scholarly journals Peri-operative pain management in hip arthroscopy: a systematic review of the literature

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 353-363
Author(s):  
Jensen G Kolaczko ◽  
Derrick M Knapik ◽  
Michael J Salata
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Pain Management ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Pain Control ◽  
Review Of The Literature ◽  
Discharge Time ◽  
Nerve Blocks ◽  
Vas Score ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Control Protocols

Abstract The purpose of this article was to review current literature on peri-operative pain management in hip arthroscopy. A systematic review of the literature on pain control in hip arthroscopy published January 2008 to December 2018 was performed. Inclusion criteria consisted of English language or articles with English translations, subjects undergoing hip arthroscopy with documented peri-operative pain control protocols in studies reporting Level I to IV evidence. Exclusion criteria were non-English articles, animal studies, prior systematic review or meta-analyses, studies not reporting peri-operative pain control protocols, studies documenting only pediatric (<18 years of age) patients, studies with Level V evidence and studies including less than five subjects. Statistical analysis was performed to assess pain protocols on narcotic consumption in PACU, VAS score on discharge, time to discharge from PACU and incidence of complications. Seventeen studies were included, comprising 1674 patients. Nerve blocks were administered in 50% of patients (n = 838 of 1674), of which 88% (n = 740 of 838) received a pre-operative block while 12% (n = 98 of 838) post-operative block. Sixty-eight complications were recorded: falls (54%, n = 37), peripheral neuritis (41%, n = 28), seizure (1.5%, n = 1), oxygen desaturation and nausea (1.5%, n = 1) and epidural spread resulting in urinary retention (1.5%, n = 1). No significant differences in narcotic consumption, VAS score at discharge, time until discharge or incidence of complication was found based on pain control modality utilized. No statistically significant difference in PACU narcotic utilization, VAS pain scores at discharge, time to discharge or incidence of complications was found between peri-operative pain regimens in hip arthroscopy.

Pain Management After Hip Arthroscopy: Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials and Cohort Studies

2017 ◽  
Vol 46 (13) ◽  
pp. 3288-3298 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason J. Shin ◽  
Chris L. McCrum ◽  
Craig S. Mauro ◽  
Dharmesh Vyas
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Pain Management ◽  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Pain Control ◽  
Femoral Nerve ◽  
Lumbar Plexus ◽  
Nerve Blocks ◽  
Fascia Iliaca Block ◽  
Plexus Block

Background: Hip arthroscopy is often associated with significant postoperative pain and opioid-associated side effects. Effective pain management after hip arthroscopy improves patient recovery and satisfaction and decreases opioid-related complications. Purpose: To collect, examine, and provide a comprehensive review of the available evidence from randomized controlled trials and comparative studies on pain control after hip arthroscopy. Study Design: Systematic review. Methods: Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines, a systematic review of the literature for postoperative pain control after hip arthroscopy was performed using electronic databases. Only comparative clinical studies with level 1 to 3 evidence comparing a method of postoperative pain control with other modalities or placebo were included in this review. Case series and studies without a comparative cohort were excluded. Results: Several methods of pain management have been described for hip arthroscopy. A total of 14 studies met our inclusion criteria: 3 on femoral nerve block, 3 on lumbar plexus block, 3 on fascia iliaca block, 4 on intra-articular injections, 2 on soft tissue surrounding surgical site injection, and 2 on celecoxib (4 studies compared 2 or more methods of analgesia). The heterogeneity of the studies did not allow for pooling of data. Single-injection femoral nerve blocks and lumbar plexus blocks provided improved analgesia, but increased fall rates were observed. Fascia iliaca blocks do not provide adequate pain relief when compared with surgical site infiltration with local anesthetic and are associated with increased risk of cutaneous nerve deficits. Patients receiving lumbar plexus block experienced significantly decreased pain compared with fascia iliaca block. Portal site and periacetabular injections provide superior analgesia compared with intra-articular injections alone. Preoperative oral celecoxib, compared with placebo, resulted in earlier time to discharge and provided significant pain relief up to 24 hours. Conclusion: Perioperative nerve blocks provide effective pain management after hip arthroscopy but must be used with caution to decrease risk of falls. Intra-articular and portal site injections with local anesthetics and preoperative celecoxib can decrease opioid consumption. There is a lack of high-quality evidence on this topic, and further research is needed to determine the best approach to manage postoperative pain and optimize patient satisfaction.

