Explore the vast range of titles available.

Opioid-free anaesthesia may enhance postoperative recovery by reducing opioid-related side effects such as nausea, hyperalgesia or tolerance. The objective was to investigate the impact of multimodal opioid-free general anaesthesia on postoperative nausea, vomiting, pain and morphine consumption compared to the traditional opioid-based approach. This study was conducted as a prospective parallel-group randomised controlled trial. Perioperative Care. 152 adult women undergoing elective inpatient gynaecological laparoscopy. Patients were randomly assigned for opioid-free anaesthesia (Group OF) with dexmedetomidine, esketamine and sevoflurane or to have opioid-based anaesthesia (Group C) with sufentanil and sevoflurane. Primary outcome was the occurrence of nausea within 24 h after surgery. Patients were assessed for the incidence and severity of PONV, postoperative pain and morphine consumption and recovery characteristics. Patients in both groups had comparable clinical and surgical data. 69.7% of patients in the control group and 68.4% of patients in the opioid-free group met the primary endpoint (OR 1.06, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) (0.53; 2.12) p = 0.86). The incidence of clinically important PONV defined by the PONV impact scale was 8.1% (Group C) vs 10.5% (OF); p = 0.57). Antiemetic requirements, pain scores and morphine consumption were equivalent in both groups. Postoperative sedation was significantly increased in group OF (p < 0.001), and the median length of stay at the post-anaesthesia care unit was 69.0 min (46.5–113.0) vs 50.0 (35.3–77.0) minutes in the control group (p < 0.001). Opioid-free multimodal general anaesthesia is feasible but did not decrease the incidence of PONV, or reduce pain scores and morphine consumption compared to an opioid-containing anaesthetic regimen. •This trial assessed opioid-free anaesthesia in comparison to opioid-based anaesthesia for gynaecological laparoscopy.•Both study groups did not differ with respect to postoperative nausea and vomiting, pain or morphine consumption.•Multimodal general anaesthesia was associated with an increased time to discharge from the post-anaesthesia care unit.

Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) has gained popularity for perioperative analgesia in various surgeries. However, its efficacy in lumbar surgery remains unclear. This review aimed to determine whether ESPB could improve analgesic efficacy in lumbar spine surgery. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Perioperative setting. Patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery under general anesthesia. We searched the databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science etc. for published eligible controlled trials comparing ESPB with control (no block/sham block) in lumbar spine surgery. The primary outcome was opioid consumption in the first 24 h after surgery. Twelve studies comprising 665 participants were included. Compared to the control, ESPB reduced the opioid (morphine milligram equivalents) consumption significantly 24 h after surgery [mean difference (MD) = −14.55; 95% confidence interval (CI), −21.03 to −8.07; P < 0.0001] and lowered the pain scores at various time points (at rest or during movement) for 48 h after surgery. ESPB increased the patient satisfaction score (0−10) (MD = 2.38; 95% CI, 2.10 to 2.66; P < 0.0001), decreased the postoperative nausea and vomiting [risk ratio (RR) = 0.36; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.67; P = 0.001], and minimized the length of hospital stay (MD = −1.24 days; 95% CI, −2.31 to −0.18; P = 0.02). Furthermore, subgroup analysis revealed additional reduction in opioid consumption by the block approach at the vertebral level of incision/operation than that at the fixed thoracic/lumbar level. However, considerable heterogeneity and low-grade quality of evidence were observed. ESPB provided effective postoperative analgesia resulting in better patient satisfaction and recovery with decreased postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing lumbar surgery compared to the control. However, the low-grade quality of evidence compromised the findings, therefore further high-quality of evidence is required. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021233362. •Evidence for ESPB use in lumbar spine surgery is insufficient.•We performed evidence synthesis of 12 RCTs on ESPB vs. control for lumbar surgery.•ESPB improved analgesic efficacy by reducing opioid consumption 24 h after surgery.•ESPB increased patient satisfaction and decreased postoperative nausea and vomiting.•ESPB at the incision/operation level reduced opioid use more than at the fixed level.

