Daily Anesthesiology Research Analysis
Analyzed 120 papers and selected 3 impactful papers.
Summary
Three impactful studies span perioperative critical care, obstetric regional anesthesia, and orthopedic analgesia. A multi-society, GRADE-based guideline updates comprehensive cardiogenic shock management; a prospective obstetric study shows color Doppler can localize epidural catheters with high specificity; and a large propensity-matched cohort finds no clinically meaningful benefit from adding a genicular nerve block to adductor canal block plus IPACK in total knee arthroplasty.
Research Themes
- Consensus-based critical care pathways for cardiogenic shock
- Ultrasound innovations to confirm epidural catheter placement in labor
- Value (or lack thereof) of additive peripheral nerve blocks in multimodal arthroplasty analgesia
Selected Articles
1. Experts' recommendations for the management of adult patients with cardiogenic shock.
This multi-society, GRADE-based consensus provides 41 recommendations across six domains of cardiogenic shock care, emphasizing shock team organization, early etiologic treatment, norepinephrine as first-line vasopressor, selective inotrope use, and careful selection for temporary mechanical circulatory support. The guidance aims to standardize staging, avoid delays in culprit-lesion therapies, and balance organ support with prognosis.
Impact: Guidelines integrating critical care, cardiology, anesthesia, and surgery set a contemporary, evidence-graded standard for cardiogenic shock, a high-mortality syndrome with practice variability.
Clinical Implications: Implement structured shock teams and regional networks; prioritize immediate culprit revascularization or urgent valve interventions; use norepinephrine first-line, titrate inotropes selectively; reserve Impella or VA-ECMO for carefully selected patients via team discussion; apply standardized staging and prognostication while avoiding premature WLST.
Key Findings
- 41 recommendations across six domains (teams/centers, symptomatic care, etiologic management, organ support, temporary MCS, de-escalation/early post-CS).
- Norepinephrine recommended as first-line vasopressor; inotropes used selectively.
- Early etiologic treatment (culprit-lesion PCI, urgent valve intervention) is central to outcome improvement.
- Temporary mechanical circulatory support (Impella, VA-ECMO) reserved for selected patients after expert team discussion.
Methodological Strengths
- GRADE methodology with explicit rating of evidence and recommendation strength
- Multi-society, multidisciplinary authorship with strong consensus across recommendations
Limitations
- Several recommendations rely on low-quality evidence or expert opinion where trials are lacking
- Guideline development focused on French/European context; implementation may vary by resources and systems
Future Directions: Prospective evaluations of standardized shock team pathways, patient selection criteria for temporary MCS, and biomarker/imaging-enhanced prognostication are needed.
The last specific international European recommendations regarding the management of cardiogenic shock (CS) regardless of the etiology were issued over 10 years ago. We present herein recommendations for the management of CS in adults, developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system by an expert group of from the French Intensive Care Society [Société de Réanimation de Langue Française (SRLF)] and the French Society of Cardiology [Société Française de Cardiologie (SFC)], with the partic
2. Performance of M-mode and Color Doppler Ultrasound for Confirming Epidural Catheter Placement in Laboring women: A Prospective Cohort Study.
In 100 laboring women, color Doppler localized epidural catheters with 78% sensitivity and 100% specificity, outperforming M-mode (49% sensitivity; 100% specificity) and enabling faster detection. Using either modality increased sensitivity to 87%, though negative visualization could not exclude correct placement.
Impact: Introduces a feasible, bedside ultrasound strategy to directly visualize epidural catheter function in obstetric anesthesia, potentially reducing uncertainty after placement.
Clinical Implications: Color Doppler, alone or combined with M-mode, can augment confirmation of epidural catheter placement in labor. Absence of visualization should not trigger removal; instead, use multimodal assessment (clinical efficacy, aspiration tests) while ultrasound can support troubleshooting and documentation.
Key Findings
- Color Doppler detected epidural catheter position with 78% sensitivity and 100% specificity; M-mode achieved 49% sensitivity and 100% specificity.
- Combining modalities increased sensitivity to 87% with 100% specificity; color Doppler provided faster detection (p < 0.001).
- Two of 15 undetected cases by both modalities corresponded to epidural analgesia failure requiring repositioning.
Methodological Strengths
- Prospective design with predefined ultrasound criteria in a real-world obstetric cohort
- Direct head-to-head comparison of two ultrasound modalities with performance metrics (sensitivity/specificity, detection time)
Limitations
- Single-center study without a universal gold-standard imaging reference for catheter tip position
- Limited negative predictive value; absence of signal could not rule out correct placement
Future Directions: Multicenter validation, standardized scanning protocols, correlation with fluoroscopic or MRI positioning, and assessment of impact on analgesia success and complication rates.
BACKGROUND: Correct epidural catheter (EC) placement is essential for effective epidural analgesia (EA) during labour, yet confirmation remains indirect. B-mode ultrasound facilitates EA placement but does not reliably visualise the EC. Alternative modalities such as M-mode and colour Doppler (cD) ultrasonography may improve EC localisation, though evidence in obstetrics remains limited. This study evaluated the feasibility of detecting the EC within the epidural space (ES) using M-mode, with secondary objectives of comparing the diagnostic pe
3. What Is the Association Between Adding Genicular Nerve Block to Adductor Canal Block and Infiltration Between the Popliteal Artery and Capsule of the Knee and Perioperative Outcomes After Primary TKA?
In more than 7,800 matched TKA cases across inpatient and outpatient settings, adding a genicular nerve block to ACB/IPACK produced no clinically meaningful improvements in pain, opioid consumption, PACU pain, time to physical therapy clearance, or 90-day opioid refills. Findings argue against routine GNB addition within comprehensive multimodal protocols.
