Comparison of analgesic efficacy of continuous perineural catheter, liposomal bupivacaine, and dexamethasone as an adjuvant for interscalene block in total shoulder arthroplasty: a triple-blinded randomized controlled trial.

IF 2.9 2区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Poonam Pai B H, Sonya Bohaczuk, Samiat Jinadu, Janet Hong, Ghislaine Echevarria, Yan H Lai, Junping Chen, Paul J Cagle, Evan L Flatow, Meg Rosenblatt
{"title":"Comparison of analgesic efficacy of continuous perineural catheter, liposomal bupivacaine, and dexamethasone as an adjuvant for interscalene block in total shoulder arthroplasty: a triple-blinded randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Poonam Pai B H, Sonya Bohaczuk, Samiat Jinadu, Janet Hong, Ghislaine Echevarria, Yan H Lai, Junping Chen, Paul J Cagle, Evan L Flatow, Meg Rosenblatt","doi":"10.1016/j.jse.2024.06.014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Interscalene catheters (ISC) are considered as the gold standard for perioperative pain control after total shoulder arthroplasty. Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) for interscalene blocks (ISBs) and the addition of dexamethasone to ISBs have both presented as additional options for extended analgesia. We aimed to compare the efficacy of LB to a single-shot ISB (SISB) with added dexamethasone to an ISC. We hypothesized that a single injection of LB or an ISB with dexamethasone would provide noninferior duration and quality of analgesia compared with an ISC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A single-center triple-blinded randomized controlled trial evaluated patients who underwent elective primary total shoulder arthroplasty. Patients were randomized to 3 groups: group A (control): 0.5% bupivacaine 15 mL with a rescue catheter left in situ (0.125% bupivacaine infusion), group B: 0.5% bupivacaine 14 mL with 4 mg (1 mL) dexamethasone with a catheter left in situ (saline infusion), group C: 10 mL of LB (133 mg) with 0.5% bupivacaine 5 mL, with a catheter left in situ (saline infusion). The primary outcome was the worst numeric rating scale measured on arrival to the postanesthesia care unit, 6, 12, 24, and 36 hours postoperatively. Secondary outcomes recorded were time to first analgesic request; intraoperative opioid consumption; total inpatient opioid consumption; arm weakness; arm numbness; time of analgesia duration; time of motor recovery; sensory testing using a pinprick on postoperative day 1, q36, and q48; hand strength assessment using a dynamometer on postoperative day 1, q36, and q48; and postanesthesia care unit and hospital length of stay.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We analyzed 72 patients in 3 groups (group A 24, group B 24, and group C 24). The presurgery physical function scores were similar between the groups. The change in postoperative pain was not different among the 3 groups. All 3 groups demonstrated an increase in the postoperative values, a change that was not statistically significant between the groups. Likewise, no difference in the mental function score was seen within or between the groups. No differences in sleep quality or satisfaction were seen among the groups (P = .405 and 1.00, respectively). No adverse events were reported in all groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>No significant difference was demonstrated between a single-injection ISB with dexamethasone, an LB injection, and an ISC. Given the equivalence in analgesia provided with these 3 modalities, providers should carefully consider the option that best fits each patient. Thus, a single injection of LB or a single injection of bupivacaine with dexamethasone provides similar analgesic efficacy to an ISC.</p>","PeriodicalId":50051,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2024.06.014","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Interscalene catheters (ISC) are considered as the gold standard for perioperative pain control after total shoulder arthroplasty. Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) for interscalene blocks (ISBs) and the addition of dexamethasone to ISBs have both presented as additional options for extended analgesia. We aimed to compare the efficacy of LB to a single-shot ISB (SISB) with added dexamethasone to an ISC. We hypothesized that a single injection of LB or an ISB with dexamethasone would provide noninferior duration and quality of analgesia compared with an ISC.

Methods: A single-center triple-blinded randomized controlled trial evaluated patients who underwent elective primary total shoulder arthroplasty. Patients were randomized to 3 groups: group A (control): 0.5% bupivacaine 15 mL with a rescue catheter left in situ (0.125% bupivacaine infusion), group B: 0.5% bupivacaine 14 mL with 4 mg (1 mL) dexamethasone with a catheter left in situ (saline infusion), group C: 10 mL of LB (133 mg) with 0.5% bupivacaine 5 mL, with a catheter left in situ (saline infusion). The primary outcome was the worst numeric rating scale measured on arrival to the postanesthesia care unit, 6, 12, 24, and 36 hours postoperatively. Secondary outcomes recorded were time to first analgesic request; intraoperative opioid consumption; total inpatient opioid consumption; arm weakness; arm numbness; time of analgesia duration; time of motor recovery; sensory testing using a pinprick on postoperative day 1, q36, and q48; hand strength assessment using a dynamometer on postoperative day 1, q36, and q48; and postanesthesia care unit and hospital length of stay.

