Managing post-thoracotomy pain: Epidural or systemic analgesia and extended care – A randomized study with an “as usual” control group

Author:

Tiippana Elina1,Nelskylä Kaisa1,Nilsson Eija1,Sihvo Eero2,Kataja Matti3,Kalso Eija14

Affiliation:

1. Helsinki University Central Hospital , Department of Anaesthesia, Intensive Care Medicine, Emergency Medicine and Pain Medicine , Helsinki , Finland

2. Helsinki University Central Hospital , Department of Surgery , Helsinki , Finland

3. National Institute for Health and Welfare , Helsinki , Finland

4. University of Helsinki , Institute of Clinical Medicine , Helsinki , Finland

Abstract

Abstract Background and aims Thoracotomies can cause severe pain, which persists in 21–67% of patients. We investigated whether NSAID + intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) with morphine is an efficacious alternative to thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA). We also wanted to find out whether an extended controlled pain management protocol within a clinical study can decrease the incidence of persistent post-thoracotomy pain. Methods Thirty thoracotomy patients were randomized into 3 intervention groups with 10 patients in each. G1: preoperative diclofenac 75mg orally+150 mg/24h IV for 44h, then PO; G2: valdecoxib 40mg orally+parecoxib 80mg/24h IV for 44h, then PO. IV-PCA morphine was available in groups 1 and 2 during pleural drainage, and an intercostal nerve block at the end of surgery was performed; G3: parac-etamol+patient controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) with a background infusion of bupivacaine with fentanyl. After PCA/PCEA oxycodone PO was provided when needed. These patients were contacted one week, 3 and 6 months after discharge. Patients (N = 111) not involved in the study were treated according to hospital practice and served as a control group. The control patients’ data from the perioperative period were extracted, and a prospective follow-up questionnaire at 6 months after surgery similar to the intervention group was mailed. Results The intended sample size was not reached in the intervention group because of the global withdrawal of valdecoxib, and the study was terminated prematurely. At 6 months 3% of the intervention patients and 24%ofthe control patients reported persistent pain (p<0.01). Diclofenac and valdecoxib provided similar analgesia, and in the combined NSAID group (diclofenac+valdecoxib) movement-related pain was milder in the PCEA group compared with the NSAID group. The duration of pain after coughing was shorter in the PCEA group compared with the NSAID+IV-PCA group. The only patient with persistent painat6 months postoperatively had a considerably longer duration ofpain after coughing than the other Study patients. The patients with mechanical hyperalgesia had more pain on movement. Conclusions Both PCEA and NSAID+IV-PCA morphine provided sufficient analgesia with little persistent pain compared with the incidence of persistent pain in the control group. High quality acute pain management and follow-up continuing after discharge could be more important than the analgesic method per se in preventing persistent post-thoracotomy pain. In the acute phase the measurement of pain when coughing and the duration of pain after coughing could be easy measures to recognize patients having a higher risk for persistent post-thoracotomy pain. Implications To prevent persistent post-thoracotomy pain, the extended protocol for high quality pain management in hospital covering also the sub-acute phase at home, is important. This study also provides some evidence that safe and effective alternatives to thoracic epidural analgesia do exist. The idea to include the standard “as usual” care patients as a control group and to compare them with the intervention patients provides valuable information of the added value of being a study patient, and deserves further consideration in future studies.

Funder

Helsinki University Central Hospital Research Funds

Publisher

Walter de Gruyter GmbH

Subject

Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine,Neurology (clinical)

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3