These authors note that Exparel® has recently gained favor for use in interscalene regional block for shoulder surgery, but that it apparently has adverse effects in addition to those associated with interscalene blocks using other agents.
They conducted aretrospective chart review of all patients undergoing shoulder surgery with an Exparel® interscalene block in an 8-month period.
352 patients were included of which 58 (16.5%) had postoperative complications related to their interscalene block, including 37 (10.5%) minor complications and 21 (6.0%) major complications leading to an emergency department visit.
Univariate analysis yielded ASA score (p=0.03) as a significant predictor of minor complications. A multivariate logistic regression analysis yielded ASA score (p=0.096, Odds ratio=1.64) as trending towards being a significant risk factor for minor complications.
Univariate analysis yielded age (p=0.006), ASA score (p=0.009), and CCI score (p=0.002) as significant predictors of major complications. Multivariate logistic regression analysis yielded ASA score (p=0.049, Odds ratio=2.25) as the only significant risk factor for major complications.
The authors recommended that surgeons and anesthesiologists should strongly consider a patient’s ASA score, in addition to their pulmonary and cardiac history, when deciding whether the patient is an appropriate candidate for interscalene regional block using Exparel® for shoulder surgery.
The authors recommended that surgeons and anesthesiologists should strongly consider a patient’s ASA score, in addition to their pulmonary and cardiac history, when deciding whether the patient is an appropriate candidate for interscalene regional block using Exparel® for shoulder surgery.
Comment: Recognized complications of interscalene blocks include transient and permanent brachial plexus injury, recurrent laryngeal nerve blockade, Horner's syndrome, hematoma, brain damage, bradycardia, pneumothorax, hypotension, carotid artery puncture, and rebound pain.
In the four decades of our arthroplasty practice we have found that brachial plexus blocks do not add to patient satisfaction or patient safety. Using a preoperative cocktail of Celebrex, Gabapentin, and Tylenol, and a rapid postoperative transition to oral analgesics, patients are able to start active assisted range of motion exercises immediately after surgery, avoiding the cost and risks of interscalene blocks.
Here are some other related articles
These authors list the shortcomings of interscalene brachial plexus block as technical failure and rebound pain. They could also have added to these shortcomings (1) increase cost, (2) increase time, (3) increased rate of complications, (4) risk of phrenic nerve palsy (5) patient frustration with having a 'dead arm' until the block wears off, and (6) inability to do a post op neurological exam.
They randomized patients undergoing primary shoulder arthroplasty to either interscalene brachial plexus block or intraoperative soft-tissue infiltration of bupivacaine liposome injectable suspension.
They found that the mean total postoperative narcotic consumption over 24 hours after the surgical procedure was 14.8 ± 11.3 morphine equivalent units in the block group compared with 14.4 ± 16.8 morphine equivalent units in the suspension group (p = 0.849). The mean VAS pain score was significantly lower in the blockade group than in the suspension group at 0 hours postoperatively (0.8 ± 2.2 compared with 3.3 ± 2.7 points; p < 0.001) and at 8 hours postoperatively (1.4 ± 2.4 compared with 3.2 ± 2.2 points; p < 0.001), but it was not significantly different at 16 hours postoperatively (4.3 ± 2.8 compared with 3.8 ± 2.4 points; p = 0.348). The VAS pain scores were significantly higher (p = 0.021) in the block group (4.9 ± 2.7 points) compared with the suspension group (3.9 ± 2.3 points) at 24 hours postoperatively.
What is particularly concerning about the VAS pain scores for interscalene block is that at 24 hours the pain was worse than it was preoperatively as shown in this graph
The costs of these two modalities were not available.
They concluded that interscalene brachial plexus block provided improved pain scores for the first 8 hours after the surgical procedure, pain scores were worse at 24 hours. The optimal postoperative pain regimen for shoulder arthroplasty and the cost-effectiveness of analgesic techniques require further investigation.
