Johnson, Rebecca L.

Total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is transitioning to be an outpatient rather than an inpatient procedure under national and institutional pressures to increase volumes while reducing hospital costs and length of stay. Innovative surgical and anesthesia techniques have allowed for earlier ambulation and physical therapy participation, maximizing the chance that an appropriately selected patient may be discharged within a day of surgery. The choice of anesthesia type is a modifiable factor that has a major impact on both surgical outcomes and discharge readiness. Recent large database studies have provided evidence for improved outcomes, including decreased mortality, with the use of spinal anesthesia. However, few randomized, controlled trials exist and database studies have limitations. Modern general anesthesia techniques, including total intravenous anesthesia and infusions targeted to anesthetic depth, may make some of these differences insignificant, especially when newer regional anesthesia and local infiltration analgesia techniques are incorporated into TJA enhanced recovery protocols. Multimodal analgesia for all TJA patients may also help minimize differences in pain. Perhaps even more important than anesthesia technique is the proper selection of patients likely to meet the necessary milestones for early discharge. In this article, we provide two contrasting viewpoints on the optimal primary anesthetic for outpatient TJA.

Background Frailty increases risk for complications after total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Whether this association is influenced by anesthetic administered is unknown. We hypothesized that use of neuraxial (spinal or epidural) anesthesia is associated with better outcomes compared with general anesthesia, and that the effect of anesthesia type on outcomes differs by frailty status. Methods This single-institution cohort study included all patients (≥50 years) from January 2005 through December 2016 undergoing unilateral, primary and revision TJA. Using multivariable Cox regression, we assessed relationships between anesthesia type, a preoperative frailty deficit index (FI) categorized as non-frail (FI <0.11), vulnerable (FI 0.11 to 0.20), and frail (FI >0.20), and complications (mortality, infection, wound complications/hematoma, reoperation, dislocation, and periprosthetic fracture) within 1 year after surgery. Interactions between anesthesia type and frailty were tested, and stratified models were presented when an interaction (p<0.1) was observed. Results Among 18 458 patients undergoing TJA, more patients were classified as frail (21.5%) and vulnerable (36.2%) than non-frail (42.3%). Anesthesia type was not associated with complications after adjusting for age, joint, and revision type. However, in analyzes stratified by frailty, vulnerable patients under neuraxial block had less mortality (HR=0.49; 95% CI 0.27 to 0.89) and wound complications/hematoma (HR=0.71; 95% CI 0.55 to 0.90), whereas no difference in risk by anesthesia type was observed among patients found non-frail or frail. Conclusions Neuraxial anesthesia use among vulnerable patients was associated with improved survival and less wound complications. Calculating preoperative frailty prior to TJA informs perioperative risk and enhances shared-decision making for selection of anesthesia type.

Abstract Background Intrathecal opioids are routinely administered during spinal anesthesia for postcesarean analgesia. The effectiveness of intrathecal morphine for postcesarean analgesia is well established, and the use of intrathecal hydromorphone is growing. No prospective studies have compared the effectiveness of equipotent doses of intrathecal morphine versus intrathecal hydromorphone as part of a multimodal analgesic regimen for postcesarean analgesia. The authors hypothesized that intrathecal morphine would result in superior analgesia compared with intrathecal hydromorphone 24 h after delivery. Methods In this single-center, double-blinded, randomized trial, 138 parturients undergoing scheduled cesarean delivery were randomized to receive 150 µg of intrathecal morphine or 75 µg of intrathecal hydromorphone as part of a primary spinal anesthetic and multimodal analgesic regimen; 134 parturients were included in the analysis. The primary outcome was the numerical rating scale score for pain with movement 24 h after delivery. Static and dynamic pain scores, nausea, pruritus, degree of sedation, and patient satisfaction were assessed every 6 h for 36 h postpartum. Total opioid consumption was recorded. Results There was no significant difference in pain scores with movement at 24 h (intrathecal hydromorphone median [25th, 75th] 4 [3, 5] and intrathecal morphine 3 [2, 4.5]) or at any time point (estimated difference, 0.5; 95% CI, 0 to 1; P = 0.139). Opioid received in the first 24 h did not differ between groups (median [25th, 75th] oral morphine milligram equivalents for intrathecal hydromorphone 30 [7.5, 45.06] vs. intrathecal morphine 22.5 [14.0, 37.5], P = 0.769). From Kaplan–Meier analysis, the median time to first opioid request was 5.4 h for hydromorphone and 12.1 h for morphine (log-rank test P = 0.200). Conclusions Although the hypothesis was that intrathecal morphine would provide superior analgesia to intrathecal hydromorphone, the results did not confirm this. At the doses studied, both intrathecal morphine and intrathecal hydromorphone provide effective postcesarean analgesia when combined with a multimodal analgesia regimen. Editor’s Perspective What We Already Know about This Topic What This Article Tells Us That Is New