To evaluate all available evidence thus far on opioid based versus opioid-free anesthesia and its effect on acute and chronic postoperative pain. Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Operating room, postoperative recovery room and ward. Patients undergoing general anesthesia. After consulting MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane database, studies which compared opioid free anesthesia (OFA) with opioid based anesthesia (OBA) were included (last search April 15th 2022). Primary outcomes were acute and chronic pain scores in NRS or VAS. Secondary outcomes were quality of recovery and postoperative opioid consumption. Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB2 tool and a random effects model for the meta-analysis was conducted. We identified 1245 citations, of which 38 studies met our inclusion criteria. There is moderate quality evidence showing no clinically relevant difference of Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) scores or opioid consumption in the postoperative period (pooled mean difference of 0.39 points with a CI of 0.19–0.59 and 4.02 MME with a CI of 1.73–6.30). We found only one small-sized study reporting no effect of opioid-free anesthesia on chronic pain. The quality of recovery was superior in patients with opioid-free anesthesia (mean difference of 8.26 points), however, this pooled analysis was comprised of only two studies. Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) occurred less in opioid-free anesthesia, but bradycardia was more frequent. We concluded that we cannot recommend one strategy over the other. Future studies could focus on quality of recovery as outcome measure and adequately powered studies on the effects of opioid-free anesthesia on chronic pain are eagerly awaited. •Opioid-free and opioid based anesthesia have similar postoperative pain scores.•Postoperative events depend on drugs used as alternatives for opioids.•Bradycardia occurred more when chosen for dexmedetomidine in opioid-free anesthesia.•One strategy cannot be recommended over another.

Erector spinae plane (ESP) block is a novel regional anesthesia technique and gaining importance for postoperative pain management. Since it was first described, the clinicians wonder if this new simple technique can replace paravertebral block (PVB). We aimed to compare the postoperative analgesic effect of ESP block and PVB with a control group in breast surgeries. Randomized controlled trial. Operating room. Seventy-five ASA I–II patients aged 25–65, who were scheduled to go under elective unilateral breast surgery for breast cancer were included to the study. Patients were randomized into three groups as ESP, PVB, and Control group. Ultrasound (US) guided ESP block and PVB with 20 ml 0.25% bupivacaine was done preoperatively to the patients according to their groups. All patients were provided with iv patient-controlled analgesia device for postoperative analgesia. Morphine consumptions and numeric rating scale (NRS) scores for pain were recorded at 1st, 6th, 12th and 24th hours postoperatively. There was a statistically significant difference between ESP and Control groups (p < 0,001) and between PVB and Control groups (p < 0,001), while there was no difference between ESP and PVB groups (p > 0,05) for 24-hour morphine consumptions. There was a significant difference between PVB and Control groups for NRS at postoperative 1st and 6th hour (p = 0.018 and p = 0.027 respectively). This study has shown that US guided ESP block and PVB provided adequate analgesia in patients undergoing breast surgery and have an opioid sparing effect by reducing morphine consumption. Clinical Trials Registry: NCT03480958. •ESP block provides effective analgesia in breast surgery.•ESP block has lower risk of complications compared to TPV block.•Both ESP block and TPV block have a similar analgesic effect in breast surgery.

Paravertebral block (PVB) is the most recognized regional anesthesia technique after thoracic epidural anesthesia for postoperative analgesia in thoracic and breast surgery. Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is a recently discovered blocking technique, and it has evidenced excellent postoperative analgesia for breast and thoracic surgery with fewer adverse reactions. However, there are controversies about the postoperative analgesic effects of the two analgesic techniques. To assess the analgesic effects of PVB versus ESPB in postoperative thoracic and breast surgery. We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, and ScienceDirect databases up to April 5, 2021. The primary outcome was postoperative pain scores. Secondary outcomes included: opioid consumption, additional analgesia, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) 24 hours post-operation, and the time required for completing block procedure. This study was registered in PROSPERO, number CRD42021246160. After screening relevant, full-text articles, ten randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that met the inclusion criteria were retrieved for this meta-analysis. Six studies involved thoracic surgery patients, and four included breast surgery patients. Thoracic surgery studies included all of the outcomes involved in this meta-analysis while breast surgery did not report pain scores at movement and additional analgesia in 24 hours post-operation. For thoracic surgery, PVB resulted in significant reduction in the following pain scores: 0-1 hours (MD = -0.79, 95% CI: -1.54 to -0.03, P = 0.04), 4-6 hours (MD = -0.31, 95% CI: -0.57 to -0.05, P = 0.02), and 24 hours (MD = -0.42, 95% CI: -0.81 to -0.02, P = 0.04) at rest; significant reduction in pain scores at 4-6 hours (MD = -0.47, 95% CI: -0.93 to -0.01, P = 0.04), 8-12 hours (MD = -1.09, 95% CI: -2.13 to -0.04, P = 0.04), and 24 hours (MD = -0.31, 95% CI: -0.57 to -0.06, P = 0.01) at movement. Moreover, the opioid consumption at 24 hours post-operation (MD = -2.74, 95% CI: -5.41 to -0.07, P = 0.04) and the incidence of additional analgesia in 24 hours of the postoperative course (RR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.29 to 0.97, P = 0.04) were significantly lower in the PVB group than in the ESPB group for thoracic surgery. However, no significant differences were found in pain scores at rest at various time points postoperatively, and opioid consumption at 24 hours post-operation for breast surgery. The time required for completing block procedure was longer in the PVB group than in the ESPB group for thoracic and breast surgery, and the incidence of PONV between the two groups showed no significant difference. The postoperative analgesic effects of PVB versus ESPB are distinguished by the surgical site. For thoracic surgery, the postoperative analgesic effect of PVB is better than that of ESPB. For breast surgery, the postoperative analgesic effects of PVB and ESPB are similar.

