Is the combination of morphine with ketamine better than morphine alone for postoperative intravenous patient-controlled analgesia?

BACKGROUND: The addition of ketamine to morphine for patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) is supported by previous basic and clinical research, but has been challenged by subsequent negative studies. Important limitations of previous studies are the low number of patients analyzed, the use of morphine-ketamine combinations that may not the optimal, and that not all the relevant outcomes have been analyzed. In this study, we compared the combination of morphine and ketamine with morphine alone for postoperative PCA in large patient groups. We used a morphine-ketamine combination identified by an optimization procedure in our previous study. METHODS: After major elective orthopedic surgery, 352 patients received either PCA with morphine bolus 1.5 mg (Group M, n = 176) or a bolus of morphine plus ketamine 1.5 mg each (Group MK, n = 176) in a randomized, double-blind fashion. Unsatisfactory treatment was defined as the occurrence of either inadequate analgesia or unacceptable side effects. In addition, total consumption of PCA drugs, duration of PCA use, direct medical costs, and number of patients with chronic postoperative pain 3 and 6 mo after operation were recorded. RESULTS: The incidence of unsatisfactory treatment was 33.0% in Group M and 36.9% in Group MK (P = 0.50). No significant differences were found between the groups with respect to secondary end points. CONCLUSIONS: Small-dose ketamine combined with morphine for PCA provides no benefit to patients undergoing major orthopedic surgery and cannot be recommended for routine use.

[Drug therapy of acute and chronic abdominal pain]

For drug therapy a differentiation of acute and chronic pain is essential. In emergency situations of acute abdominal pain a fast diagnosis is mandatory. Analgesia should be provided as soon as possible. The different groups of analgesics should be used according to their known effects, side effects and contraindications. Postoperative pain after abdominal surgery has to be considered as a special condition of acute abdominal pain. Main treatment options are non opioid analgesics and opioids. Opioids can be administered intravenously via patient controlled analgesia (PCA) devices. In major abdominal surgery neuroaxial analgesia, preferentially administered via an epidural catheter provides excellent pain relief with positive impact on gastrointestinal motility and patients' recovery. Because of difficulties to allocate chronic abdominal pain to a specific organ, causal treatment often turns out to be difficult. Peripheral and central sensitization, as well as an alteration of the endogenous pain modulation comes to the fore in these chronic pain conditions. Co-analgesics like anticonvulsants and antidepressants are utilized to reduce sensitization and improve the endogenous pain modulating system. Non drug approaches and alternative treatment options might be useful. In contrast, orally or transcutaneously administered opioids are the principal corner stone for the treatment of cancer pain.

Quality of pain treatment after caesarean section: Results of a multicentre cohort study.

BACKGROUND A large cohort study recently reported high pain scores after caesarean section (CS). The aim of this study was to analyse how pain after CS interferes with patients' activities and to identify possible causes of insufficient pain treatment. METHODS We analysed pain scores, pain-related interferences (with movement, deep breathing, mood and sleep), analgesic techniques, analgesic consumption, adverse effects and the wish to have received more analgesics during the first 24 h after surgery. To better evaluate the severity of impairment by pain, the results of CS patients were compared with those of patients undergoing hysterectomy. RESULTS CS patients (n = 811) were compared with patients undergoing abdominal, laparoscopic-assisted vaginal or vaginal hysterectomy (n = 2406, from 54 hospitals). Pain intensity, wish for more analgesics and most interference outcomes were significantly worse after CS compared with hysterectomies. CS patients with spinal or general anaesthesia and without patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) received significantly less opioids on the ward (62% without any opioid) compared with patients with PCA (p < 0.001). Patients with PCA reported pain-related interference with movement and deep breathing between 49% and 52% compared with patients without PCA (between 68% and 73%; p-values between 0.004 and 0.013; not statistically significant after correction for multiple testing). CONCLUSION In daily clinical practice, pain after CS is much higher than previously thought. Pain management was insufficient compared with patients undergoing hysterectomy. Unfavourable outcome was mainly associated with low opioid administration after CS. Contradictory pain treatment guidelines for patients undergoing CS and for breastfeeding mothers might contribute to reluctance of opioid administration in CS patients.