scholarly journals Pain management practice patterns after hip arthroscopy: an international survey

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Flávio L Garcia ◽  
Brady T Williams ◽  
Bhargavi Maheshwer ◽  
Asheesh Bedi ◽  
Ivan H Wong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pain Management ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Pain Control ◽  
Sports Medicine ◽  
Management Practice ◽  
Professional Organizations ◽  
International Survey ◽  
Nerve Blocks ◽  
Optimal Approach ◽  
Answer Choice

Abstract Several post-operative pain control methods have been described for hip arthroscopy including systemic medications, intra-articular or peri-portal injection of local anesthetics and peripheral nerve blocks. The diversity of modalities used may reflect a lack of consensus regarding an optimal approach. The purpose of this investigation was to conduct an international survey to assess pain management patterns after hip arthroscopy. It was hypothesized that a lack of agreement would be present in the majority of the surgeons’ responses. A 25-question multiple-choice survey was designed and distributed to members of multiple orthopedic professional organizations related to sports medicine and hip arthroscopy. Clinical agreement was defined as > 80% of respondents selecting a single answer choice, while general agreement was defined as >60% of a given answer choice. Two hundred and fifteen surgeons completed the survey. Clinical agreement was only evident in the use of oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for pain management after hip arthroscopy. A significant number of respondents (15.8%) had to readmit a patient to the hospital for pain control in the first 30 days after hip arthroscopy in the past year. There is significant variability in pain management practice after hip arthroscopy. The use of oral NSAIDs in the post-operative period was the only practice that reached a clinical agreement. As the field of hip preservation surgery continues to evolve and expand rapidly, further research on pain management after hip arthroscopy is clearly needed to establish evidence-based guidelines and improve clinical practice.

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Intranasal Ketamine for Acute Pain Management in the Emergency Setting: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (17) ◽  
pp. 3978
Author(s):  
Yee Sin Seak ◽  
Junainah Nor ◽  
Tuan Hairulnizam Tuan Kamauzaman ◽  
Ariff Arithra ◽  
Md Asiful Islam
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Pain Management ◽  
Acute Pain ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Emergency Setting ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Acute Pain Management ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Mean Differences ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Due to overcrowding, personnel shortages, or problematic intravenous (IV) cannulation, acute pain management is often sub-optimal in emergency departments (EDs). The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intranasal (IN) ketamine for adult acute pain in the emergency setting. We searched and identified studies up to 21 May 2021 via PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Database, and Google Scholar. The random-effects model with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was used to estimate mean differences (MDs) and odds ratios (ORs). The I2 statistic and Cochran’s Q test were used to determine heterogeneity. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020213391). Seven randomised controlled trials were included with a total of 1760 patients. There was no significant difference in pain scores comparing IN ketamine with IV analgesics or placebo at 5 (MD 0.94, p = 0.26), 15 (MD 0.15, p = 0.74), 25 (MD 0.24, p = 0.62), 30 (MD −0.05, p = 0.87), and 60 (MD −0.42, p = 0.53) minutes. There was also no significant difference in the need for rescue analgesics between IN ketamine and IV analgesics (OR 1.66, 95% CI: 0.57−4.86, p = 0.35, I2 = 70%). Only mild adverse effects were observed in patients who received IN ketamine. Our results suggest that IN ketamine is non-inferior to IV analgesics and may have a role in acute pain management among adults in the ED.

scholarly journals Fascia Iliaca Compartment Block for Perioperative Pain Management of Geriatric Patients with Hip Fractures: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Hao-yang Wan ◽  
Su-yi Li ◽  
Wei Ji ◽  
Bin Yu ◽  
Nan Jiang
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Pain Management ◽  
Pain Relief ◽  
Hip Fractures ◽  
Pain Control ◽  
Geriatric Patients ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Perioperative Pain Management ◽  
Fascia Iliaca Compartment Block

