Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine最新文献

Background: The efficacy of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) in chronic pain studies is traditionally assessed by pain scores, which do not reflect the multidimensional nature of pain perception. Despite the evidence of SCS's influence on emotional functioning comprehensive assessments of its effect remain lacking.

Objective: To assess changes in emotional and psychosocial functioning in patients who underwent SCS implantation for chronic pain.

Evidence review: Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO, Cochrane CENTRAL and Scopus databases were searched for original peer-reviewed publications reporting emotional functioning after SCS. The primary outcomes were a pooled mean difference (MD) in anxiety, depression, global functioning, mental well-being and pain catastrophizing at 12 months. The Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to determine the quality of evidence.

Findings: Thirty-two studies were included in the primary analysis. Statistically significant improvements were observed in anxiety (MD -2.16; 95% CI -2.84 to -1.49; p<0.001), depression (MD -4.66; 95% CI -6.26 to -3.06; p<0.001), global functioning (MD 20.30; 95% CI 14.69 to 25.90; p<0.001), mental well-being (MD 4.95; 95% CI 3.60 to 6.31; p<0.001), and pain catastrophizing (MD -12.09; 95% CI -14.94 to -9.23; p<0.001). Subgroup analyses revealed differences in Global Assessment of Functioning and mental well-being based on study design and in depression based on waveform paradigm.

Conclusion: The results highlight the statistically and clinically significant improvements in emotional and psychosocial outcomes in patients with chronic pain undergoing SCS therapy. However, these results need to be interpreted with caution due to the very low certainty of evidence per the GRADE criteria.

Prospero registration: CRD42023446326.

Regional anesthesia (RA) is commonly used in perioperative settings of developed and well-resourced environments. RA has significant potential benefits when used in resource-limited environments, including disaster, mass casualty, and wartime environments. RA offers benefits over general anesthesia and opioid-based analgesia, including decreased risk of complications, decreased reliance on mechanical ventilation, improved cost efficiency, and others. The decreasing cost of ultrasound matched with its smaller size and portability increases the availability of ultrasound in these environments, making ultrasound-guided RA more feasible. This daring discourse discusses some historical examples of RA in ultralow resource environments, both man-made disasters and natural disasters. Future investigations should increase the usefulness and availability of RA in resource-limited environments.

Background: Peer review represents a cornerstone of the scientific process, yet few studies have evaluated its association with scientific impact. The objective of this study is to assess the association of peer review scores with measures of impact for manuscripts submitted and ultimately published.

Methods: 3173 manuscripts submitted to Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine (RAPM) between August 2018 and October 2021 were analyzed, with those containing an abstract included. Articles were categorized by topic, type, acceptance status, author demographics and open-access status. Articles were scored based on means for the initial peer review where each reviewer's recommendation was assigned a number: 5 for 'accept', 3 for 'minor revision', 2 for 'major revision' and 0 for 'reject'. Articles were further classified by whether any reviewers recommended 'reject'. Rejected articles were analyzed to determine whether they were subsequently published in an indexed journal, and their citations were compared with those of accepted articles when the impact factor was <1.4 points lower than RAPM's 5.1 impact factor. The main outcome measure was the number of Clarivate citations within 2 years from publication. Secondary outcome measures were Google Scholar citations within 2 years and Altmetric score.

Results: 422 articles met inclusion criteria for analysis. There was no significant correlation between the number of Clarivate 2-year review citations and reviewer rating score (r=0.038, p=0.47), Google Scholar citations (r=0.053, p=0.31) or Altmetric score (p=0.38). There was no significant difference in 2-year Clarivate citations between accepted (median (IQR) 5 (2-10)) and rejected manuscripts published in journals with impact factors >3.7 (median 5 (2-7); p=0.39). Altmetric score was significantly higher for RAPM-published papers compared with RAPM-rejected ones (median 10 (5-17) vs 1 (0-2); p<0.001).

Conclusions: Peer review rating scores were not associated with citations, though the impact of peer review on quality and association with other metrics remains unclear.

Background: Nerve block utility has been extensively described in the operating room, however, there is a paucity of evidence regarding blocks in the interventional radiology (IR) suite, with no studies examining its safety and efficacy in children.

Methods: A retrospective study was conducted at a single tertiary-care children's hospital to evaluate the analgesic utility of nerve blocks during IR-performed sclerotherapy for bone cysts, venous malformations, and lymphatic malformations. Lymphatic and venous malformations were combined for final analysis. Patients between January 2016 and September 2022 had their medical records reviewed for procedural data, postprocedural pain scores, and analgesic administration data.