Nitrous oxide is commonly used in general anaesthesia but concerns exist that it might increase perioperative cardiovascular risk. We aimed to gather evidence to establish whether nitrous oxide affects perioperative cardiovascular risk. We did an international, randomised, assessor-blinded trial in patients aged at least 45 years with known or suspected coronary artery disease having major non-cardiac surgery. Patients were randomly assigned via automated telephone service, stratified by site, to receive a general anaesthetic with or without nitrous oxide. Attending anaesthetists were aware of patients' group assignments, but patients and assessors were not. The primary outcome measure was a composite of death and cardiovascular complications (non-fatal myocardial infarction, stroke, pulmonary embolism, or cardiac arrest) within 30 days of surgery. Our modified intention-to-treat population included all patients randomly assigned to groups and undergoing induction of general anaesthesia for surgery. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00430989. Of 10 102 eligible patients, we enrolled 7112 patients between May 30, 2008, and Sept 28, 2013. 3543 were assigned to receive nitrous oxide and 3569 were assigned not to receive nitrous oxide. 3483 patients receiving nitrous oxide and 3509 not receiving nitrous oxide were assessed for the primary outcome. The primary outcome occurred in 283 (8%) patients receiving nitrous oxide and in 296 (8%) patients not receiving nitrous oxide (relative risk 0·96, 95% CI 0·83–1·12; p=0·64). Surgical site infection occurred in 321 (9%) patients assigned to nitrous oxide, and in 311 (9%) patients in the no-nitrous oxide group (p=0·61), and severe nausea and vomiting occurred in 506 patients (15%) assigned to nitrous oxide and 378 patients (11%) not assigned to nitrous oxide (p<0·0001). Our findings support the safety profile of nitrous oxide use in major non-cardiac surgery. Nitrous oxide did not increase the risk of death and cardiovascular complications or surgical-site infection, the emetogenic effect of nitrous oxide can be controlled with antiemetic prophylaxis, and a desired effect of reduced volatile agent use was shown. Australian National Health and Medical Research Council; Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists; Heart and Stroke Foundation of Quebec, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario, Canada; General Research Fund of the Research Grant Council, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.

Postoperatively the regiment includes basal infusion free patient controlled analgesia (PCA) with tramadol, in addition to scheduled paracetamol every 8 h and rescue analgesics (diclofenac 75 mg and meperidine 50 mg) when required. In one patient that underwent anterior approach hip arthroplasty, postoperative pelvic computerised tomography (CT) was scheduled in order to determine acetabulum damage and visualize the placement of screws. [...]additional written informed consent was obtained for CT with contrast to be performed and for the images to be used for scientific purposes. Lumbar ESPB can be used successfully for postoperative analgesia in hip surgery, with similar results when compared to other regional anesthesia techniques such as psoas compartment block and quadratus lumborum block.