Background. With continuous increase of the aging population, the number of geriatric patients with fragility hip fractures is rising sharply, and timely surgery remains the mainstay of treatment. However, adequate and effective pain control is the precondition of satisfactory efficacy. This systematic review aimed to summarize the use of fascia iliaca compartment block (FICB) as an analgesic strategy for perioperative pain management in geriatric patients with hip fractures. Methods. PubMed and Embase databases were searched for English published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting application of FICB for pain control of the older adults with hip fractures between January 1st, 2000, and May 31st, 2020. The modified Jadad scale was used to evaluate quality of the RCTs included. Primary outcomes of the eligible RCTs were presented and discussed. Results. A total of 27 RCTs with 2478 cases were included finally. The present outcomes suggested, after admission or in the emergency department (ED), FICB can provide patients with equal or even better pain relief compared with the conventional analgesia methods, which can also reduce additional analgesic consumptions. While, before positioning for spinal anesthesia (SA), FICB is able to offer superior pain control, facilitating SA performance, after surgery FICB can effectively alleviate pain with decreased use of additional analgesics, promoting earlier mobilization and preventing complications. Conclusions. FICB is a safe, reliable, and easy-to-conduct technique, which is able to provide adequate pain relief during perioperative management of geriatric patients with hip fractures.

Hip Arthroplasty After Hip Arthroscopy: Are Short-term Outcomes Affected? A Systematic Review of the Literature

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (9) ◽  
pp. 2736-2746 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip J. Rosinsky ◽  
Cynthia Kyin ◽  
Jacob Shapira ◽  
David R. Maldonado ◽  
Ajay C. Lall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Review Of The Literature ◽  
Short Term

scholarly journals Bilateral versus unilateral hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement: a systematic review

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 225-232
Author(s):  
Claire E Fernandez ◽  
Allison M Morgan ◽  
Ujash Sheth ◽  
Vehniah K Tjong ◽  
Michael A Terry
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Femoroacetabular Impingement ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Case Reports ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Return To Sport ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Study Patient ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Patient Reported

Abstract One in four patients presenting with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) has bilateral symptoms, and despite excellent outcomes reported after arthroscopic treatment of FAI, there remains a paucity of data on the outcomes following bilateral hip arthroscopy. This systematic review aims to examine the outcomes following bilateral (either ‘simultaneous’ or ‘staged’) versus unilateral hip arthroscopy for FAI. A systematic review of multiple electronic databases was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and checklist. All studies comparing simultaneous, staged and/or unilateral hip arthroscopy for FAI were eligible for inclusion. Case series, case reports and reviews were excluded. All study, patient and hip-specific data were extracted and analyzed. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale was used to assess study quality. A meta-analysis was not performed due to heterogeneity among outcome measures. A total of six studies, including 722 patients (42.8% male) and 933 hips were eligible for inclusion. The mean age across patients was 35.5. The average time between staged procedures was 7.7 months. Four of the six studies were retrospective cohort studies, while the remaining two were prospective in nature. The overall quality of the eligible studies was found to be good. No significant difference was noted among patient-reported outcomes (modified Harris hip score, hip outcome score and non-arthritic hip score), visual analog scale, return to sport, traction time and complications between those undergoing bilateral (simultaneous or staged) versus unilateral hip arthroscopy. Based on the current available evidence, bilateral hip arthroscopy (whether simultaneous or staged) exhibits similar efficacy and safety when compared with unilateral hip arthroscopy. However, further prospective study is required to confirm this finding.

