Percutaneous Cryoanalgesia: A New Strategy for Pain Management in Pectus Excavatum Surgery

Author(s):  
María Velayos ◽  
Mercedes Alonso ◽  
Carlos Delgado-Miguel ◽  
Karla Estefanía-Fernández ◽  
Antonio J Muñoz-Serrano ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction In recent years, pain protocols for pectus excavatum (PE) have incorporated cryoanalgesia through thoracoscopic approach. Since 2019, ultrasound-guided percutaneous cryoanalgesia (PCr) has been applied at our institution, either on the same day as the Nuss procedure or 48 hours before surgery. We carried out a preliminary retrospective review of patients with PE in whom PCr prior to surgery was performed at our institution between 2019 and 2021. Materials and Methods Two groups were evaluated: PCr on the same day (PCrSD) and PCr 48 hours before surgery (PCr48). Despite PCr, patients were treated with “patient-controlled analgesia” (PCA) with opioids for at least 24 hours, switching to conventional intravenous analgesia and oral analgesia in the following days. Demographic, clinical-radiological variables, PCA opioid use, pain grade according to the visual analog scale (VAS), and length of stay (LOS) were compared between the groups. A total of 20 patients were included (12 with PCrSD and 8 with PCr48), without significant differences in demographics or clinical-radiological variables. The overall median time of PCr was 65 minutes (55–127), with no differences between the groups. Results PCr48 group presented with significantly lower median number of hours of continuous PCA (24 vs. 32 hours; p = 0.031), lower median number of rescue boluses (11 vs. 18; p = 0.042), lower median VAS in the early postoperative hours (2 vs. 5.5; p = 0.043), and lower median LOS (3.5 vs. 5 days). Conclusion PCr performed 48 hours prior to surgery is more effective in terms of PCA requirements, VAS, and LOS when compared with cryoanalgesia on the same day.

2009 ◽  
Vol 111 (3) ◽  
pp. 625-631 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacqueline M. Leung ◽  
Laura P. Sands ◽  
Sudeshna Paul ◽  
Tim Joseph ◽  
Sakura Kinjo ◽  
...  

Unlabelled BACKGROUNDPostoperative pain Is an independent predictor of postoperative delirium. Whether postoperative delirium limits patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) use has not been determined. Methods The authors conducted a nested cohort study in older patients undergoing noncardiac surgery and used PCA for postoperative analgesia. Delirium was measured by using the Confusion Assessment Method. The authors computed a structural equation model to determine the effects of pain and opioid consumption on delirium status and the effect of delirium on opioid use. Results Of 335 patients, 108 (32.2%) developed delirium on postoperative day (POD) 1, and 120 (35.8%) on POD 2. Postoperative delirium did not limit the use of PCA. Patients with postoperative delirium used more PCA in a 24-h period (POD 2) compared to those without delirium (mean dose of hydromorphone +/- SE adjusted for covariates was 2.24 +/- 0.71 mg vs. 1.25 +/- 0.67 mg, P = 0.02). Despite more opioid use, patients with delirium reported higher Visual Analogue Scale scores than those without delirium (POD 1: mean visual analog scale +/- SE at rest 4.2 +/- 0.23 vs. 3.3 +/- 0.22, P = 0.0051; POD 2: 3.3 +/- 0.23 vs. 2.5 +/- 0.19, P = 0.004). Path coefficients from structural equation model revealed that pain and opioid use affect delirium status, but delirium does not affect subsequent opioid dose. Conclusions Postoperative delirium did not limit PCA use. Despite more opioid use, visual analog scale scores were higher in patients with delirium. Future studies on delirium should consider the role of pain and pain management as potential etiologic factors.


2005 ◽  
Vol 49 (5) ◽  
pp. 624 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ki Ryang Ahn ◽  
Ji Weon Chung ◽  
Jin Hyeong Kwon ◽  
Kyu Sik Kang ◽  
Jung Suk Lee ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Jennifer A. McCoy ◽  
Sarah Gutman ◽  
Rebecca F. Hamm ◽  
Sindhu K. Srinivas

Objective This study was aimed to evaluate opioid use after cesarean delivery (CD) and to assess implementation of an enhanced recovery after CD (ERAS-CD) pathway and its association with inpatient and postdischarge pain control and opioid use. Study Design We conducted a baseline survey of women who underwent CD from January to March 2017 at a single, urban academic hospital. Patients were called 5 to 8 days after discharge and asked about their pain and postdischarge opioid use. An ERAS-CD pathway was implemented as a quality improvement initiative, including use of nonopioid analgesia and standardization of opioid discharge prescriptions to ≤25 tablets of oxycodone of 5 mg. From November to January 2019, a postimplementation survey was conducted to assess the association between this initiative and patients' pain control and postoperative opioid use, both inpatient and postdischarge. Results Data were obtained from 152 women preimplementation (PRE) and 137 women post-implementation (POST); complete survey data were obtained from 102 women PRE and 98 women POST. The median inpatient morphine milligram equivalents consumed per patient decreased significantly from 141 [range: 90–195] PRE to 114 [range: 45–168] POST (p = 0.002). On a 0- to 10-point scale, median patient-reported pain scores at discharge decreased significantly (PRE: 7 [range: 5–8] vs. POST 5 [range: 3–7], p < 0.001). The median number of pills consumed after discharge also decreased significantly (PRE: 25 [range: 16–30] vs. POST 17.5 [range: 4–25], p = 0.001). The number of pills consumed was significantly associated with number prescribed (p < 0.001). The median number of leftover pills and number of refills did not significantly differ between groups. Median patient-reported pain scores at the week after discharge were lower in the POST group (PRE: 4 [range: 2–6] vs. POST 3[range: 1–5], p = 0.03). Conclusion Implementing an ERAS-CD pathway was associated with a significant decrease in inpatient and postdischarge opioid consumption while improving pain control. Our data suggest that even fewer pills could be prescribed for some patients. Key Points


2009 ◽  
Vol 88 (6) ◽  
pp. 1773-1779 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marlos de Souza Coelho ◽  
Ruy Fernando Kuenzer Caetano Silva ◽  
Nelson Bergonse Neto ◽  
Wilson de Souza Stori ◽  
Anna Flávia Ribeiro dos Santos ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 65 (6) ◽  
pp. 317-321 ◽  
Author(s):  
Savina Aneja ◽  
James S. Taylor ◽  
Oliver Soldes ◽  
John DiFiore

2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 175-180 ◽  
Author(s):  
Li Luo ◽  
Bo Xu ◽  
Xinling Wang ◽  
Bo Tan ◽  
Jing Zhao

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document