Delayed clinically important postoperative nausea and vomiting (CIPONV) could lead to significant consequences following surgery. We aimed to develop a prediction model for it using machine learning algorithms utilizing perioperative data from patients undergoing laparoscopic gastrointestinal surgery. All 1154 patients in the FDP-PONV trial were enrolled. The optimal features for model development were selected by least absolute shrinkage and selection operator and stepwise regression from 81 perioperative variables. The machine learning algorithm with the best area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROCAUC) was determined and assessed. The interpretation of the prediction model was performed by the SHapley Additive Explanations library. Six important predictors were identified. The random forest model showed the best performance in predicting delayed CIPONV, achieving an ROCAUC of 0.737 in the validation cohort. This study developed an interpretable model predicting personalized risk for delayed CIPONV, aiding high-risk patient identification and prevention strategies. •Delayed clinically important PONV is linked to predisposing and precipitating factors.•The prediction model for delayed clinically important PONV was developed.•The model included six simple variables and was visualized by SHAP.

BackgroundLaparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has become a single-step operation for the management of severe obesity. A statistically significant number of participants who undergo this procedure experience nausea, vomiting, and reflux symptoms early after the operation. The objectives of this study were to measure the positive or negative effect of gastropexy on reducing distressing postoperative LSG-related gastrointestinal symptoms.Patients and MethodsThis was a comparative randomized study conducted from January 2018 to January 2021. The study was carried out in the general surgery department at Menoufia University Hospital, Menoufia Faculty of Medicine in Egypt. Two hundred participants were included randomly during this trial. The participants were divided into two groups, with 100 patients in each group. Patients in group A underwent gastropexy, and patients in group B underwent LSG without gastropexy.ResultsThere was no significant difference between the groups in age or sex (p > 0.05). There was no significant difference in the length of hospital stay (p > 0.05). There was a significant difference between the two groups regarding nausea, vomiting, reflux symptoms, and the amount and frequency of antiemetics used (p < 0.001). There was also a significant difference in hospital readmissions (p < 0.05) and in clinic visits during the postoperative period.ConclusionsPatients who underwent gastropexy showed a significant reduction in antiemetic consumption and a significantly lower incidence of postoperative nausea, vomiting, gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms and gastric torsion than those who did not undergo gastropexy.

This systematic review and network meta-analysis aimed to compare the analgesic efficacy of transversus abdominis plane block (TAPB) and quadratus lumborum block (QLB) on nephrectomy. Systematic review and network meta-analysis. Patients undergoing nephrectomy. TAPB and QLB for postoperative analgesia. The primary outcome was 24 h morphine-equivalent consumptions after surgery. Secondary outcomes included postoperative pain scores, postoperative opioid consumption, postoperative rescue analgesia, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), length of hospital stay after surgery, and patient satisfaction. Fourteen studies involving 883 patients were included. Seven studies compared TAPB to control, six studies compared QLB to control, and one study compared TAPB to QLB. For direct meta-analysis of the post-surgical 24 h morphine-equivalent consumption, QLB was lower than control (mean difference [95%CI]: −18.16 [−28.96, −7.37]; I2 = 88%; p = 0.001), while there was no difference between TAPB and control (mean difference [95%CI]: −8.34 [−17.84, 1.17]; I2 = 88%; p = 0.09). Network meta-analysis showed similar findings that QLB was ranked as the best anesthetic technique for reducing postoperative 24 h opioid consumption (p-score = 0.854). Moreover, in direct meta-analysis, as compared to control, the time of first postoperative rescue analgesia was prolonged after QLB (mean difference [95%CI]: 165.00 [128.99, 201.01]; p < 0.00001), but not TAPB (mean difference [95%CI]: 296.82 [−91.92, 685.55]; p = 0.13). Meanwhile, QLB can effectively reduce opioid usages at intraoperative period, as well as at postoperative 6 h and 48 h, while TAPB can only reduce opioid consumption at 6 h after surgery. As compared to control, both TAPB and QLB exhibited the reduction in PONV and pain scores at post-surgical some timepoints. Also, QLB (mean difference [95%CI]: −0.29 [−0.49, −0.08]; p = 0.006) but not TAPB (mean difference [95%CI]: 0.60 [−0.25, 1.45]; p = 0.17) exhibited the shorter postoperative length of hospital stay than control. QLB is more likely to be effective in reducing postoperative opioid use than TAPB, whereas both of them are superior to control with regard to the reduction in postoperative pain intensity and PONV. Trial registration: PROSPERO identifier: CRD42022358464. •QLB is more likely to be effective in reducing postoperative opioid use than TAPB.•QLB and TAPB were equivalent to reduce postoperative pain intensity.•QLB and TAPB were equivalent to reduce the incidence of PONV.•QLB shortened the postoperative length of hospital stay.