scholarly journals Evaluation of Intraoperative, Local Site Injections of Liposomal Bupivacaine as an Alternative to Standard Local Anesthetics in Patients Undergoing Total Hip Arthroplasty

2019 ◽  
Vol 55 (4) ◽  
pp. 273-278
Author(s):  
Edward C. Rainville ◽  
Carl Asche ◽  
Jinma Ren ◽  
MinChul Kim ◽  
Lucas Walker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Local Anesthetics ◽  
Pain Control ◽  
Opioid Use ◽  
Liposomal Bupivacaine ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Discharge Disposition ◽  
Successful Recovery ◽  
Hospitalization Costs

Background: Achieving postsurgical pain control after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a critical factor for successful recovery because inadequately treated pain may lead to a delay in ambulation and hospital discharge and have an adverse impact on a patient’s quality of life. Objective: This study compares the effectiveness of immediate-release local anesthetics for pain control in THA vs liposomal bupivacaine (LB) related to patient outcomes and costs of care. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients undergoing THA at 3 hospitals from January 2013 to July 2016. The control group received plain bupivacaine or ropivacaine while the study group received LB. Generalized linear models were used controlling for several patient factors. Primary measures included length of stay (LOS), hospitalization costs, pain relief, opioid use, and mobility. Secondary outcomes were discharge disposition and 30-, 60-, and 90-day readmissions. Results: One hundred and ninety-six patients were identified, with 103 as controls, 70 receiving LB, and 23 excluded. The LB group showed a decrease in LOS of 0.5 days (2.5 ± 2.6 vs 3.0 ± 2.1 days, P = .010), increased mobility on the day of surgery (27.6 ± 49.3 vs 12.5 ± 48.5 feet, P = .001) and the first day after surgery (186.8 ± 133.8 vs 155.2 ± 135.6, P = .039), and decreased hospital costs ($10 670 vs $11 351, P = .022). There were no significant differences in pain scores, opioid use, adverse events, discharge disposition, or readmissions. Study limitations include retrospective analysis, unblinded participants, and generalizability of results. Conclusions: LB provides an effective alternative to standard local anesthetics in patients undergoing THA based on improvements of inpatient parameters, LOS, and cost measures.

scholarly journals Liposomal bupivacaine versus traditional bupivacaine for pain control after total hip arthroplasty

Medicine ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 96 (25) ◽  
pp. e7190 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ting-Ting Ma ◽  
Yu-Hui Wang ◽  
Yun-Feng Jiang ◽  
Cong-Bin Peng ◽  
Chao Yan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Pain Control ◽  
Liposomal Bupivacaine ◽  
Total Hip

Liposomal Bupivacaine as an Adjunct to Postoperative Pain Control in Total Hip Arthroplasty

2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (7) ◽  
pp. 1510-1515 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen W. Yu ◽  
Alessandra L. Szulc ◽  
Sharon L. Walton ◽  
Roy I. Davidovitch ◽  
Joseph A. Bosco ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Pain Control ◽  
Postoperative Pain Control ◽  
Liposomal Bupivacaine ◽  
Total Hip

scholarly journals Participants with mild, moderate, or severe pain following total hip arthroplasty. A sub-study of the PANSAID trial on paracetamol and ibuprofen for postoperative pain treatment

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Luma Mahmoud Issa ◽  
Kasper Højgaard Thybo ◽  
Daniel Hägi-Pedersen ◽  
Jørn Wetterslev ◽  
Janus Christian Jakobsen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Severe Pain ◽  
Pain Treatment ◽  
Opioid Analgesic ◽  
Opioid Use ◽  
Mild Pain ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Pain Scores

