Analgesic Safety and Efficacy of Perioperative Posterior Cervical Muscle Plane Blocks in Elective Posterior Cervical Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review With Meta-analyses.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Luke J Weisbrod, Omar I Ceesay, Cynthia Schmidt, Roman Haynatzki, Daniel L Surdell
{"title":"Analgesic Safety and Efficacy of Perioperative Posterior Cervical Muscle Plane Blocks in Elective Posterior Cervical Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review With Meta-analyses.","authors":"Luke J Weisbrod, Omar I Ceesay, Cynthia Schmidt, Roman Haynatzki, Daniel L Surdell","doi":"10.1097/AJP.0000000000001269","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Posterior cervical spine surgery can result in significant discomfort in the postoperative period. Postoperative pain management presents a challenge, particularly in the elderly population that is more sensitive to adverse effects from analgesia. We compared outcomes after perioperative posterior cervical muscle plane blocks versus patients who received general anesthesia only.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for articles concerning the use of blocks in posterior cervical spinal surgery from January 1, 1974 to December 11, 2023. Data from studies meeting inclusion criteria were analyzed. Fixed-effect and random-effect models were used to establish odds ratios and mean differences with 95% CIs for each outcome.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results of the pooled analysis showed that in patients undergoing elective posterior cervical spine surgery, a perioperative posterior cervical muscle plane block resulted in a statistically significant decrease in numerical pain rating scores at 2 hours postoperatively, 12 hours postoperatively, adverse events, and postoperative nausea/vomiting. A preoperative posterior cervical block resulted in a decrease in the duration of surgery, and numerical pain rating scores at 24 hours postoperatively, though not to a level of statistical significance.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These meta-analyses suggest that perioperative posterior cervical muscle plane blocks are safe and result in improved postoperative analgesic efficacy when compared with controls. More robust prospective, randomized studies are necessary to help inform the safety and efficacy of perioperative posterior cervical blocks for elective posterior cervical spine surgery.</p>","PeriodicalId":50678,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Journal of Pain","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Journal of Pain","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/AJP.0000000000001269","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Posterior cervical spine surgery can result in significant discomfort in the postoperative period. Postoperative pain management presents a challenge, particularly in the elderly population that is more sensitive to adverse effects from analgesia. We compared outcomes after perioperative posterior cervical muscle plane blocks versus patients who received general anesthesia only.

Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for articles concerning the use of blocks in posterior cervical spinal surgery from January 1, 1974 to December 11, 2023. Data from studies meeting inclusion criteria were analyzed. Fixed-effect and random-effect models were used to establish odds ratios and mean differences with 95% CIs for each outcome.

Results: The results of the pooled analysis showed that in patients undergoing elective posterior cervical spine surgery, a perioperative posterior cervical muscle plane block resulted in a statistically significant decrease in numerical pain rating scores at 2 hours postoperatively, 12 hours postoperatively, adverse events, and postoperative nausea/vomiting. A preoperative posterior cervical block resulted in a decrease in the duration of surgery, and numerical pain rating scores at 24 hours postoperatively, though not to a level of statistical significance.

Conclusion: These meta-analyses suggest that perioperative posterior cervical muscle plane blocks are safe and result in improved postoperative analgesic efficacy when compared with controls. More robust prospective, randomized studies are necessary to help inform the safety and efficacy of perioperative posterior cervical blocks for elective posterior cervical spine surgery.

择期颈椎后路手术围手术期颈后肌平面阻滞镇痛的安全性和有效性:一项meta分析的系统综述。
目的:颈椎后路手术术后会引起明显的不适。术后疼痛管理提出了一个挑战,特别是在老年人中,他们对镇痛的不良反应更敏感。我们的目的是比较围手术期颈椎后肌平面阻滞和仅接受全身麻醉的患者的结果。方法:检索MEDLINE、EMBASE和Cochrane图书馆1974年1月1日至2023年12月11日关于后路颈椎手术中使用阻滞的文章。对符合纳入标准的研究数据进行分析。固定效应和随机效应模型用于建立每个结果的优势比(ORs)和平均差(MD),并具有95%的置信区间(ci)。结果:合并分析结果显示,择期颈椎后路手术患者,围手术期颈椎后肌平面阻滞导致术后2小时、12小时数值疼痛评分、不良事件和术后恶心/呕吐均有统计学意义的降低。术前颈椎后路阻滞可缩短手术时间,减少术后24小时疼痛评分,但差异无统计学意义。讨论:这些荟萃分析表明围手术期颈椎后肌平面阻滞是安全的,与对照组相比,术后镇痛效果更好。需要更有力的前瞻性随机研究来帮助了解择期后颈椎手术围术期后路颈椎阻滞的安全性和有效性。
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
Clinical Journal of Pain
Clinical Journal of Pain 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
3.40%
发文量
118
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: ​​​The Clinical Journal of Pain explores all aspects of pain and its effective treatment, bringing readers the insights of leading anesthesiologists, surgeons, internists, neurologists, orthopedists, psychiatrists and psychologists, clinical pharmacologists, and rehabilitation medicine specialists. This peer-reviewed journal presents timely and thought-provoking articles on clinical dilemmas in pain management; valuable diagnostic procedures; promising new pharmacological, surgical, and other therapeutic modalities; psychosocial dimensions of pain; and ethical issues of concern to all medical professionals. The journal also publishes Special Topic issues on subjects of particular relevance to the practice of pain medicine.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信