates equivocal opioid consumption compared to traditional interscalene nerve blocks: A systematic review and meta-analysis of level 1 studies

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS Orthopaedics & Traumatology-Surgery & Research Pub Date : 2026-02-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-17 DOI:10.1016/j.otsr.2025.104190
Jaden Hardrick , Anna M. Ifarraguerri , Michael S. Collins , David P. Trofa , James E. Fleischli , Nady Hamid , Patrick N. Siparsky , Bryan M. Saltzman
{"title":"Liposomal bupivacaine after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair moderately decreases early postoperative pain and demonstrates equivocal opioid consumption compared to traditional interscalene nerve blocks: A systematic review and meta-analysis of level 1 studies","authors":"Jaden Hardrick ,&nbsp;Anna M. Ifarraguerri ,&nbsp;Michael S. Collins ,&nbsp;David P. Trofa ,&nbsp;James E. Fleischli ,&nbsp;Nady Hamid ,&nbsp;Patrick N. Siparsky ,&nbsp;Bryan M. Saltzman","doi":"10.1016/j.otsr.2025.104190","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div><span><span><span>Interscalene nerve blocks (ISNBs) reduce length of stay, postoperative pain, and opioid consumption following arthroscopic </span>rotator cuff repair (ARCR). ISNBs with anesthetic agents like </span>bupivacaine<span> are associated with intense rebound pain, while liposomal bupivacaine (LB) can potentially extend pain relief up to 72 h and reduce opioid consumption. The purpose of this </span></span>systematic review<span> and meta-analysis is to compare the efficacy of LB versus traditional ISNB for postoperative pain management and opioid consumption following ARCR.</span></div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A systematic review following PRISMA guidelines was performed from inception through March 2024. Randomized controlled trials comparing LB and traditional ISNB for postoperative pain management and opioid consumption following ARCR were included. The meta-analysis on each outcome measure was outlined in a forest plot detailing the standard mean difference (SMD) for continuous variables.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Data was extracted from 5 articles on 362 patients who underwent ARCR, 196 of whom received LB and 166 with a control non-LB ISNB. LB interventions had significantly lower pain scores than controls on postoperative day (POD) 1 and POD 2 (SMD −3.45, 95% CI [−5.20, −1.60]; P = 0.0003 and SMD −2.39, 95% CI [−4.01, −0.77]; P = 0.004, respectively). There was a significantly lower oral morphine equivalent dosage consumption in the LB cohort than controls on POD 0, POD 1, POD 2, and POD 3 (SMD −4.66; 95% CI, −7.95 to −1.36; <em>p = 0.006</em>; SMD −3.77; 95% CI, −5.69 to −1.85; <em>p = 0.0001</em>, SMD -3.34 95% CI [−5.13, −1.56]; <em>p = 0.0002</em>, and SMD -3.43; 95% CI, −5.74 to −1.12; <em>p = 0.004</em>, respectively).</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>LB moderately decreased pain scores 24–72 h postoperatively and reduced opioid consumption for up to 96 h following ARCR compared to a control ISNB cohort. However, the clinical difference in opioid usage may not translate to patient benefits or justify the increased cost.</div></div><div><h3>Level of evidence</h3><div>I.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54664,"journal":{"name":"Orthopaedics & Traumatology-Surgery & Research","volume":"112 1","pages":"Article 104190"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopaedics & Traumatology-Surgery & Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877056825000374","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Interscalene nerve blocks (ISNBs) reduce length of stay, postoperative pain, and opioid consumption following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR). ISNBs with anesthetic agents like bupivacaine are associated with intense rebound pain, while liposomal bupivacaine (LB) can potentially extend pain relief up to 72 h and reduce opioid consumption. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare the efficacy of LB versus traditional ISNB for postoperative pain management and opioid consumption following ARCR.

Methods

A systematic review following PRISMA guidelines was performed from inception through March 2024. Randomized controlled trials comparing LB and traditional ISNB for postoperative pain management and opioid consumption following ARCR were included. The meta-analysis on each outcome measure was outlined in a forest plot detailing the standard mean difference (SMD) for continuous variables.

