Objective To investigate whether the peri pheral administration of amitri ptyl ine and bupivacaine produces anti-hyperalgesic effect and to screen the neurotoxicological effect on sciatic nerve blockade in a rat model of neuropathic pain. Methods Twenty-four adult male SD rats [weighing (200 ± 20) g] were made the models of chronic constriction injury (CCI) and randomly divided into 3 groups (n=8) 5 days after operation: group A (amitriptyl ine), group B (bupivacaine) and group C (normal sal ine). 0.5 mL 0.5% amitriptyl ine, 0.5% bupivacaine or normal sal ine were given in group A, group B, and group C, respectively through implanted cannulas after 5, 7 and 9 days of CCI once a day for successive 3 days. The motor function was measured before administration and 1, 2, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours after every administration. Mechanical withdrawal threshold (MWT) and thermal withdrawal latency (TWL) were measured before administration and 1, 3, 5 and 7 days after the third administration. The operated sciatic nerve samples were obtained for neuropathological examination under l ight microscope. Results Twenty-four CCI rats were all survival without infection, palsy and catheter fall ing off. Compared with group C, the rats of group A and group B both produced significant ambulation deficits after every administration (P lt; 0.05). The ambulation deficits lasted 2 hours (group B) and 8 hours (group A) respectively. But the ambulation deficits of CCI rats were all reversible. The MWT and TWL of group A 1 and 3 days after the third administration increased when compared with those before administration and 5 and 7 days after the third administration, and when compared with group B and group C (P lt; 0.05). There was no significant difference (P gt; 0.05) in l ight microscopic neuropathological examination among three groups. Epineurial tissue and endoneurium tissue integrity, tidy arrangement of fibers, less inflammatory cell and no marked degeneration of myel inated fibers were observed. Conclusion Repeated sciatic nerve blockade with 0.5% amitriptyl ine has peripheral anti-hyperalgesic effects on neuropathic pain of rats. No morphological evidence of neurotoxicity in the sciatic nerve of rats is observed in 0.5% amitriptyl ine.
Objective To compare the analgesic effect, duration and incidence of adverse reactions of liposome bupivacaine (LB) and bupivacaine hydrochloride after intercostal nerve block in single-port thoracoscopic lung surgery. Methods In Department of Thoracic Surgery of the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinxiang Medical University between September 2023 and March 2024, 228 patients who needed to undergo thoracoscopic lung surgery were selected and divided into two groups by random number table method: a group B with bupivacaine hydrochloride (n=118), and a group LB with LB (n=110). Intraoperative intercostal nerve block was performed under endoscopy, and the time of first use of analgesic drugs after surgery, cumulative use of opioids 72 h after surgery, incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, length of stay and other indicators were evaluated and recorded. Results Visual analogue scale (VAS) scores at 4 h, 8 h, 12 h, 24 h, 48 h and 72 h in the LB group were significantly lower than those in the group B (P<0.05). The total number of activities within 48 h after surgery in the group B was significantly lower than that in the LB group (P<0.05), and the postoperative hospitalization stay in the LB group was shorter than that in the group B, but the difference was not statistically significant. There was no statistical difference between the two groups in postoperative adverse reactions. Conclusion Intercostal nerve block with LB during single-port thoracoscopic lung surgery can significantly reduce postoperative pain, improve quality of life, and promote recovery of the patients. It is worthy of clinical application.
ObjectiveA prospective randomized controlled study was conducted to investigate the early postoperative analgesic effectiveness of using liposomal bupivacaine (LB) for local infiltration anesthesia (LIA) in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). Methods Between January 2024 and July 2024, a total of 80 patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA) who met the selection criteria were enrolled in the study. Patients were randomly assigned to either the LB group or the “cocktail” group in a 1∶1 ratio using a random number table, with 40 patients in each group. Baseline characteristics, including gender, age, body mass index, operated side, Kellgren-Lawrence grade, and preoperative American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score, and knee joint range of motion, showed no significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05). Both groups received LIA and comprehensive pain management. The surgical duration, incision length, pain-related indicators [resting and activity visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, total dosage of oral morphine, WOMAC scores], knee joint range of motion, first ambulation time after operation, length of hospital stay, and postoperative adverse events. ResultsThere was no significant difference between the two groups in surgical duration, incision length, first ambulation time after operation, length of hospital stay, total dosage of oral morphine, and pre-discharge satisfaction with surgery and WOMAC scores (P>0.05). At 4, 12, and 24 hours after operation, the resting and activity VAS scores in the “cocktail” group were lower than those in the LB group; at 60 and 72 hours postoperatively, the resting VAS scores in the LB group were lower than those in the “cocktail” group, with the activity VAS scores also being lower at 60 hours; all showing significant differences (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the above indicators between the two groups at other time points (P>0.05). On the second postoperative day, the sleep scores of the LB group were significantly higher than those of the “cocktail” group (P<0.05), while there was no significant difference in sleep scores on the day of surgery and the first postoperative day (P>0.05). Additionally, the incidence of complications showed no significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05). ConclusionThe use of LB for LIA in UKA can provide prolonged postoperative pain relief; however, it does not demonstrate a significant advantage over the “cocktail” method in terms of short-term analgesic effects or reducing opioid consumption and early functional recovery after UKA. Nevertheless, LB may help reduce postoperative sleep disturbances, making it a recommended option for UKA patients with cardiovascular diseases and insomnia or other mental health issues.
