A qualitative systematic review of incisional local anaesthesia for postoperative pain relief after abdominal operations
In a qualitative systematic review, we have evaluated randomized controlled trials (RCT) of incisional local anaesthesia compared with placebo or no treatment in the control of postoperative pain after open abdominal operations. Twenty-six studies with data from 1211 patients were considered appropr...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | British journal of anaesthesia : BJA 1998-09, Vol.81 (3), p.377-383 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 383 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 377 |
container_title | British journal of anaesthesia : BJA |
container_volume | 81 |
creator | Møiniche, S Mikkelsen, S Wetterslev, J Dahl, J B |
description | In a qualitative systematic review, we have evaluated randomized controlled trials (RCT) of incisional local anaesthesia compared with placebo or no treatment in the control of postoperative pain after open abdominal operations. Twenty-six studies with data from 1211 patients were considered appropriate for analysis. Five RCT considered inguinal herniotomy, four hysterectomy, eight cholecystectomy and nine studies a variety of surgical procedures. Outcome measures were pain scores, supplementary analgesics and time to first analgesic request. Efficacy was estimated by significant difference (P < 0.05), as reported in the original investigation. All studies of herniotomy showed a 2-7-h duration of clinically relevant improved pain relief. Results of hysterectomy studies were inconclusive, with two being negative. Five of the cholecystectomy studies showed significant differences but questionable clinical importance and validity in three. In various other procedures results were inconsistent and in some of minor clinical importance. Except for herniotomy, there was a lack of evidence for effect of incisional local anaesthesia on postoperative pain and further standardized studies are needed before recommendations can be made. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1093/bja/81.3.377 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_69097273</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><oup_id>10.1093/bja/81.3.377</oup_id><els_id>S0007091217395971</els_id><sourcerecordid>69097273</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c459t-9c864130580b62ec9f507025ddf30671928d62fa6543693b120400d452885f6d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkUtr3TAUhEVpSG_S7rotiFLSTX2jhyVZyxD6gkA2yVrI8hHVxbYcyU6af19dbLIohW4kwflmdJhB6D0le0o0v2wP9rKhe77nSr1CO1orWkml6Gu0I4SoimjK3qCznA-EUMW0OEWnupGUsnqHfl_hh8X2YbZzeAScn_MMQ3k7nOAxwBOOHofRhRziaHvcR1dOO1rI8y_IwWIfE55inuMEafWYbBiLug_gsfUzJGzbLg7hqN-oOOa36MTbPsO77T5H99--3l3_qG5uv_-8vrqpXC30XGnXyJpyIhrSSgZOe0EUYaLrPCdSUc2aTjJvpai51LyljNSEdLVgTSO87Pg5ulh9pxQflrK2GUJ20Pd2hLhkIzXRiilewI9_gYe4pLJ0NlQrTWshWYG-rJBLMecE3kwpDDY9G0rMsQ1T2jANNdyUNgr-YfNc2gG6F3iLv8w_bXObS7A-2WPULxjjDRNKFOzzisVl-t-HciWhRFr6Sya7AKODLiRws-li-LfwD9tSscY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>197914562</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A qualitative systematic review of incisional local anaesthesia for postoperative pain relief after abdominal operations</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Møiniche, S ; Mikkelsen, S ; Wetterslev, J ; Dahl, J B</creator><creatorcontrib>Møiniche, S ; Mikkelsen, S ; Wetterslev, J ; Dahl, J B</creatorcontrib><description>In a qualitative systematic review, we have evaluated randomized controlled trials (RCT) of incisional local anaesthesia compared with placebo or no treatment in the control of postoperative pain after open abdominal operations. Twenty-six studies with data from 1211 patients were considered appropriate for analysis. Five RCT considered inguinal herniotomy, four hysterectomy, eight cholecystectomy and nine studies a variety of surgical procedures. Outcome measures were pain scores, supplementary analgesics and time to first analgesic request. Efficacy was estimated by significant difference (P < 0.05), as reported in the original investigation. All studies of herniotomy showed a 2-7-h duration of clinically relevant improved pain relief. Results of hysterectomy studies were inconclusive, with two being negative. Five of the cholecystectomy studies showed significant differences but questionable clinical importance and validity in three. In various other procedures results were inconsistent and in some of minor clinical importance. Except for herniotomy, there was a lack of evidence for effect of incisional local anaesthesia on postoperative pain and further standardized studies are needed before recommendations can be made.