Procedural Sedation and Pain Management

2020 ◽  
pp. 588-602
Author(s):  
Rosalia Holzman ◽  
Jennifer Mitzman
Keyword(s):  
Pain Management ◽  
Pain Control ◽  
Procedural Sedation ◽  
Nerve Blocks ◽  
Administration Routes ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Age Appropriate ◽  
Control Pain ◽  
And Control ◽  
Pharmacologic Agents

There are many conditions in the emergency department that require pain management or procedural sedation due to significant pain or complexity. There are also a number of procedures and conditions that will require pain control or anxiolysis in children due to developmental and behavioral factors. Pain control and procedural sedation in pediatric patients can be challenging. A variety of pharmacologic agents can be utilized to minimize anxiety and control pain. These have a wide range of administration routes, including topical, oral, intravenous, intramuscular, intranasal, and regional pain control via nerve blocks. In addition, many non-pharmacologic adjuncts can be coupled with age-appropriate interaction tips to decrease the medications required. This chapter discusses pharmacologic intervention, including narcotic and non-narcotic medications, non-pharmacologic interventions, procedural sedation, and nerve blocks.

Examining the Role of Perioperative Nerve Blocks in Hip Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review

2016 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 704-715.e1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Kay ◽  
Darren de SA ◽  
Muzammil Memon ◽  
Nicole Simunovic ◽  
James Paul ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Nerve Blocks

scholarly journals Pain Management after Outpatient Foot and Ankle Surgery

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 2473011417S0003
Author(s):  
Austin Sanders ◽  
Akash Gupta ◽  
Mackenzie Jones ◽  
Matthew Roberts ◽  
David Levine ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pain Management ◽  
Peripheral Nerve ◽  
Pain Control ◽  
Outpatient Surgery ◽  
The United States ◽  
Prescribing Patterns ◽  
Foot And Ankle ◽  
Nerve Blocks ◽  
Ankle Surgery ◽  
Long Acting

Category: Pain Management, Anesthetic Advances Introduction/Purpose: The number of opioid prescriptions in the United States has significantly increased over the past 20 years, including those given after low-risk surgery. Unintentional opioid overdoses have also dramatically risen. Excess pills are widely acknowledged as a source of diversion, which accounts for up to 40% of opioid-related overdoses. In the foot and ankle literature, there are no studies looking at the quantity of pain medications that should be prescribed following outpatient surgery. Furthermore, with the increasing use of peripheral nerve blocks, their effect on quantities of narcotics needed after these surgeries have not been explored. This study aims to determine prescribing patterns for common outpatient foot and ankle surgery and whether patients are over or under-prescribed opioids and if so, by how much. Methods: 57 patients undergoing outpatient foot and ankle surgeries were prospectively enrolled. Patients received a spinal neuraxial block and a long-acting popliteal peripheral nerve block, and did not receive ketorolac perioperatively. Patients were excluded if they had a history of chronic pain, or were currently using opioids or muscle relaxers. Enrolled patients received a standard post-operative prescription regimen of 60 tablets of narcotics, 3 days of scheduled ibuprofen, aspirin 81 mg twice a day (or alternate based on risk factors) for DVT prophylaxis, and ondansetron taken as needed. Patients used a pain diary to record when their block wore off and the quantity of narcotic taken. They received surveys at post-operative day (POD) 3, 7, and 14 detailing how many days they took the medication and how many pills were consumed, how their actual pain compared to their expected level of pain, and if they were satisfied with their pain control. Results: At POD 3, compared to their expected level of pain 36 patients had less pain, 15 had the same pain, and 3 had more pain than expected. The mean pain score was 4. Patients first started feeling the block wear off at 0.9 days. Patients averaged 10.3 pills of narcotics in the first 3 days and rated their overall satisfaction with pain control at 8.5. Between days 4-7, patients took an average of 7 pills, and on POD 7, 22 patients were still taking narcotics. At POD 14, patients experienced 74.4% relief of pain compared to their expected pain, and rated their overall satisfaction at 8.2. Patients had an average of 33.5 remaining pills on POD 14 and 13 patients (22.8%) were still taking narcotics. Conclusion: Patients receiving spinal and long-acting popliteal blocks, followed by the prescription regimen described above had excellent pain control after outpatient foot and ankle surgeries. Patients had a high level of satisfaction with their pain control, with many patients describing better pain relief than expected. However, 60 tablets of narcotics were excessive in most cases. We suggest that in patients receiving spinal and long-acting popliteal blocks, 30 tablets of a narcotic would cover the pain needs of most patients. This would provide a small excess in case of need, but would help minimize the risk of narcotic related complications and diversion.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document