Opioid-Sparing Effects of Peripheral Nerve Blocks in Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Hye Joo Yun, Dong Hyun Kim, Mee Young Chung, Ji Young Min
{"title":"Opioid-Sparing Effects of Peripheral Nerve Blocks in Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Hye Joo Yun, Dong Hyun Kim, Mee Young Chung, Ji Young Min","doi":"10.12659/AOT.952211","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BACKGROUND Kidney transplantation (KT) is frequently associated with substantial postoperative pain, while opioid use in these patients increases the risk of adverse outcomes. Peripheral nerve blocks (PNBs) have been proposed as opioid-sparing strategies; however, evidence in kidney transplant recipients remains inconsistent, likely due to heterogeneity in block techniques, variability in perioperative analgesic regimens, and differences in study design and methodological rigor. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the impact of PNBs on postoperative analgesia in kidney transplant recipients. MATERIAL AND METHODS A systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science was conducted through April 2025 following the Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies reporting 24-h postoperative opioid consumption in adult kidney transplant recipients were included. The primary outcome was cumulative opioid use within 24 hours after surgery, expressed as intravenous morphine or fentanyl. RESULTS Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria, of which 10 contributed to the quantitative synthesis. Pooled analysis showed that PNBs significantly reduced 24-h morphine consumption compared with control analgesia (pooled mean difference=-16.20 mg of intravenous morphine equivalents, 95% confidence interval -24.66 to -7.74; P=0.0002). Heterogeneity was high (I²=99%), but no study reported higher opioid use or increased adverse events in the PNB groups. CONCLUSIONS PNBs appear to be an effective opioid-sparing adjunct for postoperative analgesia in kidney transplant recipients. However, the available evidence remains limited, and further well-designed comparative trials are needed to define their role within multimodal analgesic strategies in this population.</p>","PeriodicalId":7935,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Transplantation","volume":"31 ","pages":"e952211"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13282924/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Transplantation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12659/AOT.952211","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND Kidney transplantation (KT) is frequently associated with substantial postoperative pain, while opioid use in these patients increases the risk of adverse outcomes. Peripheral nerve blocks (PNBs) have been proposed as opioid-sparing strategies; however, evidence in kidney transplant recipients remains inconsistent, likely due to heterogeneity in block techniques, variability in perioperative analgesic regimens, and differences in study design and methodological rigor. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the impact of PNBs on postoperative analgesia in kidney transplant recipients. MATERIAL AND METHODS A systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science was conducted through April 2025 following the Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies reporting 24-h postoperative opioid consumption in adult kidney transplant recipients were included. The primary outcome was cumulative opioid use within 24 hours after surgery, expressed as intravenous morphine or fentanyl. RESULTS Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria, of which 10 contributed to the quantitative synthesis. Pooled analysis showed that PNBs significantly reduced 24-h morphine consumption compared with control analgesia (pooled mean difference=-16.20 mg of intravenous morphine equivalents, 95% confidence interval -24.66 to -7.74; P=0.0002). Heterogeneity was high (I²=99%), but no study reported higher opioid use or increased adverse events in the PNB groups. CONCLUSIONS PNBs appear to be an effective opioid-sparing adjunct for postoperative analgesia in kidney transplant recipients. However, the available evidence remains limited, and further well-designed comparative trials are needed to define their role within multimodal analgesic strategies in this population.

肾移植受者周围神经阻滞的阿片保留作用:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
肾移植(KT)通常与术后严重疼痛相关,而在这些患者中使用阿片类药物会增加不良后果的风险。外周神经阻滞(pnb)已被提出作为阿片节约策略;然而,肾移植受者的证据仍然不一致,可能是由于阻滞技术的异质性,围手术期镇痛方案的可变性,以及研究设计和方法严谨性的差异。本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在评估PNBs对肾移植受者术后镇痛的影响。材料和方法按照系统评价和荟萃分析(PRISMA)指南,在2025年4月之前对PubMed、EMBASE、Cochrane图书馆和Web of Science进行了系统检索。报告成人肾移植受者术后24小时阿片类药物消耗的研究包括在内。主要终点是术后24小时内阿片类药物的累积使用,以静脉注射吗啡或芬太尼表示。结果12项研究符合纳入标准,其中10项对定量综合有贡献。合并分析显示,与对照组相比,PNBs显著减少了24小时吗啡用量(合并平均差值=-16.20 mg静脉吗啡当量,95%可信区间为-24.66 ~ -7.74;P=0.0002)。异质性很高(I²=99%),但没有研究报告PNB组中阿片类药物使用增加或不良事件增加。结论:PNBs是一种有效的节省阿片类药物的肾移植术后镇痛辅助药物。然而,现有的证据仍然有限,需要进一步精心设计的比较试验来确定它们在该人群中多模式镇痛策略中的作用。
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
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
79
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Annals of Transplantation is one of the fast-developing journals open to all scientists and fields of transplant medicine and related research. The journal is published quarterly and provides extensive coverage of the most important advances in transplantation. Using an electronic on-line submission and peer review tracking system, Annals of Transplantation is committed to rapid review and publication. The average time to first decision is around 3-4 weeks. Time to publication of accepted manuscripts continues to be shortened, with the Editorial team committed to a goal of 3 months from acceptance to publication. Expert reseachers and clinicians from around the world contribute original Articles, Review Papers, Case Reports and Special Reports in every pertinent specialty, providing a lot of arguments for discussion of exciting developments and controversies in the field.
×
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
小红书