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0007-0912</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1471-6771</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/bja/81.3.377</identifier><identifier>PMID: 9861124</identifier><identifier>CODEN: BJANAD</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Abdomen - surgery ; Analgesics ; Anesthesia ; Anesthesia, Local - methods ; Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy ; Anesthetics, Local - administration & dosage ; Biological and medical sciences ; Cholecystectomy ; Double-Blind Method ; Female ; Hernia, Inguinal - surgery ; Humans ; Hysterectomy ; Local anesthesia. Pain (treatment) ; Medical sciences ; Neuropharmacology ; Pain, Postoperative - drug therapy ; Pharmacology. Drug treatments ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</subject><ispartof>British journal of anaesthesia : BJA, 1998-09, Vol.81 (3), p.377-383</ispartof><rights>1998 British Journal of Anaesthesia</rights><rights>1998 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright British Medical Association Sep 1998</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c459t-9c864130580b62ec9f507025ddf30671928d62fa6543693b120400d452885f6d3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=2382575$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9861124$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Møiniche, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mikkelsen, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wetterslev, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dahl, J B</creatorcontrib><title>A qualitative systematic review of incisional local anaesthesia for postoperative pain relief after abdominal operations</title><title>British journal of anaesthesia : BJA</title><addtitle>Br J Anaesth</addtitle><addtitle>Br J Anaesth</addtitle><description>In a qualitative systematic review, we have evaluated randomized controlled trials (RCT) of incisional local anaesthesia compared with placebo or no treatment in the control of postoperative pain after open abdominal operations. Twenty-six studies with data from 1211 patients were considered appropriate for analysis. Five RCT considered inguinal herniotomy, four hysterectomy, eight cholecystectomy and nine studies a variety of surgical procedures. Outcome measures were pain scores, supplementary analgesics and time to first analgesic request. Efficacy was estimated by significant difference (P < 0.05), as reported in the original investigation. All studies of herniotomy showed a 2-7-h duration of clinically relevant improved pain relief. Results of hysterectomy studies were inconclusive, with two being negative. Five of the cholecystectomy studies showed significant differences but questionable clinical importance and validity in three. In various other procedures results were inconsistent and in some of minor clinical importance. Except for herniotomy, there was a lack of evidence for effect of incisional local anaesthesia on postoperative pain and further standardized studies are needed before recommendations can be made.</description><subject>Abdomen - surgery</subject><subject>Analgesics</subject><subject>Anesthesia</subject><subject>Anesthesia, Local - methods</subject><subject>Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy</subject><subject>Anesthetics, Local - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Cholecystectomy</subject><subject>Double-Blind Method</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Hernia, Inguinal - surgery</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Hysterectomy</subject><subject>Local anesthesia. Pain (treatment)</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Neuropharmacology</subject><subject>Pain, Postoperative - drug therapy</subject><subject>Pharmacology. Drug treatments</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</subject><issn>0007-0912</issn><issn>1471-6771</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1998</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkUtr3TAUhEVpSG_S7rotiFLSTX2jhyVZyxD6gkA2yVrI8hHVxbYcyU6af19dbLIohW4kwflmdJhB6D0le0o0v2wP9rKhe77nSr1CO1orWkml6Gu0I4SoimjK3qCznA-EUMW0OEWnupGUsnqHfl_hh8X2YbZzeAScn_MMQ3k7nOAxwBOOHofRhRziaHvcR1dOO1rI8y_IwWIfE55inuMEafWYbBiLug_gsfUzJGzbLg7hqN-oOOa36MTbPsO77T5H99--3l3_qG5uv_-8vrqpXC30XGnXyJpyIhrSSgZOe0EUYaLrPCdSUc2aTjJvpai51LyljNSEdLVgTSO87Pg5ulh9pxQflrK2GUJ20Pd2hLhkIzXRiilewI9_gYe4pLJ0NlQrTWshWYG-rJBLMecE3kwpDDY9G0rMsQ1T2jANNdyUNgr-YfNc2gG6F3iLv8w_bXObS7A-2WPULxjjDRNKFOzzisVl-t-HciWhRFr6Sya7AKODLiRws-li-LfwD9tSscY</recordid><startdate>19980901</startdate><enddate>19980901</enddate><creator>Møiniche, S</creator><creator>Mikkelsen, S</creator><creator>Wetterslev, J</creator><creator>Dahl, J B</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Oxford University Press</general><general>Oxford Publishing Limited (England)</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19980901</creationdate><title>A qualitative systematic review of incisional local anaesthesia for postoperative pain relief after abdominal operations</title><author>Møiniche, S ; Mikkelsen, S ; Wetterslev, J ; Dahl, J