Objective To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of ropivacaine in spinal anesthesia. Methods We searched PubMed (1999 to 2008), OVID (1999 to 2008), EBSCO (1999 to 2008), The Cochrane Library (2000 to 2008), and CNKI (1999 to 2008) databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared ropivacaine and bupivacaine for spinal anesthesia. The quality of the included RCTs was evaluated by two reviewers independently, and meta-analysis was performed by RevMan 5.0 software. Results Six RCTs were included. The methodological quality of them were all poor. Among the six RCTs, 215 patients received ropivacaine and 215 received bupivacaine. The results of meta-analyses showed that the motor-block time to complete block of ropivacaine was significantly shorter than that of bupivacaine (WMD=2.18 min, 95%CI 0.32 to 4.03, P=0.02). The motor-block time to complete recovery of ropivacaine was significantly shorter than that of bupivacaine for cesarean delivery in spinal anesthesia (SMD= – 1.82, 95%CI – 3.05 to – 0.59, P=0.004). The incidence rate of hypotension and bradycardia in spinal anestheisa with ropivacaine was lower than that with bupivacaine (OR=0.49, 95%CI 0.31 to 0.80, P=0.004; OR=0.40, 95%CI 0.03 to 4.99, P=0.47). Conclusion Equivalent doses of ropivacaine and bupivacaine provide similar analgesia in spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery. However, haemodynamics in spinal anesthesia with ropivacaine fluctuate lightlier than with bupivacaine. Ropivacaine is suitable for spinal anesthesia in low-abdominal operations.
Objective To assess the analgesic effect of caudal bupivacaine with neostigmine for hypospadias surgery in children. Methods We searched The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2008), MEDLINE (1966-2008), EMbase (1980-2008), CBMdisc (1978-2008), CNKI (1989-2008) and Wanfang Database using the keywords “bupivacaine”, “neostigmine” and “hypospadias” to identify randomized control trials (RCTs) of caudal bupivacaine with neostigmine versus bupivacaine alone for hypospadias surgery in children. The methodological quality of included RCTs was evaluated by two reviewers independently, and Meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.0.13 software. Results We identified 3 RCTs including 160 patients which had an uncertain risk of bias. The results of meta-analysis showed no significant difference found between bupivacine alone and bupivacine plus 1 µg/kg neostigmine (WMD= 0.05, 95%CI – 6.76 to 6.86, P= 0.99), but a difference was found between bupivacine alone and bupivacine plus 1 µg/ kg, 2 µg/kg, or 3 µg/ kg neostigmine (WMD= 12.79, 95%CI 10.96 to 14.62, Plt; 0.000 01; WMD= 12.10, 95%CI – 6.76 to 6.86, Plt; 0.000 01; WMD= 11.90, 95%CI 9.17 to 14.63, Plt;0.000 01). The duration of postoperative analgesia of the bupivacaine with neostigmine group was longer than that of bupivacine alone. Conclusions Because of the small sample size and the unclear risk of bias in the included RCTs, the effectiveness of caudal bupivacaine with neostigmine for postoperative pain management after hypospadias surgery in children is not completely confirmed. So more large sample size, double-blind RCTs are needed.
ObjectiveTo explore the analgesic effect of local infiltration anesthesia with liposome bupivacaine (LB) after Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy through a multicenter, double-blind, randomized controlled study. MethodsA prospective study was conducted on 240 patients with mixed hemorrhoids admitted to the Third Affiliated Hospital of Henan University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Henan Province Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Zhengzhou Hospital for Largeintestinal and Anal Diseases, and Puyang People’s Hospital between December 2023 and June 2024. Patients were randomly divided into an observation group (receiving liposome bupivacaine injection) and a control group (receiving methylene blue injection) using a random number table. Postoperative outcomes including pain (VAS) scores, insomnia scores, postoperative edema, urination, time to first defecation, pain during first defecation, perianal sensory recovery time, hospital stay, need for additional analgesic medication, and postoperative complications were compared between the two groups. ResultsAmong 240 patients, 238 completed the study and were included in the analysis, with 119 patients in the observation group and 119 in the control group.① There were no statistically significant differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups (P>0.05).② Postoperative anal pain scores at 6 h, 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, 72 h, and 5 days were lower in the observation group than in the control group (P<0.05).③ Postoperative insomnia scores on days 1, 2, 3, and 5 were lower in the observation group compared with the control group (P<0.05).④ Postoperative edema scores on days 3, 5, and 7 were lower in the observation group than in the control group (P<0.001).⑤ The observation group showed superior outcomes compared to the control group in the following parameters: postoperative 24-hour urination score [0 points vs. 0 points, Z=–2.528, P=0.011]、time to first defecation [2 days vs. 2 days, Z=–2.638, P=0.008]、pain score at first defecation [3 points vs. 5 points, Z=–2.528, P<0.001]、time to recovery of perianal sensation [2 days vs. 1 day, Z=–4.977, P<0.001]、hospital stay duration [6 days vs. 11 days, Z=–12.170, P<0.001]、supplemental analgesic medication need at 7 days postoperation [20.1% vs. 80.7%, χ2 = 87.132, P<0.001]. No statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups in the incidence of complications such as:postoperative nausea [6.7% vs. 8.4%, χ2 = 0.240, P=0.624]、vomiting [5.0% vs. 7.6%, χ2 = 0.640, P=0.424]、dizziness [1.7% vs. 4.2%, χ2=1.325, P=0.250]. ConclusionsLocal infiltration anesthesia with LB after Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy significantly reduces postoperative pain, insomnia, and edema, shortens hospital stays, and accelerates postoperative recovery. LB demonstrates broad clinical application potential.