Antagonistic effects of ondansetron and tramadol? A randomized placebo and active drug controlled study

Opposing effects of ondansetron and tramadol on the serotonin pathway have been suggested which possibly increase tramadol consumption and emesis when co-administered. In a randomized, double-blinded study, 179 patients received intravenous ondansetron, metoclopramide, or placebo for emesis prophylaxis. Analgesic regimen consisted of tramadol intraoperative loading and subsequent patient-controlled analgesia. Tramadol consumption and response to antiemetic treatment were compared. Additionally, plasma concentrations of ondansetron and (+)O-demethyltramadol and CYP2D6 genetic variants were analyzed as possible confounders influencing analgesic and antiemetic efficacy. Tramadol consumption did not differ between the groups. Response rate to antiemetic prophylaxis was superior in patients receiving ondansetron (85.0%) compared with placebo (66.7%, P = .046), with no difference to metoclopramide (69.5%). Less vomiting was reported in the immediate postoperative hours in the verum groups (ondansetron 5.0%, metoclopramide 5.1%) compared with placebo (18.6%; P = .01). Whereas plasma concentrations of (+)O-demethyltramadol were significantly correlated to CYP2D6 genotype, no influence was detected for ondansetron. Co-administration of ondansetron neither increased tramadol consumption nor frequency of PONV in this postoperative setting. PERSPECTIVE: Controversial findings were reported for efficacy of tramadol and ondansetron when co-administered due to their opposing serotonergic effects. Co-medication of these drugs neither increased postoperative analgesic consumption nor frequency of emesis in this study enrolling patients recovering from major surgery.

Respiratory depression with tramadol in a patient with renal impairment and CYP2D6 gene duplication

We observed opioid-related respiratory depression in a patient receiving tramadol via patient-controlled analgesia. Predisposing factors were the patient's genetic background and renal impairment. Complete recovery occurred after naloxone administration, thus confirming opioid intoxication. Analysis of the patient's genotype revealed a CYP2D6 gene duplication resulting in ultra-rapid metabolism of tramadol to its active metabolite (+)O-desmethyltramadol. Concomitant renal impairment resulting in decreased metabolite clearance enhanced opioid toxicity. This genetic CYP2D6 variant is particularly common in specific ethnic populations and should be a future diagnostic target whenever administration of tramadol or codeine is anticipated, as both drugs are subject to a comparable CYP2D6-dependent metabolism.

A novel blood-sparing agent in cardiac surgery? First in-patient experience with the synthetic serine protease inhibitor MDCO-2010: a phase II, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting with cardiopulmonary bypass

BACKGROUND Antifibrinolytics have been used for 2 decades to reduce bleeding in cardiac surgery. MDCO-2010 is a novel, synthetic, serine protease inhibitor. We describe the first experience with this drug in patients. METHODS In this phase II, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 32 patients undergoing isolated primary coronary artery bypass grafting with cardiopulmonary bypass were randomly assigned to 1 of 5 increasing dosage groups of MDCO-2010. The primary aim was to evaluate pharmacokinetics (PK) with assessment of plasmatic concentrations of the drug, short-term safety, and tolerance of MDCO-2010. Secondary end points were influence on coagulation, chest tube drainage, and transfusion requirements. RESULTS PK analysis showed linear dosage-proportional correlation between MDCO-2010 infusion rate and PK parameters. Blood loss was significantly reduced in the 3 highest dosage groups compared with control (P = 0.002, 0.004 and 0.011, respectively). The incidence of allogeneic blood product transfusions was lower with MDCO-2010 4/24 (17%) vs 4/8 (50%) in the control group. MDCO-2010 exhibited dosage-dependent antifibrinolytic effects through suppression of D-dimer generation and inhibition of tissue plasminogen activator-induced lysis in ROTEM analysis as well as anticoagulant effects demonstrated by prolongation of activated clotting time and activated partial thromboplastin time. No systematic differences in markers of end organ function were observed among treatment groups. Three patients in the MDCO-2010 groups experienced serious adverse events. One patient experienced intraoperative thrombosis of venous grafts considered possibly related to the study drug. No reexploration for mediastinal bleeding was required, and there were no deaths. CONCLUSIONS This first-in-patient study demonstrated dosage-proportional PK for MDCO-2010 and reduction of chest tube drainage and transfusions in patients undergoing primary coronary artery bypass grafting. Antifibrinolytic and anticoagulant effects were demonstrated using various markers of coagulation. MDCO-2010 was well tolerated and showed an acceptable initial safety profile. Larger multi-institutional studies are warranted to further investigate the safety and efficacy of this compound.

