Pecto-Intercostal Fascial Plane Block: Effect on the Postoperative Analgesia and Recovery After Off-PUMP Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery

Q2 Medicine Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine Pub Date : 2024-02-15 DOI:10.5812/aapm-144344
R. Mahrose, Hany Magdy Fahim, Amr A. Kasem, Mohammed Samy Helmy Sakr, M. A. Menshawi
{"title":"Pecto-Intercostal Fascial Plane Block: Effect on the Postoperative Analgesia and Recovery After Off-PUMP Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery","authors":"R. Mahrose, Hany Magdy Fahim, Amr A. Kasem, Mohammed Samy Helmy Sakr, M. A. Menshawi","doi":"10.5812/aapm-144344","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Anteromedial chest wall fascial plane blocks may serve as a valuable addition to postoperative multimodal pain management following median sternotomy for cardiothoracic surgeries. Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of implementing the pecto-intercostal fascial plane block (PIFB) in patients scheduled for off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) surgery. Methods: This randomized controlled study involved 40 adult patients aged 30 to 70 years undergoing OPCAB surgery. They were randomly assigned to two equal groups: Group PI received bilateral ultrasound (US)-guided PIFB with 20 mL of bupivacaine 0.25% with adrenaline 2.5 µg/mL, while group C (control group) received bilateral sham blocks with 20 mL of saline 0.9%. Pain scores in the postoperative period (primary outcome), perioperative analgesic consumption, time until extubation, and discharge from the intensive care unit (ICU) were assessed for both groups. Results: Postoperative pain scores, both at rest and during coughing, were significantly lower in group PI compared to group C. Group PI required significantly less fentanyl perioperatively and less tramadol for postoperative rescue compared to group C. The duration of postoperative ventilation and time to ICU discharge were significantly shorter in group PI than in group C. Conclusions: In patients undergoing OPCAB surgery, pre-incisional ultrasound-guided PIFB can be a beneficial and safe component of multimodal pain management. It provides improved postoperative pain control, reduces the need for perioperative opioids, and leads to faster extubation and ICU discharge.","PeriodicalId":7841,"journal":{"name":"Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine","volume":"16 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5812/aapm-144344","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Anteromedial chest wall fascial plane blocks may serve as a valuable addition to postoperative multimodal pain management following median sternotomy for cardiothoracic surgeries. Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of implementing the pecto-intercostal fascial plane block (PIFB) in patients scheduled for off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) surgery. Methods: This randomized controlled study involved 40 adult patients aged 30 to 70 years undergoing OPCAB surgery. They were randomly assigned to two equal groups: Group PI received bilateral ultrasound (US)-guided PIFB with 20 mL of bupivacaine 0.25% with adrenaline 2.5 µg/mL, while group C (control group) received bilateral sham blocks with 20 mL of saline 0.9%. Pain scores in the postoperative period (primary outcome), perioperative analgesic consumption, time until extubation, and discharge from the intensive care unit (ICU) were assessed for both groups. Results: Postoperative pain scores, both at rest and during coughing, were significantly lower in group PI compared to group C. Group PI required significantly less fentanyl perioperatively and less tramadol for postoperative rescue compared to group C. The duration of postoperative ventilation and time to ICU discharge were significantly shorter in group PI than in group C. Conclusions: In patients undergoing OPCAB surgery, pre-incisional ultrasound-guided PIFB can be a beneficial and safe component of multimodal pain management. It provides improved postoperative pain control, reduces the need for perioperative opioids, and leads to faster extubation and ICU discharge.
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
胸骨肋间筋膜平面阻滞:对非PUMP冠状动脉搭桥术后镇痛和恢复的影响
背景:胸壁前内侧筋膜平面阻滞可作为心胸手术胸骨正中切开术后多模式疼痛治疗的重要补充。研究目的本研究旨在评估对计划接受体外循环冠状动脉搭桥术(OPCAB)的患者实施胸骨肋间筋膜平面阻滞(PIFB)的影响。方法:这项随机对照研究涉及 40 名接受 OPCAB 手术的 30 至 70 岁成年患者。他们被随机分配到两个相同的小组:PI 组接受 20 mL 0.25% 布比卡因加 2.5 µg/mL 肾上腺素的双侧超声(US)引导 PIFB,而 C 组(对照组)接受 20 mL 0.9% 生理盐水的双侧假阻滞。对两组患者的术后疼痛评分(主要结果)、围术期镇痛药消耗量、拔管前时间和重症监护室(ICU)出院情况进行了评估。结果与 C 组相比,PI 组围手术期所需的芬太尼显著减少,术后抢救所需的曲马多也显著减少;PI 组的术后通气时间和 ICU 出院时间显著短于 C 组:对于接受 OPCAB 手术的患者,切口前超声引导 PIFB 是多模式疼痛治疗中有益且安全的组成部分。它能改善术后疼痛控制,减少围手术期对阿片类药物的需求,并能加快拔管和 ICU 出院。
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
Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine Medicine-Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
49
期刊最新文献
The Power of Color Flow Doppler Ultrasonography Versus Blind Technique in Localization of Epidural Catheter: A Randomized Prospective Study. Spinal Anesthesia Management in a 30-Year-Old Patient with Progeria Syndrome: A Case Report. Robotic Pediatric Urologic Surgery-Clinical Anesthetic Considerations: A Comprehensive Review. Anesthetic Management Recommendations Using a Machine Learning Algorithm to Reduce the Risk of Acute Kidney Injury After Cardiac Surgeries Retraction Note: The Effect of Dexmedetomidine and Esmolol on Early Postoperative Cognitive Dysfunction After Middle Ear Surgery Under Hypotensive Technique: A Comparative, Randomized, Double-blind Study.
×
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