METHODS: Patients undergoing elective midline laparotomy through standardized incisions in two tertiary hospitals from February 2017 to September 2018 were randomized to either LS or SS. The primary outcome was post-operative patient-controlled analgesia morphine usage at 24 h. Secondary outcomes were presence of surgical site infection and length of hospital stay (LOHS). Categorical variables were analysed using chi-squared analysis. Outcomes of study were tested for normal distribution. Skewed data were analysed using Mann-Whitney U-test.
RESULTS: Eighty-six patients were recruited (42 SS and 44 LS). The median age was 66 (interquartile range (IQR) 15). Majority were males (62.8%) and Chinese (50%). The median incision length was 17 cm in both groups. The median patient-controlled analgesia morphine usage 24 h post-operatively did not differ significantly (SS 21 mg, IQR 28.3; LS 18.5 mg, IQR 33.8, P = 0.829). The median pain score at rest (SS 1, IQR 1; LS 1, IQR 2, P = 0.426) and movement (SS 3, IQR 1; LS 3, IQR 2, P = 0.307) did not differ significantly. LOHS was shorter in the SS group (SS 6, IQR 4; LS 8, IQR 5, P = 0.034). The rate of surgical site infection trended lower in the SS group with no statistical difference.
CONCLUSION: There were no differences in post-operative pain between SS and LS but we found that there were shorter LOHS in SS arm as secondary outcome.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A single centre, cohort study evaluating 335 women who have undergone unilateral mastectomy between January 2017 and March 2020 in Malaysia. Regional anaesthesia were given pre-operatively via ultrasound guided pectoral and intercostal nerves block (PECSII).
RESULTS: Utilization of regional anaesthesia increased from 11% in 2017 to 43% in 2020. Types and duration of surgeries were comparable. Opiod consumption was 3 mg lower in those who had PECS2 block ((27 [24-30] mg), in comparison with those who received general anaesthesia only (30 [26-34] mg), p pain score (2 [1-3]; 2 [1-3], p=0.719) and post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) (32.6-32.5%, p = 0.996) were similar.
CONCLUSION: This study highlights the importance of PECS2 block as a component of ERAS protocol for mastectomy in an Asian hospital. This study also inferred that patients may be safely discharged within 24 h of surgery and therefore, same day surgery may be feasible in selected group of patients undergoing mastectomy and this could imply overall cost benefits.
METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of an international prospective cohort study from 2012 to 2014. This study included patients who were 45 yr of age or older who underwent major inpatient noncardiac surgery. Data were collected perioperatively and at 1 yr after surgery to assess for the development of persistent incisional pain (pain present around incision at 1 yr after surgery).
RESULTS: Among 14,831 patients, 495 (3.3%; 95% CI, 3.1 to 3.6) reported persistent incisional pain at 1 yr, with an average pain intensity of 3.6 ± 2.5 (0 to 10 numeric rating scale), with 35% and 14% reporting moderate and severe pain intensities, respectively. More than half of patients with persistent pain reported needing analgesic medications, and 85% reported interference with daily activities (denominator = 495 in the above proportions). Risk factors for persistent pain included female sex (P = 0.007), Asian ethnicity (P < 0.001), surgery for fracture (P < 0.001), history of chronic pain (P < 0.001), coronary artery disease (P < 0.001), history of tobacco use (P = 0.048), postoperative patient-controlled analgesia (P < 0.001), postoperative continuous nerve block (P = 0.010), insulin initiation within 24 h of surgery (P < 0.001), and withholding nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medication or cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors on the day of surgery (P = 0.029 and P < 0.001, respectively). Older age (P < 0.001), endoscopic surgery (P = 0.005), and South Asian (P < 0.001), Native American/Australian (P = 0.004), and Latin/Hispanic ethnicities (P < 0.001) were associated with a lower risk of persistent pain.
CONCLUSIONS: Persistent incisional pain is a common complication of inpatient noncardiac surgery, occurring in approximately 1 in 30 adults. It results in significant morbidity, interferes with daily living, and is associated with persistent analgesic consumption. Certain demographics, ethnicities, and perioperative practices are associated with increased risk of persistent pain.
EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE:
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A search of the Medline, Embase, Science Citation Index, Current Contents and PubMed databases identified English-language randomized clinical trials comparing LARR and ORR. The meta-analysis was prepared in accordance with the PRISMA statement. Thirteen outcome variables were analyzed. Random effects meta-analyses were performed due to heterogeneity.
RESULTS: A total of 14 randomized clinical trials that included 3843 rectal resections (LARR 2096, ORR 1747) were analyzed. The summary point estimates favored LARR for the intraoperative blood loss, commencement of oral intake, first bowel movement, and length of hospital stay. There was significantly longer duration of operating time of 38.29 minutes for the LARR group. Other outcome variables such as total complications, postoperative pain, postoperative ileus, abdominal abscesses, postoperative anastomotic leak, reintervention and postoperative mortality rates were found to have comparable outcomes for both cohorts.
CONCLUSIONS: LARR was associated with significantly reduced blood loss, quicker resumption of oral intake, earlier return of gastrointestinal function, and shorter length of hospital stay at the expense of significantly longer operating time. Postoperative morbidity and mortality and analgesia requirement for both these groups were comparable. LARR seems to be a safe and effective alternative to ORR; however, it needs to be performed in established colorectal units with experienced laparoscopic surgeons.
