Regional anaesthesia: Overview

Abstract
Purpose of review: Regional anesthesia is gaining attention as a valuable component of multimodal, opioid-sparing analgesia in cardiac surgery, where improving the patient's quality of recovery while minimizing the harms of opioid administration are key points of emphasis in perioperative care. This review serves as an outline of recent advancements in a variety of applications of regional analgesia for cardiac surgery.

Recent findings: Growing interest in regional analgesia, particularly the use of newer "chest wall blocks", has led to accumulating evidence for the efficacy of multiple regional techniques in cardiac surgery. These include a variety of technical approaches, with results consistently demonstrating optimized pain control and reduced opioid requirements. Regional and pain management experts have worked to derive consensus around nerve block nomenclature, which will be foundational to establish best practice, design and report future research consistently, improve medical education, and generally advance our knowledge in this vital area of perioperative patient care.

Summary: The field of regional analgesia for cardiac surgery has matured over the last several years. A variety of regional techniques have been described and shown to be efficacious as part of the multimodal, opioid-sparing approach to pain management in the cardiac surgical setting.

Abstract
There have been some modest recent advancements in the research of Complex Regional Pain Syndrome, yet the amount and quality of the work in this complicated multifactorial disease remains low (with some notable exceptions; e.g., the recent work on the dorsal root ganglion stimulation). The semi-systematic (though in some cases narrative) approach to review is necessary so that we might treat our patients while waiting for "better research." This semi-systematic review was conducted by experts in the field, (deliberately) some of whom are promising young researchers supplemented by the experience of "elder statesman" researchers, who all mention the system they have used to examine the literature. What we found is generally low- to medium-quality research with small numbers of subjects; however, there are some recent exceptions to this. The primary reason for this paucity of research is the fact that this is a rare disease, and it is very difficult to acquire a sufficient sample size for statistical significance using traditional statistical approaches. Several larger trials have failed, probably due to using the broad general diagnostic criteria (the "Budapest" criteria) in a multifactorial/multi-mechanism disease. Responsive subsets can often be identified in these larger trials, but not sufficient to achieve statistically significant results in the general diagnostic grouping. This being the case the authors have necessarily included data from less compelling protocols, including trials such as case series and even in some instances case reports/empirical information. In the humanitarian spirit of treating our often desperate patients with this rare syndrome, without great evidence, we must take what data we can find (as in this work) and tailor a treatment regime for each patient.

Background: Adjuvant regional anesthesia is often selected for patients or procedures with high risk of pulmonary complications after general anesthesia. The benefit of adjuvant regional anesthesia to reduce postoperative pulmonary complications remains uncertain. In a prospective observational multicenter study, patients scheduled for non-cardiothoracic surgery with at least one postoperative pulmonary complication surprisingly received adjuvant regional anesthesia more frequently than those with no complications. We hypothesized that, after adjusting for surgical and patient complexity variables, the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications would not be associated with adjuvant regional anesthesia.

Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of a prospective observational multicenter study including 1202 American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status 3 patients undergoing non-cardiothoracic surgery. Patients were classified as receiving either adjuvant regional anesthesia or general anesthesia alone. Predefined pulmonary complications within the first seven postoperative days were prospectively identified. Groups were compared using bivariable and multivariable hierarchical logistic regression analyses for the outcome of at least one postoperative pulmonary complication.

Results: Adjuvant regional anesthesia was performed in 266 (22.1%) patients and not performed in 936 (77.9%). The incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications was greater in patients receiving adjuvant regional anesthesia (42.1%) than in patients without it (30.9%) (site adjusted p = 0.007), but this association was not confirmed after adjusting for covariates (adjusted OR 1.37; 95% CI, 0.83-2.25; p = 0.165).

Conclusion: After adjusting for surgical and patient complexity, adjuvant regional anesthesia versus general anesthesia alone was not associated with a greater incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications in this multicenter cohort of non-cardiothoracic surgery patients.