Intrathecal Morphine Versus Paravertebral Nerve Blocks for Analgesia After Breast Reconstruction With Abdominally Based Free Flaps.

IF 3 2区 医学 Q1 SURGERY Aesthetic Surgery Journal Pub Date : 2025-03-19 DOI:10.1093/asj/sjaf043
Matthew W Swisher, Austin T Nguyen, Miriam Becker, Jacklynn F Sztain, Wendy B Abramson, Paige S Tsuda, Brenton S Alexander, Chris M Reid, Engy T Said
{"title":"Intrathecal Morphine Versus Paravertebral Nerve Blocks for Analgesia After Breast Reconstruction With Abdominally Based Free Flaps.","authors":"Matthew W Swisher, Austin T Nguyen, Miriam Becker, Jacklynn F Sztain, Wendy B Abramson, Paige S Tsuda, Brenton S Alexander, Chris M Reid, Engy T Said","doi":"10.1093/asj/sjaf043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Breast reconstruction with abdominally based free flaps can be associated with more significant acute pain and longer hospital stays than implant-based techniques. As new pain management strategies are developed, there have not been any studies conducted to analyze intrathecal morphine's (ITM) analgesic effects for patients undergoing abdominally based free flap reconstruction.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The primary outcome analyzed from this retrospective study was opioid consumption, which was measured from postoperative anesthesia care unit (PACU) through postoperative day (POD) 2. In addition, the secondary outcomes analyzed from the study included factors such as pain scores, hospital length of stay (LOS), and adverse effects.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>51 patients presented for breast reconstruction with abdominally based free flaps and received ITM for postoperative analgesia. Then, results obtained were compared with a cohort that included an equal number of patients who received paravertebral nerve blocks (PVBs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Results showed that patients who received ITM displayed a lower median consumption in PACU (0 mg versus 12.5 mg MEQ; p = 0.009), from PACU to POD 1 (0 mg versus 7.5 mg MEQ; p =0.046), and POD 1 to POD 2 (7.5 mg versus 30 mg MEQ; p = 0.002) when compared with those who received PVBs. Those who received ITM also had lower median pain scores in the PACU and from PACU to POD 1 and decreased LOS. There were similar rates of adverse events.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ITM improves postoperative analgesia after abdominally based free flaps compared to PVBs and may facilitate recovery and earlier discharge.</p>","PeriodicalId":7728,"journal":{"name":"Aesthetic Surgery Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aesthetic Surgery Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjaf043","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Breast reconstruction with abdominally based free flaps can be associated with more significant acute pain and longer hospital stays than implant-based techniques. As new pain management strategies are developed, there have not been any studies conducted to analyze intrathecal morphine's (ITM) analgesic effects for patients undergoing abdominally based free flap reconstruction.

Objectives: The primary outcome analyzed from this retrospective study was opioid consumption, which was measured from postoperative anesthesia care unit (PACU) through postoperative day (POD) 2. In addition, the secondary outcomes analyzed from the study included factors such as pain scores, hospital length of stay (LOS), and adverse effects.

Methods: 51 patients presented for breast reconstruction with abdominally based free flaps and received ITM for postoperative analgesia. Then, results obtained were compared with a cohort that included an equal number of patients who received paravertebral nerve blocks (PVBs).

Results: Results showed that patients who received ITM displayed a lower median consumption in PACU (0 mg versus 12.5 mg MEQ; p = 0.009), from PACU to POD 1 (0 mg versus 7.5 mg MEQ; p =0.046), and POD 1 to POD 2 (7.5 mg versus 30 mg MEQ; p = 0.002) when compared with those who received PVBs. Those who received ITM also had lower median pain scores in the PACU and from PACU to POD 1 and decreased LOS. There were similar rates of adverse events.

Conclusions: ITM improves postoperative analgesia after abdominally based free flaps compared to PVBs and may facilitate recovery and earlier 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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
20.70%
发文量
309
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Aesthetic Surgery Journal is a peer-reviewed international journal focusing on scientific developments and clinical techniques in aesthetic surgery. The official publication of The Aesthetic Society, ASJ is also the official English-language journal of many major international societies of plastic, aesthetic and reconstructive surgery representing South America, Central America, Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. It is also the official journal of the British Association of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons, the Canadian Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery and The Rhinoplasty Society.
期刊最新文献
A Controlled Phase 2b Trial to Assess the Efficacy and Safety of a Single Intervention of OnabotulinumtoxinA for Treating Masseter Muscle Prominence. Commentary on: Patient Factors That Impact FACE-Q Aesthetics Outcomes: An Exploratory Cross-Sectional Regression Analysis. Intrathecal Morphine Versus Paravertebral Nerve Blocks for Analgesia After Breast Reconstruction With Abdominally Based Free Flaps. Rupture of Breast Implants Does Not Cause Systemic or Local Immune Changes. Exosomes Derived from Adipose Stem Cells Inhibit Skin T Cells Activation and Alleviate Wound Inflammation.
×
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