B</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c459t-9c864130580b62ec9f507025ddf30671928d62fa6543693b120400d452885f6d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1998</creationdate><topic>Abdomen - surgery</topic><topic>Analgesics</topic><topic>Anesthesia</topic><topic>Anesthesia, Local - methods</topic><topic>Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy</topic><topic>Anesthetics, Local - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Cholecystectomy</topic><topic>Double-Blind Method</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Hernia, Inguinal - surgery</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Hysterectomy</topic><topic>Local anesthesia. Pain (treatment)</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Neuropharmacology</topic><topic>Pain, Postoperative - drug therapy</topic><topic>Pharmacology. Drug treatments</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Møiniche, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mikkelsen, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wetterslev, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dahl, J B</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>British journal of anaesthesia : BJA</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Møiniche, S</au><au>Mikkelsen, S</au><au>Wetterslev, J</au><au>Dahl, J B</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A qualitative systematic review of incisional local anaesthesia for postoperative pain relief after abdominal operations</atitle><jtitle>British journal of anaesthesia : BJA</jtitle><stitle>Br J Anaesth</stitle><addtitle>Br J Anaesth</addtitle><date>1998-09-01</date><risdate>1998</risdate><volume>81</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>377</spage><epage>383</epage><pages>377-383</pages><issn>0007-0912</issn><eissn>1471-6771</eissn><coden>BJANAD</coden><abstract>In a qualitative systematic review, we have evaluated randomized controlled trials (RCT) of incisional local anaesthesia compared with placebo or no treatment in the control of postoperative pain after open abdominal operations. Twenty-six studies with data from 1211 patients were considered appropriate for analysis. Five RCT considered inguinal herniotomy, four hysterectomy, eight cholecystectomy and nine studies a variety of surgical procedures. Outcome measures were pain scores, supplementary analgesics and time to first analgesic request. Efficacy was estimated by significant difference (P < 0.05), as reported in the original investigation. All studies of herniotomy showed a 2-7-h duration of clinically relevant improved pain relief. Results of hysterectomy studies were inconclusive, with two being negative. Five of the cholecystectomy studies showed significant differences but questionable clinical importance and validity in three. In various other procedures results were inconsistent and in some of minor clinical importance. Except for herniotomy, there was a lack of evidence for effect of incisional local anaesthesia on postoperative pain and further standardized studies are needed before recommendations can be made.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>9861124</pmid><doi>10.1093/bja/81.3.377</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0007-0912 |
ispartof | British journal of anaesthesia : BJA, 1998-09, Vol.81 (3), p.377-383 |
issn | 0007-0912 1471-6771 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_69097273 |
source | MEDLINE; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Abdomen - surgery Analgesics Anesthesia Anesthesia, Local - methods Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy Anesthetics, Local - administration & dosage Biological and medical sciences Cholecystectomy Double-Blind Method Female Hernia, Inguinal - surgery Humans Hysterectomy Local anesthesia. Pain (treatment) Medical sciences Neuropharmacology Pain, Postoperative - drug therapy Pharmacology. Drug treatments Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic |
title | A qualitative systematic review of incisional local anaesthesia for postoperative pain relief after abdominal operations |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-24T21%3A43%3A14IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20qualitative%20systematic%20review%20of%20incisional%20local%20anaesthesia%20for%20postoperative%20pain%20relief%20after%20abdominal%20operations&rft.jtitle=British%20journal%20of%20anaesthesia%20:%20BJA&rft.au=M%C3%B8iniche,%20S&rft.date=1998-09-01&rft.volume=81&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=377&rft.epage=383&rft.pages=377-383&rft.issn=0007-0912&rft.eissn=1471-6771&rft.coden=BJANAD&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/bja/81.3.377&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E69097273%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=197914562&rft_id=info:pmid/9861124&rft_oup_id=10.1093/bja/81.3.377&rft_els_id=S0007091217395971&rfr_iscdi=true |