METHODS: Three databases were searched to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published up until September 2017. Retrieved RCTs were evaluated using the revised Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. The primary efficacy outcome of interest was the success rate of IANB anesthesia. Meta-analytic estimates (risk ratio [RR] with 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) performed using a random effects model and publication bias determined using funnel plot analysis were assessed. Random errors were evaluated with trial sequential analyses, and the quality of evidence was appraised using a Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.
RESULTS: Thirteen RCTs (N = 1034) were included. Eight studies had low risk of bias. Statistical analysis of good-quality RCTs showed a significant beneficial effect of any NSAID in increasing the anesthetic success of IANBs compared with placebo (RR = 1.92; 95% CI, 1.55-2.38). Subgroup analyses showed a similar beneficial effect for ibuprofen, diclofenac, and ketorolac (RR = 1.83 [95% CI, 1.43-2.35], RR = 2.56 [95% CI, 1.46-4.50], and RR = 2.07 [95% CI, 1.47-2.90], respectively). Dose-dependent ibuprofen >400 mg/d (RR = 1.85; 95% CI, 1.39-2.45) was shown to be effective; however, ibuprofen ≤400 mg/d showed no association (RR = 1.78; 95% CI, 0.90-3.55). TSA confirmed conclusive evidence for a beneficial effect of NSAIDs for IANB premedication. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach did not reveal any concerns regarding the quality of the results.
CONCLUSIONS: Oral premedication with NSAIDs and ibuprofen (>400 mg/d) increased the anesthetic success of IANBs in patients with irreversible pulpitis.
METHODS: Patients diagnosed with a single lumbar herniated intervertebral disc (HIVD) refractory to conservative management but not willing for immediate surgery were selected for a prospective nonrandomized comparative study. An SNRB was administered as a therapeutic alternative using the AP subpedicular approach in one group (n = 25; mean age, 45 ± 5.4 years) and the oblique Scotty dog subpedicular approach in the other group (n = 22; mean age, 43.8 ± 4.7 years). Results were compared in terms of the duration of the procedure, the number of C-arm exposures, accuracy, pain relief, functional outcome and the duration of relief.
RESULTS: Our results suggest that the oblique Scotty dog subpedicular approach took a significantly longer duration (p = 0.02) and a greater number of C-arm exposures (p = 0.001). But, its accuracy of needle placement was 95.5% compared to only 72% using the AP subpedicular approach (p = 0.03). There was no significant difference in terms of clinical outcomes between these approaches.
CONCLUSIONS: The AP subpedicular approach was simple and facile, but the oblique Scotty dog subpedicular approach was more accurate. However, a brief window period of pain relief was achieved irrespective of the approaching technique used.
METHODS: This was a prospective, randomised controlled trial. We recruited diabetic patients aged > 18 years, American Society of Anesthesiologists class II-III, who were scheduled for unilateral diabetic foot surgery below the knee. All patients were assessed for autonomic dysfunction using the Survey of Autonomic Symptoms score. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either PNB or SAB for the surgery. Hemodynamic data, including usage of vasopressors, were recorded at 5-min intervals for up to 1 h after the induction of anesthesia. Pain scores were recorded postoperatively, and follow-up was done via telephone 6 months later.
RESULTS: Compared to the PNB group, the SAB group had a larger number of patients with significant hypotension (14 vs. 1; p = 0.001) and more patients who required vasopressor boluses (6 vs. 0 patients). Compared to SAB group, the patients in the PNB group had a longer postoperative pain-free duration (9 vs. 4.54 h; p = 0.002) and lower pain scores 1 day after surgery (3.63 vs. 4.69; p = 0.01).
CONCLUSION: Peripheral nerve block should be considered, whenever possible, as the first option of anesthesia for lower limb surgery in diabetic patients as it provides hemodynamic stability and superior postoperative pain control compared to SAB.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trial registry: ClinicalTrials.gov. ID NCT02727348.