AI Article Synopsis
- Shoulder arthroplasty is growing in popularity, and effective postoperative pain management is crucial for successful outcomes, with liposomal bupivacaine (LB) emerging as a potential solution for extended pain relief.
- A clinical trial compared two methods: continuous interscalene nerve block (CISB) and a single shot of LB, evaluating pain control, narcotic use, patient satisfaction, and functional outcomes in 70 patients post-surgery.
- The study found LB provided similar pain relief to CISB within the first 24 hours but showed higher long-term shoulder function scores, fewer complications, and lower overall costs, suggesting LB is an effective alternative in pain management for shoulder arthroplasty.
Article Abstract
Background: Shoulder arthroplasty is the fastest growing joint replacement surgery in the United States, and optimal postoperative pain management is critical to optimize outcomes for these surgeries. Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) has gained popularity for its potential to provide extended postoperative pain relief with possibly fewer side effects. The goal of this study was to assess the impact of LB compared with continuous interscalene nerve block (CISB) in terms of postoperative pain control, outpatient pain scores, and patient-reported and functional outcomes after shoulder arthroplasty surgery.
Methods: A prospective randomized controlled clinical trial compared consecutive patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty treated with CISB vs. LB with a single bolus interscalene block. The primary outcome measures included pain assessment up to 24 hours after surgery; in addition, all doses and times of narcotics administered during the inpatient stay were recorded. Patient-reported outcome measures for pain, satisfaction, and functional outcomes were recorded postoperatively.
Results: A total of 70 of 74 consecutive patients who underwent shoulder arthroplasty were included in the study. The LB group had equivalent narcotic use, pain scores, and time to first narcotic rescue compared with the CISB group within the first 24 hours (P > .05). The LB group had higher American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score and Penn Shoulder Score at final follow-up. There was an increased number of complications and cost for the CISB group.
Conclusion: This prospective randomized controlled trial demonstrated that LB provides excellent postoperative pain relief for shoulder arthroplasty patients. In addition, LB had fewer complications and lower cost, making it a promising addition to a multimodal pain regimen for shoulder arthroplasty.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2017.06.044 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Risk factors for infection after primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty - A systematic review with meta-analysis.
J Clin Orthop Trauma
January 2025
Department of Orthopaedics, Sri Lakshmi Narayana Institute of Medical Sciences, Chennai, 605502, India.
Purpose: Accurate identification of radiographic landmarks is fundamental to characterizing glenohumeral relationships before and sequentially after shoulder arthroplasty, but manual annotation of these radiographs is laborious. We report on the use of artificial intelligence, specifically computer vision and deep learning models (DLMs), in determining the accuracy of DLM-identified and surgeon identified (SI) landmarks before and after anatomic shoulder arthroplasty.
Materials & Methods: 240 true anteroposterior radiographs were annotated using 11 standard osseous landmarks to train a deep learning model.
Component Mix-Match for Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty Revision: A Case Report.
Cureus
December 2024
Trauma and Orthopaedics, Northampton General Hospital, Northampton, GBR.
Although mixing and matching components is a common, safe, and well-documented practice in hip revision surgery, our extensive search indicates that it has not been previously reported for shoulder arthroplasty. This case report presents the use of mixed implants in shoulder revision surgery to reduce morbidity and address flaws in the initial implant design. We describe a case of a patient with multiple epiphyseal dysplasia who was treated for osteoarthritis in his left shoulder with an anatomic shoulder replacement in 2014.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFComplications following shoulder arthroplasty: A review of the recent literature.
J Clin Orthop Trauma
January 2025
Medway Maritime Hospital, Windmill Road, Gillingham, Kent, ME7 5NY, United Kingdom.
Do We Need to Reconsider How We Gauge Success After Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty? A Study of Thresholds Optimized for Patient Satisfaction Using the Simple Shoulder Test.
J Shoulder Elbow Surg
January 2025
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, University of Washington Medical Center, 1959 NE Pacific Street, Box 356500, Seattle, WA 98195-6500. Electronic address:
Background: Clinically important improvement after total shoulder arthroplasty is often assessed with shoulder-specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) quantifying reduction in pain and restoration in function. It is unclear if commonly utilized threshold such as minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), or patient acceptable symptom state (PASS), represent optimal improvement from the patients' perspective. The objectives of this study were to utilize the Simple Shoulder Test to: 1) compare commonly utilized thresholds for change in score and final score to thresholds optimized to patient satisfaction using receiver operative characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, and 2) determine the impact of using different thresholds on reporting of independent predictors of successful outcome in terms of patient satisfaction.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFWant AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!