METHODS/DESIGN: This study is a phase II, double-blind, randomised controlled trial with concealed allocation, blinding of patients and assessors, and intention-to-treat analysis. Patients (n = 72) will be recruited following cardiac surgery via a median sternotomy. Sample size calculations were based on the minimal important difference (two points) for the primary outcome: Short Physical Performance Battery. Thirty-six participants are required per group to counter dropout (20%). All participants will be randomised to receive either standard or modified sternal precautions. The intervention group will receive guidelines encouraging the safe use of the upper limbs. Secondary outcomes are upper limb function, pain, kinesiophobia and health-related quality of life. Descriptive statistics will be used to summarise data. The primary hypothesis will be examined by repeated-measures analysis of variance to evaluate the changes from baseline to 4 weeks post-operatively in the intervention arm compared with the usual-care arm. In all tests to be conducted, a p value <0.05 (two-tailed) will be considered statistically significant, and confidence intervals will be reported.
DISCUSSION: The Sternal Management Accelerated Recovery Trial (S.M.A.R.T.) is a two-centre randomised controlled trial powered and designed to investigate whether the effects of modifying sternal precautions to include the safe use of the upper limbs and trunk impact patients' physical function and recovery following cardiac surgery via median sternotomy.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry identifier: ACTRN12615000968572 . Registered on 16 September 2015 (prospectively registered).
METHODS: Incidence of thigh pain was lower in 2008 compared to 2006 and 2007 (p < 0.0001). The percentage of patients requiring blood transfusions (p = 0.09), duration of IDC ≥ 7 days (p = 0.27), wound dehiscence and re-operation rate were lower in 2008 in contrast to 2006 and 2007 (p = 0.43). Only 209 patients (82.3%) were available for review at 1 year. There were two (1.0%) cases of recurrent vault prolapse.
RESULTS: The subjective and objective cure rates at 1 year after this mesh implant surgery in 2006, 2007 and 2008 were 92.1% and 92.1%; 97.0% and 92.4% and 100% and 97%, respectively. The mesh erosion rate was remarkably lower in 2008 as compared to 2007 and 2006 (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: This synthetic mesh-augmented implant surgery is effective and safe, and surgical outcome appears related to the learning curve of the surgeon.
METHOD: A randomized controlled open-label study was performed at the cardiothoracic intensive care unit of Penang Hospital, Malaysia. A total of 28 patients who underwent cardiac surgeries were randomly assigned to receive either dexmedetomidine or morphine. Both groups were similar in terms of preoperative baseline characteristics. Efficacy measures included sedation scores and pain intensity and requirements for additional sedative/analgesic. Mean heart rate and arterial blood pressure were used as safety measures. Other measures were additional inotropes, extubation time and other concurrent medications.
RESULTS: The mean dose of dexmedetomidine infused was 0.12 [SD 0.03] μg kg⁻¹ h⁻¹, while that of morphine was 13.2 [SD 5.84] μg kg⁻¹ h⁻¹. Dexmedetomidine group showed more benefits in sedation and pain levels, additional sedative/analgesic requirements, and extubation time. No significant differences between the two groups for the outcome measures, except heart rate, which was significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group.
CONCLUSION: This preliminary study suggests that dexmedetomidine was at least comparable to morphine in terms of efficacy and safety among cardiac surgery patients. Further studies with larger samples are recommended in order to determine the significant effects of the outcome measures.
METHODS: The review protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42017071899). A literature search was performed in the MEDLINE and EBSCOhost databases until June 2017 with no language restriction. Randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of oral premedications, whether given alone or in combination, compared with other agents, placebo, or no treatment in adult patients before NSRCT for postoperative pain were included. Nonintervention studies, nonendodontic studies, animal studies, and reviews were excluded. The quality of the studies was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool. Pair-wise meta-analysis, network meta-analysis, and quality of evidence assessment using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria was performed.
RESULTS: Eleven studies comparing pharmacologic groups of medications were included in the primary analysis. Compared with placebo, corticosteroids (prednisolone 30-40 mg) was ranked best for reducing postoperative pain (median difference [MD] = -18.14 [95% confidence interval (CI), -32.90 to -3.37] for the pain score at 6 hours; MD = -22.17 [95% CI, -36.03 to -8.32] for the pain score at 12 hours; and MD = -21.50 [95% CI, -37.95 to -5.06] for the pain score at 24 hours). However, the evidence was very low (6 and 24 hours) to moderate quality (12 hours). Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were ranked least among the medications, and the quality of this evidence was very low. Additional analysis based on the chemical name showed that sulindac, ketorolac, and ibuprofen significantly reduced pain at 6 hours, whereas piroxicam and prednisolone significantly reduced the pain at 12 and 24 hours. Etodolac was found to be least effective in reducing pain. Overall, the evidence was of moderate to very low quality.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on the limited and low-quality evidence, oral premedication with piroxicam or prednisolone could be recommended for controlling postoperative pain after NSRCT. However, more trials are warranted to confirm the results with a higher quality of evidence.