Background: Debate surrounds the issue of whether peripheral nerve blockade or periarticular infiltration (PAI) should be employed within a contemporary, comprehensive multimodal analgesia pathway for total hip arthroplasty. We hypothesized that patients treated with a continuous posterior lumbar plexus block (PNB) would report less pain and consume less opioid medication than those treated with PAI. Methods: This investigator-initiated, independently funded, 3-arm randomized clinical trial (RCT) performed at a single high-volume institution compared postoperative analgesia interventions for elective, unilateral primary total hip arthroplasty: (1) PNB; (2) PAI with ropivacaine, ketorolac, and epinephrine (PAI-R); and (3) PAI with liposomal bupivacaine, ketorolac, and epinephrine (PAI-L) using computerized randomization. The primary outcome was maximum pain during the morning (06:00 to 12:00) of the first postoperative day (POD) on an ascending numeric rating scale (NRS) from 0 to 10. Pairwise treatment comparisons were performed using the rank-sum test, with a p value of <0.017 indicating significance (Bonferroni adjusted). A sample size of 150 provided 80% power to detect a difference of 2.0 NRS units. Results: We included 159 patients (51, 54, and 54 patients in the PNB, PAI-R, and PAI-L groups, respectively). No significant differences were found with respect to the primary end point on the morning of the first POD (median, 3.0, 4.0, and 3.0, respectively; p > 0.033 for all). Opioid consumption was low and did not differ across groups at any intervals. Median maximum pain on POD 1 was 5.0, 5.5, and 4.0, respectively, and was lower for the PAI-L group than for the PAI-R group (p = 0.006). On POD 2, maximum pain (median, 3.5, 5.0, and 3.5, respectively) was lower for the PNB group (p = 0.014) and PAI-L group (p = 0.016) compared with the PAI-R group. The PAI-L group was not significantly different from the PNB group with respect to any outcomes: postoperative opioid use including rescue intravenous opioid medication, length of stay, and hospital adverse events, and 3-month follow-up data including any complication. Conclusions: In this RCT, we found a modest improvement with respect to analgesia in patients receiving PNB compared with those receiving PAI-R, but not compared with those who had PAI-L. Secondary analyses suggested that PNB or PAI-L provides superior postoperative analgesia compared with PAI-R. For primary total hip arthroplasty, a multimodal analgesic regimen including PNB or PAI-L provides opioid-limiting analgesia. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level I . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

ABSTRACTIntroductionNeuropathy after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) can cause significant morbidity but is inconsistently reported.MethodsWe reviewed the clinical, electrodiagnostic and perioperative features of all patients who underwent primary TKA at our institution and developed a new neuropathy within 8 weeks postoperatively.ResultsFifty‐four cases were identified (incidence 0.37% [95% confidence interval, 0.28–0.49]) affecting the following nerve(s): peroneal (37), sciatic (11), ulnar (2), tibial (2), sural (1), and lumbosacral plexus (1). In all cases with follow‐up data, motor recovery typically occurred within 1 year and was complete or near‐complete.ConclusionsPost‐TKA neuropathy is uncommon, typically does not require intervention and usually resolves within 1 year. Post‐TKA neuropathy most often affects the nerves surgically at risk. Anesthesia type does not correlate with post‐TKA neuropathy. An inflammatory etiology for post‐TKA neuropathy is rare but should be considered in specific cases. Muscle Nerve 59:679–682, 2019

Manually delivered intermittent bolus (MIB) and programmable intermittent bolus (PIB), alternatives to continuous infusion (CI), involve administering a set volume of solution at a set interval of time. The benefits of intermittent bolus techniques in truncal and peripheral nerve blockade (TPNB) are unclear, and studies have largely demonstrated conflicting results. Using MEDLINE, Embase, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Library, we conducted an evidenced-based review of published randomized controlled trials comparing intermittent bolus and CI methods in TPNB. In total, 13 randomized controlled trials were identified and evaluated. Outcomes data addressed in these studies included assessments of pain, opioid and local anesthetic consumption, patient satisfaction, adverse events, and physical therapy metrics. The overall quality of current evidence was found to be low given the small sample sizes, heterogeneity of data, and the variations in intermittent bolus techniques between studies. At this time, we found limited supportive data to endorse MIB or PIB over CI in TPNB. While unable to provide data-driven conclusions for local anesthetic delivery methods at this time, we propose that future studies and quantitative analysis between techniques should be on an anatomic, site-specific basis, with greater focus on evaluation of opioid use, adverse events, patient satisfaction, and rehabilitative metrics.