Comment: In our primary and revision arthroplasty practice we use neither nerve blocks or the liposomal bupivacaine. Instead we use patient controlled analgesia for the first few hours after surgery and transition to oral analgesics the evening of surgery. With this protocol patients are able to comfortably start continuous passive motion and assisted range of motion exercises immediately after surgery in the recovery room. This is a very cost effective approach, avoiding the increased cost of nerve blocks or the liposomal bupivacaine as well as the time, complications, technical failure, and rebound pain of nerve blocks. Patient satisfaction is high, even among those taking substantial narcotics preoperatively.
Readers may wish to review a similar study:
These authors studied 57 patients undergoing primary shoulder arthroplasty randomized to receive either intraoperative local infiltration of local liposomal bupivacaine (LB) 20 mL bupivacaine/20 mL saline) or preoperative interscalene nerve block (INB).
Outcomes showed a significant increase in pain in the LB group between 0 and 8 hours postoperatively (mean [standard deviation] 5.3 [2.2] vs. 2.5 [3.0]; P = .001).
A significant increase in intravenous morphine equivalents was found in the INB group at 13 to 16 hours (mean [standard deviation] 1.2 [0.9] vs. 0.6 [0.7]; P = .01). No significant differences were found in any variable after postoperative day 0 between the 2 groups.
They concluded that an increase in early postoperative pain on the day of surgery was found with LB, whereas the INB group required more narcotics at the end of the day.
In their discussion, the authors review the safety and complication rates of INB. Weber and Jain evaluated the efficacy of INB in a review of 218 patients. They found that 13% of INBs in their study failed, and 5% of their patients had an abnormal neurologic response the day after surgery. Misamore et al demonstrated that 16% of patients undergoing INB experience immediate postoperative block side effects, with 4.4% of patients experiencing persistent neurologic complications. This study displayed similar results, with 3% of patients experiencing a persistent neurologic complication. A study by Fredrickson and Price suggested that an increase in postoperative motor blockade can be experienced with INB and is associated with a reduction in patient satisfaction.These findings along with the desire for earlymobilization of the operative extremity suggest the utility of an alternative method for pain control in shoulder arthroplasty.
Evaluating the pharmacokinetics of INB, Busch et al found that the time of pain onset after single-injection ropivacaine INB was 10 hours. Weber and Jain similarly evaluated the efficacy of lidocaine and bupivacaine INB and found that the mean duration of action of the block was 9 hours. This study demonstrated that INB had similar results, with pain levels quickly rising after 8 hours postoperatively. Goon et al used a single injection of ropivacaine (25 mL 0.375%) INB in shoulder arthroplasty patients and found the block’s effects to last on average 18 hours. This study found similar findings with a peak in pain level seen 21 to 24 hours postoperatively in the INB group. Whereas INB was more effective at controlling pain in the first 8 hours postoperatively, there was a trend toward acute rebound pain at the end of POD 0 as the block’s effects declined.
Comment: Again our reasons for avoiding interscaline blocks for shoulder arthroplasty include (1) desire for documentation of neurological status immediately after surgery, (2) wanting to avoid having a flail unprotected arm as we start immediate postoperative motion exercises, (3) eliminating the risk of block-related neurologic or pulmonary complications, (4) avoiding phrenic nerve paresis with the attendant respiratory compromise, (5) eliminating the inconvenience of a failed block, (6) reducing the cost associated with two different anesthetics (block + general), (7) avoiding the problem of acute rebound pain in the middle of the first postoperative night, and (8) the reluctance of some patients to have a needle placed in their neck.
See also
===
How you can support research in shoulder surgery Click on this link.
To see our new series of youtube videos on important shoulder surgeries and how they are done, click here.
Use the "Search" box to the right to find other topics of interest to you.
You may be interested in some of our most visited web pages arthritis, total shoulder, ream and run, reverse total shoulder, CTA arthroplasty, and rotator cuff surgery as well as the 'ream and run essentials'
