Comparison between ultrasound guided Transversus abdominis plane block and local anesthetic instillation in patients undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy

M. Hammad, R. Elkabarity, M. Ammar, Milad Ragaie Zakry
{"title":"Comparison between ultrasound guided Transversus abdominis plane block and local anesthetic instillation in patients undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy","authors":"M. Hammad, R. Elkabarity, M. Ammar, Milad Ragaie Zakry","doi":"10.21608/ebwhj.2020.111350","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Post-laparoscopy analgesia is still a challenge. Many studies have been carried out to find the effect of different analgesic techniques in patients undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy including ultrasonic guided TAP block and instillation of intraperitoneal local anesthetic.Aim: The aim of this study is to assess degree of pain control, duration of action, duration of postoperative analgesia, the effect on postoperative analgesic requirements in patients undergoing laparscopic hysterectomy and compare between Transversus abdominis plane block and intraperitoneal local anesthetics instillation.Materials and Methods: This study enrolled 50 cases for laparoscopic hysterectomy. They were divided randomly into two groups : TAP group (n=25) patients of this group received TAP block performed by ultrasound guidance and IPLA group (n=25) patients of this group received intraperitoneal local anesthetic (bupivacaine) instillation. After surgery, visual analogue score (VAS) was recorded at 1, 2,4,6,12,18 and 24 hours. Requirement of rescue analgesia when VAS score ≥ 4, total dose of morphine received in 24 h were noted in both groups postoperatively.Results: The overall VAS during the first postoperative 24 hours was significantly lower in TAP group (P = 0.048, 0.049, and 0.003 at 6, 12, 18 and 24 hours after surgery) and total analgesic consumption (morphine in mg) was lower (8.36 ± 1.98 mg) in TAP group (8.2 mg) compared to IPLA (12.24 ± 1.33 mg).Conclusion: TAP block provide better postoperative pain control and reduce postoperative opioid requirement in comparison with intraperitoneal local anesthetic instillation in patients undergoing laparscopic hysterectomy.","PeriodicalId":224226,"journal":{"name":"Evidence Based Womenʼs Health Journal","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence Based Womenʼs Health Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21608/ebwhj.2020.111350","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Post-laparoscopy analgesia is still a challenge. Many studies have been carried out to find the effect of different analgesic techniques in patients undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy including ultrasonic guided TAP block and instillation of intraperitoneal local anesthetic.Aim: The aim of this study is to assess degree of pain control, duration of action, duration of postoperative analgesia, the effect on postoperative analgesic requirements in patients undergoing laparscopic hysterectomy and compare between Transversus abdominis plane block and intraperitoneal local anesthetics instillation.Materials and Methods: This study enrolled 50 cases for laparoscopic hysterectomy. They were divided randomly into two groups : TAP group (n=25) patients of this group received TAP block performed by ultrasound guidance and IPLA group (n=25) patients of this group received intraperitoneal local anesthetic (bupivacaine) instillation. After surgery, visual analogue score (VAS) was recorded at 1, 2,4,6,12,18 and 24 hours. Requirement of rescue analgesia when VAS score ≥ 4, total dose of morphine received in 24 h were noted in both groups postoperatively.Results: The overall VAS during the first postoperative 24 hours was significantly lower in TAP group (P = 0.048, 0.049, and 0.003 at 6, 12, 18 and 24 hours after surgery) and total analgesic consumption (morphine in mg) was lower (8.36 ± 1.98 mg) in TAP group (8.2 mg) compared to IPLA (12.24 ± 1.33 mg).Conclusion: TAP block provide better postoperative pain control and reduce postoperative opioid requirement in comparison with intraperitoneal local anesthetic instillation in patients undergoing laparscopic hysterectomy.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
超声引导下经腹平面阻滞与局麻灌注在腹腔镜子宫切除术中的比较
背景:腹腔镜术后镇痛仍然是一个挑战。超声引导下TAP阻滞和腹腔局部麻醉等不同的镇痛技术对腹腔镜子宫切除术患者的效果进行了许多研究。目的:评价腹腔镜子宫切除术患者的疼痛控制程度、作用时间、术后镇痛持续时间、对术后镇痛需求的影响,并比较经腹平面阻滞与腹腔局部麻醉剂的应用效果。材料与方法:本研究纳入50例腹腔镜子宫切除术。随机分为两组:TAP组(n=25)采用超声引导下进行TAP阻滞,IPLA组(n=25)采用腹腔局部麻醉剂(布比卡因)滴注。术后1、2、4、6、12、18、24小时分别记录视觉模拟评分(VAS)。观察两组术后VAS评分≥4分时是否需要抢救镇痛,24 h内吗啡总剂量。结果:TAP组术后第1小时总VAS评分(术后6、12、18、24小时P = 0.048、0.049、0.003)明显低于IPLA组(12.24±1.33 mg),总镇痛用量(吗啡单位:mg)(8.36±1.98 mg)低于TAP组(8.36±1.98 mg)。结论:与腹腔内局麻相比,TAP阻滞能更好地控制腹腔镜子宫切除术患者的术后疼痛,减少术后阿片类药物的需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Hysteroscopy as a diagnostic tool in women with recurrent pregnancy loss, a prospective randomized controlled study Serum Soluble Endoglin Versus Serum Placental Growth Factor for Early Prediction of Preeclampsia Cervical cerclage for Pregnant Women at High-risk of Recurrent Preterm Birth can act beyond its Mechanical Action New ultrasound signs for prediction of early placental Insufficiency Efficacy and Safety of Preoperative Intravenous Tranexamic Acid to Reduce Blood Loss During and After Elective Lower‐Segment Cesarean Delivery
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1