Preemptive carprofen for peri-operative analgesia in dogs undergoing Tibial Plateau Leveling Osteotomy (TPLO): a prospective, randomized, blinded, placebo controlled clinical trial

Eighteen client-owned dogs undergoing Tibial Plateau Leveling Osteotomy (TPLO) were included in this blinded clinical study and randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups. Group C (carprofen) received intravenous (IV) carprofen, 4 mg/kg, prior to anesthesia, whereas group P (placebo) received IV saline. General anesthesia was maintained with isoflurane in oxygen and a constant rate infusion (CRI) of sufentanyl IV. Intra-operatively, assessment of nociception was based on changes in physiological parameters and on the analgesics requirement, whereas in the post-operative period evaluation of pain was performed by using a Hellyer and Gaynor pain score and by comparing the doses of rescue buprenorphine required by the two treatment groups. Although no statistically significant differences in intra-operative sufentanyl doses were found between treatment groups, group C had superior cardiovascular stability, and lower post-operative pain scores and rescue buprenorphine doses than group P. Our results indicate that administration of carprofen prior to surgery was effective in improving peri-operative analgesia in dogs undergoing TPLO.

A randomised controlled trial: can acupuncture reduce drug requirement during analgosedation with propofol and alfentanil for colonoscopy? A study protocol.

BACKGROUND The number of colonoscopies tremendously increased in recent years and will further rise in the near future. Because of patients' growing expectation on comfort during medical procedures, it is not surprising that the demand for sedation also expands. Propofol in combination with alfentanil is known to provide excellent analgosedation, however, its use is associated with respiratory and cardiovascular depression. Acupuncture could be a technique to reduce drug requirement while providing the same level of sedation and analgesia. METHODS/DESIGN The study will be performed as a single centre, randomised, placebo controlled trial. 153 patients scheduled for propofol/alfentanil sedation during colonoscopy will be randomly assigned to receive electroacupuncture (P6, ST36, LI4), sham acupuncture, or placebo acupuncture. Following endoscopy patients and gastroenterologists have to fill in questionnaires about their sedation experiences. Additionally, patients have to accomplish the Trieger test before and after the procedure. Patient monitoring includes time adapted HR, SpO2, ECG, NIBP, exCO2, OAA/S, and the Aldrete score. The primary outcome parameter is the dosage of propofol necessary for an adequate level of sedation to tolerate the procedure (OAA/S < 4). Effectiveness of sedation, classified by satisfaction levels measured by questionnaires is the secondary outcome parameter. DISCUSSION Moderate to deep sedation using propofol is increasingly applied during colonoscopies with a high satisfaction level among patients despite well-known hemodynamic and respiratory side effects of this hypnotic agent. Acupuncture is known to attenuate gastrointestinal discomfort and pain. We hypothesize that the combination of conventional sedation techniques with acupuncture may result in equally satisfied patients with a lower risk of respiratory and hemodynamic events during colonoscopies. TRIAL REGISTRATION This trial is registered in the Nederland's Trial Register NTR 4325 . The first patient was randomized on 13 February 2014.