Results

Data was extracted from 5 articles on 362 patients who underwent ARCR, 196 of whom received LB and 166 with a control non-LB ISNB. LB interventions had significantly lower pain scores than controls on postoperative day (POD) 1 and POD 2 (SMD −3.45, 95% CI [−5.20, −1.60]; P = 0.0003 and SMD −2.39, 95% CI [−4.01, −0.77]; P = 0.004, respectively). There was a significantly lower oral morphine equivalent dosage consumption in the LB cohort than controls on POD 0, POD 1, POD 2, and POD 3 (SMD −4.66; 95% CI, −7.95 to −1.36; p = 0.006; SMD −3.77; 95% CI, −5.69 to −1.85; p = 0.0001, SMD -3.34 95% CI [−5.13, −1.56]; p = 0.0002, and SMD -3.43; 95% CI, −5.74 to −1.12; p = 0.004, respectively).

Discussion

LB moderately decreased pain scores 24–72 h postoperatively and reduced opioid consumption for up to 96 h following ARCR compared to a control ISNB cohort. However, the clinical difference in opioid usage may not translate to patient benefits or justify the increased cost.

Level of evidence

I.
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
与传统的斜角肌间神经阻滞相比,关节镜下肩袖修复术后脂质布比卡因适度减少术后早期疼痛并显示模棱两可的阿片类药物消耗:1级研究的系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:斜角间神经阻滞(isnb)可减少关节镜下肩袖修复(ARCR)后的住院时间、术后疼痛和阿片类药物消耗。使用布比卡因等麻醉剂的isnb与强烈的反跳疼痛有关,而布比卡因脂质体(LB)可能将疼痛缓解延长至72小时,并减少阿片类药物的消耗。本系统综述和荟萃分析的目的是比较LB与传统ISNB在ARCR术后疼痛管理和阿片类药物消耗方面的疗效。方法:从开始到2024年3月,遵循PRISMA指南进行系统评价。纳入了比较LB和传统ISNB在ARCR术后疼痛管理和阿片类药物消耗方面的随机对照试验。每个结果测量的荟萃分析在森林图中概述,详细说明了连续变量的标准平均差(SMD)。结果:从5篇文章中提取了362例接受ARCR的患者的数据,其中196例接受LB, 166例对照非LB ISNB。术后第1天和第2天,LB干预组的疼痛评分明显低于对照组(SMD -3.45, 95% CI [-5.20, -1.60];P = 0.0003, SMD = -2.39, 95% CI [-4.01, -0.77];P = 0.004)。在POD 0、POD 1、POD 2和POD 3上,LB组口服吗啡当量用量明显低于对照组(SMD -4.66;95% CI, -7.95 ~ -1.36;p = 0.006;SMD -3.77;95% CI, -5.69 ~ -1.85;p = 0.0001, SMD = -3.34 95% CI [-5.13, -1.56];p = 0.0002, SMD -3.43;95% CI, -5.74 ~ -1.12;P = 0.004)。讨论:与对照组ISNB队列相比,LB可适度降低术后24至72小时的疼痛评分,并减少ARCR后长达96小时的阿片类药物消耗。然而,阿片类药物使用的临床差异可能不能转化为患者的益处或证明增加的成本是合理的。证据等级:1。
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
5.10
自引率
26.10%
发文量
329
审稿时长
12.5 weeks
期刊介绍: Orthopaedics & Traumatology: Surgery & Research (OTSR) publishes original scientific work in English related to all domains of orthopaedics. Original articles, Reviews, Technical notes and Concise follow-up of a former OTSR study are published in English in electronic form only and indexed in the main international databases.
期刊最新文献
Ultrasound screening of lateral hinge fracture after medial open wedge proximal tibial osteotomy. Variation in lumbar regional kyphosis between supine and standing positions. Implications for spinal fracture management Postoperative management following degenerative cervical spine surgery: Results from a survey conducted by the French Society of Spine Surgery Biomechanical evaluation of composite reduction plates with variable positioning using the Henry and Thompson approaches for transverse radial fracture surgery C1-C2 fixation: Effects on cervical range of motion and quality of life
×
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:604180095
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