Results: We analyzed 72 patients in 3 groups (group A 24, group B 24, and group C 24). The presurgery physical function scores were similar between the groups. The change in postoperative pain was not different among the 3 groups. All 3 groups demonstrated an increase in the postoperative values, a change that was not statistically significant between the groups. Likewise, no difference in the mental function score was seen within or between the groups. No differences in sleep quality or satisfaction were seen among the groups (P = .405 and 1.00, respectively). No adverse events were reported in all groups.

Conclusions: No significant difference was demonstrated between a single-injection ISB with dexamethasone, an LB injection, and an ISC. Given the equivalence in analgesia provided with these 3 modalities, providers should carefully consider the option that best fits each patient. Thus, a single injection of LB or a single injection of bupivacaine with dexamethasone provides similar analgesic efficacy to an ISC.

连续硬膜外导管、脂质体布比卡因和地塞米松作为全肩关节置换术椎间孔阻滞辅助药物的镇痛效果比较:三盲随机对照试验。
背景:疤痕内导管(ISC)被认为是全肩关节置换术(TSA)后围术期疼痛控制的黄金标准。用于椎间孔阻滞(ISB)的布比卡因脂质体(LB)或在椎间孔阻滞中加入地塞米松都是延长镇痛时间的额外选择。我们的目的是比较 LB 与单次 ISB(SISB)的疗效,以及在 ISC 中添加地塞米松的疗效。我们假设,与 ISC 相比,单次注射 LB 或添加地塞米松的 ISB 可提供非劣质的镇痛持续时间和质量:单中心三重盲法随机对照试验对接受择期初级 TSA 的患者进行了评估。患者被随机分为三组,A组(对照组):0.5%布比卡因;B组(对照组):0.5%布比卡因:B组:0.5%布比卡因14毫升加4毫克(1毫升)地塞米松,导管留在原位(生理盐水输注);C组:10毫升脂质体布比卡因(133毫克)加0.5%布比卡因5毫升,导管留在原位(生理盐水输注)。主要结果是抵达 PACU、术后 6 小时、12 小时、24 小时和 36 小时时测量的最差 NRS(数字评分量表)。记录的次要结果包括首次要求镇痛的时间、术中阿片类药物消耗量、住院阿片类药物总消耗量、手臂无力、手臂麻木、镇痛持续时间、运动恢复时间、POD1、Q36、Q48时使用针刺进行的感觉测试、POD1、Q36、Q48时使用测力计进行的手部力量评估、PACU和住院时间:我们对 3 组(A 组 24 人、B 组 24 人、C 组 24 人)72 名患者进行了分析。各组术前身体功能评分相似。三组患者术后疼痛的变化没有差异。所有三组的术后数值都有所增加,但组间变化无统计学意义。同样,组内和组间的心理功能评分也无差异。各组在睡眠质量和满意度方面没有差异(P 值分别为 0.405 和 1.00)。所有组别均未出现不良反应:单次注射地塞米松 ISB、LB 注射和 ISC 之间没有明显差异。鉴于这三种方式的镇痛效果相当,医疗服务提供者应仔细考虑最适合每位患者的方案。因此,与 ISC 相比,单次注射 LB 或单次注射布比卡因加地塞米松可提供相似的镇痛效果。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
23.30%
发文量
604
审稿时长
11.2 weeks
期刊介绍: The official publication for eight leading specialty organizations, this authoritative journal is the only publication to focus exclusively on medical, surgical, and physical techniques for treating injury/disease of the upper extremity, including the shoulder girdle, arm, and elbow. Clinically oriented and peer-reviewed, the Journal provides an international forum for the exchange of information on new techniques, instruments, and materials. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery features vivid photos, professional illustrations, and explicit diagrams that demonstrate surgical approaches and depict implant devices. Topics covered include fractures, dislocations, diseases and injuries of the rotator cuff, imaging techniques, arthritis, arthroscopy, arthroplasty, and rehabilitation.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信