Intravenous Delta-9-Tetrahydrocannabinol to Prevent Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND Evidence suggests that cannabinoids can prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. The use of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) has also been suggested for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), but evidence is very limited and inconclusive. To evaluate the effectiveness of IV THC in the prevention of PONV, we performed this double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial with patient stratification according to the risk of PONV. Our hypothesis was that THC would reduce the relative risk of PONV by 25% compared with placebo. METHODS With IRB approval and written informed consent, 40 patients at high risk for PONV received either 0.125 mg/kg IV THC or placebo at the end of surgery before emergence from anesthesia. The primary outcome parameter was PONV during the first 24 hours after emergence. Secondary outcome parameters included early and late nausea, emetic episodes and PONV, and side effects such as sedation or psychotropic alterations. RESULTS The relative risk reduction of overall PONV in the THC group was 12% (95% confidence interval, -37% to 43%), potentially less than the clinically significant 25% relative risk reduction demonstrated by other drugs used for PONV prophylaxis. Calculation of the effect of treatment group on overall PONV by logistic regression adjusted for anesthesia time gave an odds ratio of 0.97 (95% confidence interval, 0.21 to 4.43, P = 0.97). Psychotropic THC side effects were clinically relevant and mainly consisted of sedation and confusion that were not tampered by the effects of anesthesia. The study was discontinued after 40 patients because of the inefficacy of THC against PONV and the finding of clinically unacceptable side effects that would impede the use of THC in the studied setting. CONCLUSIONS Because of an unacceptable side effect profile and uncertain antiemetic effects, IV THC administered at the end of surgery before emergence from anesthesia cannot be recommended for the prevention of PONV in high-risk patients.

Adding regional analgesia to general anaesthesia: increase of risk or improved outcome?

Although it is clear that regional analgesia in association with general anaesthesia substantially reduces postoperative pain, the benefits in terms of overall perioperative outcome are less evident. The aim of this nonsystematic review was to evaluate the effect on middle and long-term postoperative outcomes of adding regional perioperative analgesia to general anaesthesia. This study is based mostly on systematic reviews, large epidemiological studies and large or high-quality randomized controlled trials that were selected and evaluated by the author. The endpoints that are discussed are perioperative morbidity, cancer recurrence, chronic postoperative pain, postoperative rehabilitation and risk of neurologic damage. Epidural analgesia may have a favourable but very small effect on perioperative morbidity. The influence of other regional anaesthetic techniques on perioperative morbidity is unclear. Preliminary data suggest that regional analgesia might reduce the incidence of cancer recurrence. However, adequately powered randomized controlled trials are lacking. The sparse literature available suggests that regional analgesia may prevent the development of chronic postoperative pain. Rehabilitation in the immediate postoperative period is possibly improved, but the advantages in the long term remain unclear. Permanent neurological damage is extremely rare. In conclusion, while the risk of permanent neurologic damage remains extremely low, evidence suggests that regional analgesia may improve relevant outcomes in the long term. The effect size is mostly small or the number-needed-to-treat is high. However, considering the importance of the outcomes of interest, even minor improvement probably has substantial clinical relevance.

Effectiveness of individual resource-oriented joint protection education in people with rheumatoid arthritis. A randomized controlled trial

the modern joint protection (JP) concept for people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an active coping strategy to improve daily tasks and role performance by changing working methods and using assistive devices. Effective group JP education includes psycho-educational interventions. The Pictorial Representation of Illness and Self Measure (PRISM) is an interactive hands-on-tool, assessing (a) the individual's perceived burden of illness and (b) relevant individual resources. Both issues are important for intrinsic motivation to take action and change behaviour. This study compared individual conventional JP education (C-JP) with PRISM-based JP education (PRISM-JP).