Results: 309 patients were included in the final analysis. Opioids were required significantly less frequently intraprocedurally and postprocedurally across subgroups. The proportion of patients who received opioids during their hospital course was significant between block and non-block patients, respectively: bone cyst: 62.7% vs 100% (p<0.001); venous and lymphatic malformation: 65.7% vs 97.4% (p<0.001). Average maximum postanesthesia care unit (PACU) pain scores were significantly lower in bone cyst patients with no significant difference seen in pain scores among venous and lymphatic malformation patients. There were no reported nerve block-related complications.

Discussion: Nerve blocks demonstrated an opioid-sparing effect intraprocedurally and postprocedurally for all subgroups. Their use among bone cyst patients was associated with significant reductions in average maximum PACU pain scores. Nerve blocks may constitute an effective opioid-sparing component of multimodal analgesia in pediatric patients undergoing IR sclerosis procedures. Prospective data are needed to establish the optimal utility of nerve blocks in the IR setting.

Background: Current understanding of the mechanism of action of the pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block is primarily based on cadaver studies. We performed an imaging study in patients undergoing hip surgery to enhance the understanding of the analgesic mechanisms following a PENG block.

Materials and methods: 10 patients scheduled for hip surgery received an ultrasound-guided PENG block with 18 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine mixed with 2 mL of a contrast agent. After completion of the block, a high-resolution CT scan was performed to obtain a three-dimensional reconstruction of the injectate's dispersion.

Results: The CT imaging revealed that injectate was mainly confined to the epimysium of the iliacus and the psoas muscle, with a minor spread to the hip capsule. Contrast dye was detected within the iliacus and/or the psoas muscle in all patients. No observed spread to either the subpectineal plane or the obturator foramen was detected.

Conclusion: Our study suggests that the analgesic effect of the PENG block may be related to the block of the branches of the femoral nerve traveling within the iliopsoas muscle without a spread pattern commensurate with the block of the obturator nerve.

Trial registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT06062134).

Background: Hip arthroscopy causes severe pain during the first few hours in the postoperative care unit. This is probably due to the intraoperative stretching of the hip joint capsule. Pain relief requires high doses of opioids which may prolong recovery and may cause opioid-related adverse events.The majority of hip joint capsule nociceptors are located anteriorly. The obturator nerve innervates the anteromedial part of the hip joint capsule. We hypothesized that a subpectineal obturator nerve block using 15 ml bupivacaine 5 mg/mL with added epinephrine 5 μg/mL would reduce the opioid consumption after hip arthroscopy.

Methods: 40 ambulatory hip arthroscopy patients were enrolled in this randomized, triple-blind controlled trial. All patients were allocated to a preoperative active or placebo subpectineal obturator nerve block. The primary outcome was opioid consumption for the first 3 hours in the postanesthesia care unit. Secondary outcomes were pain, nausea, and hip adductor strength.

Results: 34 patients were analyzed for the primary outcome. The mean intravenous morphine equivalent consumption in the subpectineal obturator nerve block group was 11.9 mg vs 19.7 mg in the placebo group (p<0.001). The hip adductor strength was significantly reduced in the active group. No other intergroup differences were observed regarding the secondary outcomes.

Conclusion: We found a significant reduction in the opioid consumption for patients receiving an active subpectineal obturator nerve block. The postoperative intravenous morphine equivalent reduction the first painful 3 hours was reduced by 40% for patients receiving a subpectineal obturator nerve block in this randomized, triple-blind trial.

Trial registration number: EudraCT database 2021-006575-42.

Well-established guidelines and checklists for authors, reviewers, and readers of systematic reviews and scoping reviews are readily available. However, the availability of such for narrative reviews is lacking, including, but not limited to, field-specific guidelines in the field of anesthesia and pain medicine. In this brief article, we review the differences between the major types of reviews, followed by a more detailed description of narrative reviews that clearly differentiates them from other types of reviews. We include a recommended checklist that will aid producers, editors, reviewers, and consumers of narrative reviews as well as examples specific to the field of anesthesia and pain medicine. It is the hope that the guidelines recommended here will aid producers, editors, reviewers, and consumers of narrative reviews in anesthesia and pain medicine, including Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine Adherence to such should help differentiate between narrative reviews and other types of reviews as well as provide consistency in what elements are necessary to include in a narrative review in the field of anesthesia and pain medicine.