AbstractObjectivesIn this sub-study of the ‘Paracetamol and Ibuprofen in Combination’ (PANSAID) trial, in which participants were randomised to one of four different non-opioids analgesic regimen consisting of paracetamol, ibuprofen, or a combination of the two after planned primary total hip arthroplasty, our aims were to investigate the distribution of participants’ pain (mild, moderate or severe), integrate opioid use and pain to a single score (Silverman Integrated Approach (SIA)-score), and identify preoperative risk factors for severe pain.MethodsWe calculated the proportions of participants with mild (VAS 0–30 mm), moderate (VAS 31–60 mm) or severe (VAS 61–100 mm) pain and the SIA-scores (a sum of rank-based percentage differences from the mean rank in pain scores and opioid use, ranging from −200 to 200%). Using logistic regression with backwards elimination, we investigated the association between severe pain and easily obtainable preoperative patient characteristics.ResultsAmong 556 participants from the modified intention-to-treat population, 33% (95% CI: 26–42) (Group Paracetamol + Ibuprofen (PCM + IBU)), 28% (95% CI: 21–37) (Group Paracetamol (PCM)), 23% (95% CI: 17–31) (Group Ibuprofen (IBU)), and 19% (95% CI: 13–27) (Group Half Strength-Paracetamol + Ibuprofen (HS-PCM + IBU)) experienced mild pain 6 h postoperatively during mobilisation. Median SIA-scores during mobilisation were: Group PCM + IBU: −48% (IQR: −112 to 31), Group PCM: 40% (IQR: −31 to 97), Group IBU: −5% (IQR: −57 to 67), and Group HS-PCM + IBU: 6% (IQR: −70 to 74) (overall difference: p=0.0001). Use of analgesics before surgery was the only covariate associated with severe pain (non-opioid: OR 0.50, 95% CI: 0.29–0.82, weak opioid 0.56, 95% CI: 0.28–1.16, reference no analgesics before surgery, p=0.02).ConclusionsOnly one third of participants using paracetamol and ibuprofen experienced mild pain after total hip arthroplasty and even fewer experienced mild pain using each drug alone as basic non-opioid analgesic treatment. We were not able, in any clinically relevant way, to predict severe postoperative pain. A more extensive postoperative pain regimen than paracetamol, ibuprofen and opioids may be needed for a large proportion of patients having total hip arthroplasty. SIA-scores integrate pain scores and opioid use for the individual patient and may add valuable information in acute pain research.

scholarly journals Are the First and Second Hip in Staged Bilateral Total Hip Arthroplasty Equal? A Hospital Adverse Event and Perioperative Risk Comparison

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jesus M. Villa ◽  
Tejbir S. Pannu ◽  
Carlos A. Higuera ◽  
Juan C. Suarez ◽  
Preetesh D. Patel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Retrospective Chart Review ◽  
Consecutive Series ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Exact Test ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Discharge Disposition ◽  
The Mean

AbstractHospital adverse events remain a significant issue; even “minor events” may lead to increased costs. However, to the best of our knowledge, no previous investigation has compared perioperative events between the first and second hip in staged bilateral total hip arthroplasty (THA). In the current study, we perform such a comparison. A retrospective chart review was performed on a consecutive series of 172 patients (344 hips) who underwent staged bilateral THAs performed by two surgeons at a single institution (2010–2016). Based on chronological order of the staged arthroplasties, two groups were set apart: first-staged THA and second-staged THA. Baseline-demographics, length of stay (LOS), discharge disposition, hospital adverse events, and hospital transfusions were compared between groups. Statistical analyses were performed using independent t-tests, Fisher's exact test, and/or Pearson's chi-squared test. The mean time between staged surgeries was 465 days. There were no significant differences in baseline demographics between first-staged THA and second-staged THA groups (patients were their own controls). The mean LOS was significantly longer in the first-staged THA group than in the second (2.2 vs. 1.8 days; p < 0.001). Discharge (proportion) to a facility other than home was noticeably higher in the first-staged THA group, although not statistically significant (11.0 vs. 7.6%; p = 0.354). The rate of hospital adverse events in the first-staged THA group was almost twice that of the second (37.2 vs. 20.3%; p = 0.001). There were no significant differences in transfusion rates. However, these were consistently better in the second-staged THA group. When compared with the first THA, our findings suggest overall shorter LOS and fewer hospital adverse events following the second. Level of Evidence Level III.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document