Double-blinded, randomized controlled trial comparing real versus placebo acupuncture to improve tolerance of diagnostic esophagogastroduodenoscopy without sedation: a study protocol

Background Sedation prior to performance of diagnostic esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGDE) is widespread and increases patient comfort. But 98% of all serious adverse events during EGDEs are ascribed to sedation. The S3 guideline for sedation procedures in gastrointestinal endoscopy published in 2008 in Germany increases patient safety by standardization. These new regulations increase costs because of the need for more personnel and a prolonged discharge procedure after examinations with sedation. Many patients have difficulties to meet the discharge criteria regulated by the S3 guideline, e.g. the call for a second person to escort them home, to resign from driving and working for the rest of the day, resulting in a refusal of sedation. Therefore, we would like to examine if an acupuncture during elective, diagnostic EGDEs could increase the comfort of patients refusing systemic sedation. Methods/Design A single-center, double blinded, placebo controlled superiority trial to compare the success rates of elective, diagnostic EGDEs with real and placebo acupuncture. All patients aged 18 years or older scheduled for elective, diagnostic EGDE who refuse a systemic sedation are eligible. 354 patients will be randomized. The primary endpoint is the rate of successful EGDEs with the randomized technique. Intervention: Real or placebo acupuncture before and during EGDE. Duration of study: Approximately 24 months. Discussion Organisation/Responsibility The ACUPEND - Trial will be conducted in accordance with the protocol and in compliance with the moral, ethical, and scientific principles governing clinical research as set out in the Declaration of Helsinki (1989) and Good Clinical Practice (GCP). The Interdisciplinary Endoscopy Center (IEZ) of the University Hospital Heidelberg is responsible for design and conduct of the trial, including randomization and documentation of patients' data. Data management and statistical analysis will be performed by the independent Institute for Medical Biometry and Informatics (IMBI) and the Center of Clinical Trials (KSC) at the Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg.

Dexmedetomidine vs midazolam or propofol for sedation during prolonged mechanical ventilation: two randomized controlled trials

Long-term sedation with midazolam or propofol in intensive care units (ICUs) has serious adverse effects. Dexmedetomidine, an α(2)-agonist available for ICU sedation, may reduce the duration of mechanical ventilation and enhance patient comfort.

A phase IIa randomized controlled pilot study evaluating the safety and clinical outcomes following the use of rhGDF-5/β-TCP in regenerative periodontal therapy

To present the safety profile, the early healing phase and the clinical outcomes at 24 weeks following treatment of human intrabony defects with open flap debridement (OFD) alone or with OFD and rhGDF-5 adsorbed onto a particulate β-tricalcium phosphate (β-TCP) carrier. Twenty chronic periodontitis patients, each with at least one tooth exhibiting a probing depth ≥6 mm and an associated intrabony defect ≥4 mm entered the study. Ten subjects (one defect/patient) were randomized to receive OFD alone (control) and ten subjects OFD combined with rhGDF-5/β-TCP. Blood samples were collected at screening, and at weeks 2 and 24 to evaluate routine hematology and clinical chemistry, rhGDF-5 plasma levels, and antirhGDF-5 antibody formation. Plaque and gingival indices, bleeding on probing, probing depth, clinical attachment level, and radiographs were recorded pre- and 24 weeks postsurgery. Comparable safety profiles were found in the two treatment groups. Neither antirhGDF-5 antibody formation nor relevant rhGDF-5 plasma levels were detected in any patient. At 6 months, treatment with OFD + rhGDF-5/β-TCP resulted in higher but statistically not significant PD reduction (3.7 ± 1.2 vs. 3.1 ± 1.8 mm; p = 0.26) and CAL gain (3.2 ± 1.7 vs. 1.7 ± 2.2 mm; p = 0.14) compared to OFD alone. In the tested concentration, the use of rhGDF-5/β-TCP appeared to be safe and the material possesses a sound biological rationale. Thus, further adequately powered, randomized controlled clinical trials are warranted to confirm the clinical relevance of this new approach in regenerative periodontal therapy. rhGDF-5/β-TCP may represent a promising new techology in regenerative periodontal therapy.