Comparison of Postoperative Opioid Consumption of Paravertebral Block and Erector Spinae Plane Block After Thoracotomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

被引:2
作者
Duran, Mustafa [1 ]
Kus, Alparslan [2 ]
Aksu, Can [3 ]
Cesur, Sevim [4 ]
Yoeruekoglu, Hadi Ufuk [5 ]
Hosten, Tulay [6 ]
机构
[1] Marmara Univ Pendik Egitim Arastirma, Anesthesiol & Reanimat, Istanbul, Turkiye
[2] Kocaeli Univ, Anesthesiol & Reanimat, Kocaeli, Turkiye
[3] Kocaeli Univ, Anesthesiol, Kocaeli, Turkiye
[4] Kocaeli Univ, Anesthesiol, Sch Med, Kocaeli, Turkiye
[5] Kinik State Hosp, Anesthesiol & Reanimat, Izmir, Turkiye
[6] Kocaeli Univ, Fac Med, Anesthesiol & Reanimat, Kocaeli, Turkiye
关键词
thoracic anesthesiology; regional anesthesiology; erector spinae plane block (espb); thoracic paraverterbral block; postoperative morphine use; SURGERY; SPREAD;
D O I
10.7759/cureus.59459
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background Thoracotomy is associated with severe postoperative pain. Pain developing after thoracotomy causes lung infections, inability to expel secretions, and atelectasis as a result of deep breathing. Effective management of acute pain after thoracotomy may prevent these complications. A multimodal approach to analgesia is widely employed by thoracic anesthetists using a combination of regional anesthetic blockade and systemic analgesia, with both non -opioid and opioid medications and local anesthesia blockade. Nowadays, regional anesthesia techniques such as thoracic epidural paravertebral block (PVB), erector spinae plane block (ESPB), and serratus plane block are frequently used to prevent pain after thoracotomy. In this study, we compared paravertebral block with erector spinae block for pain relief after thoracotomy. Our primary aim was to determine whether there was a difference between postoperative opioid consumption and pain scores. We also compared the two regional anesthesia techniques in terms of intraoperative hemodynamic data and postoperative complications. Methodology Patients aged between 18 and 75 years with an American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) physical status IIII and scheduled for elective thoracotomy were included in the study. Using www.randomizer.org, patients were divided into two different groups, namely, ESPB and PVB. All patients were provided with a patientcontrolled analgesia device preloaded with morphine. Postoperative 24 -hour morphine consumptions were recorded. Results Data from 45 patients were used in the final analyses. Morphine consumption was higher in the ESPB group than in the PVB group at 24 hours postoperatively (19.2 +/- 4.26 mg and 16.2 +/- 2.64 mg, respectively; p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in numerical rating scale scores both at rest and with coughing (p > 0.05). Intraoperative heart rates were similar between groups. However, mean intraoperative blood pressure was significantly lower in the PVB group at 30 minutes (p < 0.05). Nausea and vomiting were observed in two patients in the ESPB group and one patient in the PVB group. The complication of nausea and vomiting was not statistically significant between the two groups (p > 0.05). Catastrophic complications such as hematoma, pneumothorax, and local anesthetic systemic toxicity were not observed in either group. Conclusions We found that patients who underwent PVB consumed less morphine postoperatively than patients who underwent ESPB. However, we did not observe any difference in pain scores between both groups. We think that ESPB can be considered a reliable method in thoracotomy surgery due to its ease of application and the fact that the place where the block is technically performed is farther from the central structures compared to PVB. In light of the results of our study, ESPB can be used as an alternative to PVB, which has been proven as postoperative analgesia in thoracic surgery.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 23 条
[1]   Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus Retrolaminar Block: A Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Anatomical Study [J].
Adhikary, Sanjib Das ;
Bernard, Stephanie ;
Lopez, Hector ;
Chin, Ki Jinn .
REGIONAL ANESTHESIA AND PAIN MEDICINE, 2018, 43 (07) :756-762
[2]  
Biçer C, 2019, REV BRAS ANESTESIOL, V69, P144, DOI [10.1016/j.bjan.2018.11.002, 10.1016/j.bjane.2018.12.004]
[3]  
Chin KJ, 2021, CAN J ANESTH, V68, P387, DOI 10.1007/s12630-020-01875-2
[4]   Complications Rate Estimation After Thoracic Erector Spinae Plane Block [J].
De Cassai, Alessandro ;
Geraldini, Federico ;
Carere, Anna ;
Sergi, Massimo ;
Munari, Marina .
JOURNAL OF CARDIOTHORACIC AND VASCULAR ANESTHESIA, 2021, 35 (10) :3142-3143
[5]   Erector spinae plane block: a systematic qualitative review [J].
De Cassai, Alessandro ;
Bonvicini, Daniele ;
Correale, Christelle ;
Sandei, Ludovica ;
Tulgar, Serkan ;
Tonetti, Tommaso .
MINERVA ANESTESIOLOGICA, 2019, 85 (03) :308-319
[6]   Local anesthetic spread during erector spinae plane block [J].
De Cassai, Alessandro ;
Tonetti, Tommaso .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ANESTHESIA, 2018, 48 :60-61
[7]   Ultrasound-guided preoperative single-dose erector spinae plane block provides comparable analgesia to thoracic paravertebral block following thoracotomy: a single center randomized controlled double-blind study [J].
Fang, Bin ;
Wang, Zhaomin ;
Huang, Xiaojing .
ANNALS OF TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE, 2019, 7 (08)
[8]   The Erector Spinae Plane Block A Novel Analgesic Technique in Thoracic Neuropathic Pain [J].
Forero, Mauricio ;
Adhikary, Sanjib D. ;
Lopez, Hector ;
Tsui, Calvin ;
Chin, Ki Jinn .
REGIONAL ANESTHESIA AND PAIN MEDICINE, 2016, 41 (05) :621-627
[9]   Regional Anesthesia in the Patient Receiving Antithrombotic or Thrombolytic Therapy: American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine Evidence-Based Guidelines (Fourth Edition) [J].
Horlocker, Terese T. ;
Vandermeuelen, Erik ;
Kopp, Sandra L. ;
Gogarten, Wiebke ;
Leffert, Lisa R. ;
Benzon, Honorio T. .
REGIONAL ANESTHESIA AND PAIN MEDICINE, 2018, 43 (03) :263-309
[10]   The erector spinae plane block: a narrative review [J].
Kot, Pablo ;
Rodriguez, Pablo ;
Granell, Manuel ;
Cano, Beatriz ;
Rovira, Lucas ;
Morales, Javier ;
Broseta, Ana ;
De Andres, Jose .
KOREAN JOURNAL OF ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2019, 72 (03) :209-220