From the *Department of Anesthesia and Perioperative Medicine, and †Department of Medicine, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2017 May/Jun;42(3):319-326. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0000000000000571.
Dexamethasone is a useful adjuvant in regional anesthesia that is used to prolong the duration of analgesia for peripheral nerve blocks. Recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated conflicting results as to whether perineural versus intravenous (IV) administration is superior in this regard, and the perineural use of dexamethasone remains off-label. Therefore, we sought to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs.
In accordance with PRISMA guidelines, we performed a random-effects meta-analysis of RCTs comparing perineural versus IV dexamethasone with duration of analgesia as the primary outcome.
Eleven RCTs met the inclusion criteria with a total of 1076 subjects. Perineural dexamethasone prolonged the duration of analgesia by 3.77 hours (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.87-5.68 hours; P < 0.001) compared to IV dexamethasone, with high statistical heterogeneity. For secondary outcomes, perineural dexamethasone prolonged the duration of both motor (3.47 hours [95% CI, 1.49-5.45]; P < 0.001) and sensory (2.28 hours [95% CI, 0.38-4.17]; P = 0.019) block compared to IV administration. Furthermore, perineural dexamethasone patients consumed slightly less oral opioids at 24 hours than IV dexamethasone patients (7.1 mg of oral morphine equivalents [95% CI, 0.74-13.5 mg]; P = 0.029), and there were no statistically significant differences in the other secondary outcomes. Notably, no increase in adverse events was detected.
Perineural dexamethasone prolongs the duration of analgesia across the RCTs included in our meta-analysis. The magnitude of effect of 3.77 hours raises the question as to whether perineural dexamethasone should be administered routinely over its IV counterpart-or reserved for selected patients where such prolongation would be clinically important.
地塞米松是局部麻醉的一种有效辅助药物,用于延长周围神经阻滞的镇痛持续时间。最近的随机对照试验(RCT)结果显示,在这方面,神经周围给药与静脉内(IV)给药相比是否具有优势存在争议,且地塞米松的神经周围使用仍属于超适应证用药。因此,我们旨在进行一项 RCT 的系统评价和荟萃分析。
根据 PRISMA 指南,我们对 RCT 进行了随机效应荟萃分析,比较了神经周围与 IV 地塞米松的镇痛持续时间作为主要结局。
11 项 RCT 符合纳入标准,共纳入 1076 例患者。与 IV 地塞米松相比,神经周围地塞米松可使镇痛持续时间延长 3.77 小时(95%置信区间 [CI],1.87-5.68 小时;P < 0.001),具有高度统计学异质性。对于次要结局,与 IV 给药相比,神经周围地塞米松可使运动(3.47 小时[95%CI,1.49-5.45];P < 0.001)和感觉阻滞(2.28 小时[95%CI,0.38-4.17];P = 0.019)的持续时间延长。此外,与 IV 地塞米松相比,神经周围地塞米松患者在 24 小时时口服阿片类药物的消耗量略少(7.1mg 口服吗啡等效物[95%CI,0.74-13.5mg];P = 0.029),其他次要结局无统计学差异。值得注意的是,未发现不良反应增加。
神经周围地塞米松可延长纳入本荟萃分析的 RCT 中镇痛的持续时间。3.77 小时的效应量大小引发了这样一个问题,即神经周围地塞米松是否应常规用于周围神经阻滞,而不是静脉内给药,或者保留用于那些需要延长镇痛持续时间的患者,因为这种延长可能具有临床重要性。