Impact: A large, rigorously matched analysis provides high-confidence negative evidence that can immediately streamline perioperative analgesic workflows and avoid unnecessary procedures.
Clinical Implications: Do not routinely add a genicular nerve block to ACB/IPACK in primary TKA when using standardized multimodal analgesia; instead, focus on protocol adherence and identify potential beneficiary subgroups prospectively.
Key Findings
- After 1:1 propensity matching, inpatient cohorts (n=2,803 per group) and outpatient cohorts (n=1,102 per group) showed no clinically meaningful differences in pain scores or opioid use.
- No meaningful differences in PACU pain, time to physical therapy clearance (inpatient or outpatient), or 90-day opioid refill rates.
- Standardized multimodal analgesia was applied across groups, supporting generalizability within such protocols.
Methodological Strengths
- Very large sample with inpatient and outpatient strata and standardized analgesic protocols
- Robust 1:1 propensity score matching including demographics, psychosocial factors, prior opioid status, anesthesia and perioperative details
Limitations
- Retrospective design with potential residual confounding and practice variation in block performance
- Single high-volume academic center; external validity to other settings may vary
Future Directions: Prospective RCTs targeting hypothesized responder subgroups (e.g., high anterior knee pain phenotypes) and cost-effectiveness analyses of additional blocks.
BACKGROUND: Limited evidence exists on the functional and analgesic efficacy of adding a genicular nerve block to an adductor canal block (ACB) plus infiltration between the popliteal artery and posterior knee capsule (IPACK) for TKA. Filling this knowledge gap would be important because if this approach were to be effective, patients could benefit from an additional opioid-free, motor-sparing analgesic modality. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Is the addition of a genicular nerve block to an ACB/IPACK associated with better pain management during hospitalization? (2) Is the addition of a genicular nerve block to an ACB/IPACK associated with better pain management in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU)? (3) Is the addition of a genicular nerve block to an ACB/IPACK associated with earlier time to physical therapy (PT) clearance? (4) Is the addition of a genicular nerve block to an ACB/IPACK associated with lower incidence of opioid refills within 90 days postoperatively? METHODS: This was a retrospective, propensity score-matched cohort study including patients undergoing TKA from January 2021 to December 2024 at a high-volume academic institution specializing in inpatient and outpatient arthroplasty. All adults undergoing primary elective unilateral TKA for primary osteoarthritis with administration of an ACB/IPACK, with or without a genicular nerve block, were assessed for eligibility (n = 20,648). After excluding patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status of > III; patients receiving general anesthesia, additional peripheral nerve blocks, or acupuncture; and patients discharged to a facility, a total of 10,156 patients undergoing inpatient TKA and 2814 patients undergoing outpatient TKA were considered eligible for propensity score matching. After a 1:1 propensity score match on baseline demographic characteristics, psychosocial factors, active opioid prior to admission, perioperative and anesthesia details, and first PT visit pass or fail, 2803 and 1102 patients from each group were analyzed for inpatient and outpatient TKAs. The median (IQR) age was 71 years (64 to 76) for inpatient TKAs and 65 years (60 to 71) for outpatient TKAs; 64% and 48% were female, respectively, and no differences among groups within the same setting were observed after matching. Aside for the comparison of interest, the same standardized perioperative pain management protocol was followed for all patients. For our first aim and second aim, we evaluated median and highest pain scores and opioid consumption. For our third aim, we assessed PT clearance, and for our fourth aim, we assessed incidence of opioid refills within 90 days. A difference in pain of ≥ 2 on the numeric rating scale (NRS) and a difference in opioid consumption of ≥ 10 oral morphine milligram equivalents (OMEs) were considered clinically meaningful. For the inpatient setting, a 4-hour median difference in time to PT clearance was considered clinically meaningful, and for the outpatient setting, any statistically significant difference with a median time to PT clearance of < 12 hours for either group was considered clinically meaningful. RESULTS: During hospitalization, we found no difference between the intervention and control group in terms of highest pain and median pain. In terms of total opioid consumption, we found no clinically important difference between the intervention group and control group (median [IQR] NRS score 55 [30 to 82] versus 52 [30 to 80]; p = 0.001) in the inpatient setting and no difference in the outpatient setting. In the PACU, we found no difference in terms of highest pain and median pain in the inpatient setting and no clinically important difference for highest pain (median [IQR] NRS score 7 [5 to 8] versus 7 [6 to 8]; p = 0.03) in the outpatient setting. In the inpatient setting, no clinically important difference was observed between the intervention and control group for opioid consumption (median [IQR] OMEs 53 [30 to 82] versus 48 [25 to 75]; p < 0.001); no difference was observed in the outpatient setting. We found no clinically meaningful difference between the intervention group and control group in terms of time to PT clearance in the inpatient setting (median [IQR] 21 hours [18 to 25] versus 22 hours [19 to 41]; p < 0.001) and the outpatient setting (median [IQR] 13 hours [4 to 16] versus 14 hours [4 to 16]; p = 0.001). We found no difference in terms of incidence of opioid refills within 90 days. CONCLUSION: The associations we found do not justify the addition of a genicular nerve block in patients undergoing inpatient and outpatient TKA with a comprehensive multimodal analgesia protocol given the modest, at best, effect size observed, its potential financial cost and time cost, and risk for adverse events. Our study suggested that there are subpopulations in the general TKA population that could potentially benefit from the addition of genicular nerve block, but until future evidence identifies these subpopulations, our data suggest that the addition of a genicular nerve block was not associated with any clinically meaningful benefit in the general TKA population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.