METHODS: This study will be a pilot, interventional, randomized, 2-armed, parallel, singled-masked, controlled trial. A total of 40 diabetes mellitus patients with peripheral neuropathy will be recruited and assigned randomly into 2 groups (moxibustion group and waiting group) at a 1:1 ratio. This trial consists of an 8-week intervention period and a 4-week follow-up period. During the intervention period, the moxibustion group will take 3 moxibustion sessions per week, whereas no intervention will be done on the waiting group to act as the control group. The outcome will be assessed by an outcome assessor who is unaware of the group assignment. The primary outcome will be pain assessment measured with algometry, Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs pain scale, visual analogue scale, and neuropathy pain scale. The secondary outcome will be an evaluation of functional performance capacity with 6 minutes walking test, evaluation of the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure, and serum HbA1c and albumin levels.
DISCUSSION: We hope that this trial will provide valuable insights on the efficacy of moxibustion in the management of diabetic peripheral neuropathy.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry No.: NCT04894461 (URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04894461?term=NCT04894461&draw=2&rank=1) Registered on May 20, 2021.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled prospective study, we enrolled 40 children undergoing tonsillectomy. Anesthetic care was standardized. Intraoperative analgesia was provided with remifentanil 0.5 microg x kg(-1) followed by an infusion of 0.25 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1). Group I (ketamine, n = 20) received a bolus dose of ketamine 0.5 mg x kg(-1) followed by a continuous infusion of 2 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1) before start of surgery. The infusion was stopped when surgery ended. Group II (placebo, n=20) received normal saline in the same manner. Pain was assessed postoperatively using the Children's Hospital Eastern Ontario Pain Scale (CHEOPS; range of scores 4 13), and total morphine consumption was recorded in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU). Patients were transferred to the ward and morphine was administered via a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) device and analgesia was recorded using a visual analogue scale (VAS) (0 - 10).
RESULTS: Intraoperative remifentanil consumption was not different between the ketamine group (0.29+/-0.09 microg x kg x min(-1) ) and the control group (0.24+/-0.07 microg x kg x min(-1)). There were no significant differences between CHEOPS scores and VAS score between the two groups. The total mean morphine consumption in the ward was not significantly different between the two groups: 376.5 +/-91.6 microg x kg(-1) with ketamine and 384.4+/-97.3 microg x kg(-1) with placebo. The time-to-first analgesic requirement was also similar in both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Small-dose ketamine did not decrease postoperative pain after tonsillectomy in children when added to a continuous intraoperative remifentanil infusion.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the evidence for the effectiveness of clonidine, when given as a premedication, in reducing postoperative pain in children less than 18 years of age. We also sought evidence of any clinically significant side effects.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library (Issue 12, 2012), Ovid MEDLINE (1966 to 21 December 2012) and Ovid EMBASE (1982 to 21 December 2012), as well as reference lists of other relevant articles and online trial registers.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomized (or quasi-randomized), controlled trials comparing clonidine premedication to placebo, a higher dose of clonidine, or another agent when used for surgical or other invasive procedures in children under the age of 18 years and where pain or a surrogate (principally the need for supplementary analgesia) was reported.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently performed the database search, decided on the inclusion eligibility of publications, ascertained study quality and extracted data. They then resolved any differences between their results by discussion. The data were entered into RevMan 5 for analyses and presentation. Sensitivity analyses were performed, as appropriate, to exclude studies with a high risk of bias.
MAIN RESULTS: We identified 11 trials investigating a total of 742 children in treatment arms relevant to our study question. Risks of bias in the studies were mainly low or unclear, but two studies had aspects of their methodology that had a high risk of bias. Overall, the quality of the evidence from pooled studies was low or had unclear risk of bias. Four trials compared clonidine with a placebo or no treatment, six trials compared clonidine with midazolam, and one trial compared clonidine with fentanyl. There was substantial methodological heterogeneity between trials; the dose and route of clonidine administration varied as did the patient populations, the types of surgery and the outcomes measured. It was therefore difficult to combine the outcomes of some trials for meta-analysis.When clonidine was compared to placebo, pooling studies of low or unclear risk of bias, the need for additional analgesia was reduced when clonidine premedication was given orally at 4 µg/kg (risk ratio (RR) 0.24, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.11 to 0.51). Only one small trial (15 patients per arm) compared clonidine to midazolam for the same outcome; this also found a reduction in the need for additional postoperative analgesia (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.71) when clonidine premedication was given orally at 2 or 4 µg/kg compared to oral midazolam at 0.5 mg/kg. A trial comparing oral clonidine at 4 µg/kg with intravenous fentanyl at 3 µg/kg found no statistically significant difference in the need for rescue analgesia (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.42). When clonidine 4 µg/kg was compared to clonidine 2 µg/kg, there was a statistically significant difference in the number of patients requiring additional analgesia, in favour of the higher dose, as reported by a single, higher-quality trial (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.65).The effect of clonidine on pain scores was hard to interpret due to differences in study methodology, the doses and route of drug administration, and the pain scale used. However, when given at a dose of 4 µg/kg, clonidine may have reduced analgesia requirements after surgery. There were no significant side effects of clonidine that were reported such as severe hypotension, bradycardia, or excessive sedation requiring intervention. However, several studies used atropine prophylactically with the aim of preventing such adverse effects.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There were only 11 relevant trials studying 742 children having surgery where premedication with clonidine was compared to placebo or other drug treatment. Despite heterogeneity between trials, clonidine premedication in an adequate dosage (4 µg/kg) was likely to have a beneficial effect on postoperative pain in children. Side effects were minimal, but some of the studies used atropine prophylactically with the intention of preventing bradycardia and hypotension. Further research is required to determine under what conditions clonidine premedication is most effective in providing postoperative pain relief in children.