Abildgaard Jeffrey T, Chung Andrew S, Tokish John M, Hattrup Steven J
OrthoArizona, Phoenix, Arizona.
Department of Orthopedics, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona.
JBJS Rev. 2019 Jul;7(7):e8. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.RVW.18.00192.
There has been a surge in interest with regard to the utility of liposomal bupivacaine as part of a perioperative pain management protocol. The current study was proposed to critically assess the efficacy of liposomal bupivacaine as a local anesthetic for pain relief following orthopaedic procedures.
A systematic review of prospective, randomized trials involving liposomal bupivacaine was performed using searches of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. The primary outcomes of interest included postoperative subjective pain scores and narcotic consumption. The length of stay and postoperative mobility were reviewed as secondary outcomes.
Twenty-seven studies met inclusion criteria and were included for review. Twelve of 17 studies concluded that periarticular or local infiltrative liposomal bupivacaine offered no additive benefit compared with other local anesthetic injections. Peripheral nerve blocks without liposomal bupivacaine conferred more optimal pain relief and decreased narcotic consumption in the immediate postoperative period when compared with liposomal bupivacaine, with no differences thereafter. Twelve studies listed a conflict of interest related to the drug manufacturer (Pacira Pharmaceuticals). Eight of these studies (67%) demonstrated clinical superiority of liposomal bupivacaine when compared with the study control. In the 15 studies that did not show a conflict of interest, only 1 study (7%) demonstrated therapeutic superiority with use of periarticular liposomal bupivacaine when compared with a historical cohort that received no local or regional anesthesia.
Current prospective, randomized controlled trials in patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery fail to support the routine use of liposomal bupivacaine compared with other local injectable analgesics, particularly in the setting of knee replacement surgery. We were unable to find consistent support for the potential of superior pain relief and narcotic use reduction with the use of liposomal bupivacaine.
Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
脂质体布比卡因作为围手术期疼痛管理方案的一部分,其效用引发了人们极大的兴趣。本研究旨在严格评估脂质体布比卡因作为骨科手术后缓解疼痛的局部麻醉剂的疗效。
通过检索PubMed、Embase和Cochrane数据库,对涉及脂质体布比卡因的前瞻性随机试验进行系统评价。主要关注的结果包括术后主观疼痛评分和麻醉药物消耗量。住院时间和术后活动能力作为次要结果进行评估。
27项研究符合纳入标准并被纳入综述。17项研究中的12项得出结论,与其他局部麻醉剂注射相比,关节周围或局部浸润性脂质体布比卡因没有额外益处。与脂质体布比卡因相比,不含脂质体布比卡因的周围神经阻滞在术后即刻能提供更优的疼痛缓解并减少麻醉药物消耗,之后则无差异。12项研究列出了与药物制造商(Pacira制药公司)相关的利益冲突。其中8项研究(67%)表明脂质体布比卡因与研究对照相比具有临床优势。在15项未显示利益冲突的研究中,只有1项研究(7%)表明与未接受局部或区域麻醉的历史队列相比,使用关节周围脂质体布比卡因具有治疗优势。
目前针对接受骨科手术患者的前瞻性随机对照试验未能支持脂质体布比卡因与其他局部注射用镇痛药相比的常规使用,尤其是在膝关节置换手术中。我们未能找到一致的证据支持使用脂质体布比卡因在缓解疼痛和减少麻醉药物使用方面具有优势。
治疗性I级。有关证据级别的完整描述,请参阅作者指南。