METHODS:BACKGROUND:Maintaining a balance between nociception and analgesia perioperatively reduces morbidity and improves outcomes. Current intraoperative analgesic strategies are based on subjective and nonspecific parameters. The high-frequency heart rate (HR) variability index is purported to assess the balance between nociception and analgesia in patients under general anesthesia. This prospective observational study investigated whether intraoperative changes in the high-frequency HR variability index correlate with clinically relevant nociceptive stimulation and the addition of analgesics. METHODS:Instantaneous and mean high-frequency HR variability indexes were measured continuously in 79 adult subjects undergoing general anesthesia for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The indexes were compared just before and 2 minutes after direct laryngoscopy, orogastric tube placement, first skin incision, and abdominal insufflation and just before and 6 minutes after the administration of IV hydromorphone. RESULTS:Data from 65 subjects were included in the final analysis. The instantaneous index decreased after skin incision ([SEM], 58.7 [2.0] vs 47.5 [2.0]; P < .001) and abdominal insufflation (54.0 [2.0] vs 46.3 [2.0]; P = .002). There was no change in the instantaneous index after laryngoscopy (47.2 [2.2] vs 40.3 [2.3]; P = .026) and orogastric tube placement (49.8 [2.3] vs 45.4 [2.0]; P = .109). The instantaneous index increased after hydromorphone administration (58.2 [1.9] vs 64.8 [1.8]; P = .003). CONCLUSIONS:In adult subjects under general anesthesia for laparoscopic cholecystectomy, changes in the high-frequency HR variability index reflect alterations in the balance between nociception and analgesia. This index might be used intraoperatively to titrate analgesia for individual patients. Further testing is necessary to determine whether the intraoperative use of the index affects patient outcomes.

METHODS:INTRODUCTION:Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a prominent clinical problem, with limited effective therapies. Preliminary non-randomized clinical trial data support that Scrambler Therapy is helpful in this situation. METHODS:Patients were eligible if they had CIPN symptoms for at least 3 months and CIPN-related tingling or pain at least 4/10 in severity during the week prior to registration. They were randomized to receive Scrambler Therapy versus transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for 2 weeks. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were utilized to measure efficacy and toxicity daily for 2 weeks during therapy and then weekly for 8 additional weeks. RESULTS:This study accrued 50 patients, 25 to each of the 2 study arms; 46 patients were evaluable. There were twice as many Scrambler-treated patients who had at least a 50% documented improvement during the 2 treatment weeks, from their baseline pain, tingling, and numbness scores, when compared with the TENS-treated patients (from 36 to 56% compared with 16-28% for each symptom). Global Impression of Change scores for "neuropathy symptoms," pain, and quality of life were similarly improved during the treatment weeks. Patients in the Scrambler group were more likely than those in the TENS group to recommend their treatment to other patients, during both the 2-week treatment period and the 8-week follow-up period (p < 0.0001). Minimal toxicity was observed. CONCLUSIONS:The results from this pilot trial were positive, supporting the conduct of further investigations regarding the use of Scrambler Therapy for treating CIPN.

METHODS:INTRODUCTION:Enhanced recovery programmes are established as an essential part of laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Optimal pain management is central to the success of an enhanced recovery programme and is acknowledged to be an important patient reported outcome measure. A variety of analgesia strategies are employed in elective laparoscopic colorectal surgery ranging from patient-controlled analgesia to local anaesthetic wound infiltration catheters. However, there is little evidence regarding the optimal analgesia strategy in this cohort of patients. The LapCoGesic study aimed to explore differences in analgesia strategies employed for patients undergoing elective laparoscopic colorectal surgery and to assess whether this variation in practice has an impact on patient-reported and clinical outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS:A prospective, multicentre, observational cohort study of consecutive patients undergoing elective laparoscopic colorectal resection was undertaken over a two-month period. The primary outcome measure was postoperative pain scores at 24 hours. Data analysis was conducted using SPSS version 22. RESULTS:A total of 103 patients undergoing elective laparoscopic colorectal surgery were included in the study. Thoracic epidural was used in 4 (3.9%) patients, spinal diamorphine in 56 (54.4%) patients and patient-controlled analgesia in 77 (74.8%) patients. The use of thoracic epidural and spinal diamorphine were associated with lower pain scores on day 1 postoperatively (P < 0.05). The use of patient-controlled analgesia was associated with significantly higher postoperative pain scores and pain severity. DISCUSSION:Postoperative pain is managed in a variable manner in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery, which has an impact on patient reported outcomes of pain scores and pain severity.