Bloqueio PECS I para analgesia pós‐operatória em pacientes submetidos a mamoplastia de aumento: estudo randomizado, duplo‐cego, controlado por placebo

Jean Desroches , Maxim Roy , Marc Belliveau , Benoit Leblanc , Pierre Beaulieu
{"title":"Bloqueio PECS I para analgesia pós‐operatória em pacientes submetidos a mamoplastia de aumento: estudo randomizado, duplo‐cego, controlado por placebo","authors":"Jean Desroches ,&nbsp;Maxim Roy ,&nbsp;Marc Belliveau ,&nbsp;Benoit Leblanc ,&nbsp;Pierre Beaulieu","doi":"10.1016/j.bjan.2020.04.013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and objectives</h3><p>PECS I block was first described for surgery involving the pectoralis muscles. No randomized clinical trial has been conducted on surgeries that directly involve these muscles, such as subpectoral breast augmentation. We hypothesized that PECS I block would decrease pain in the postoperative period in this population.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This was a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial in women undergoing subpectoral breast augmentation surgery. PECS I block was performed using 0.4 mL.kg<sup>‐1</sup> of 0.9% saline on one side and bupivacaine (0.25%) on the other side, each patient being her own control. Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) pain scores (0<!--> <!-->−<!--> <!-->10) were measured at rest and during movement. The primary outcome was pain score at rest 30 minutes after arrival in the PACU. To detect a clinically significant difference of 50% in pain reduction, 14 volunteers were enrolled (power of 90% and alpha<!--> <!-->&lt;<!--> <!-->0.05).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>In the PACU, three patients had no difference in pain between sides, five had reduced pain on the placebo side, and six had reduced pain on the bupivacaine side. In the bupivacaine group, pain scores at rest at 5, 30 and 60 minutes and 24 hours were 4.89 (4.23<!--> <!-->−<!--> <!-->5.56; mean 95% CI), 3.75 (3.13<!--> <!-->−<!--> <!-->4.37), 3.79 (2.93<!--> <!-->−<!--> <!-->4.64), and 2.29 (1.56<!--> <!-->−<!--> <!-->3.01), respectively, whereas in the placebo group, they were 4.96 (4.32<!--> <!-->−<!--> <!-->5.60), 4.00 (3.50<!--> <!-->−<!--> <!-->4.49), 3.93 (3.12<!--> <!-->−<!--> <!-->4.73), and 2.29 (1.56<!--> <!-->−<!--> <!-->3.01), respectively.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>PECS I block in patients undergoing breast augmentation surgery does not provide better pain relief than placebo. Therefore, the indications for PECS I block in breast augmentation surgery should be reconsidered.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":21261,"journal":{"name":"Revista brasileira de anestesiologia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.bjan.2020.04.013","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista brasileira de anestesiologia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0034709420303718","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Background and objectives

PECS I block was first described for surgery involving the pectoralis muscles. No randomized clinical trial has been conducted on surgeries that directly involve these muscles, such as subpectoral breast augmentation. We hypothesized that PECS I block would decrease pain in the postoperative period in this population.

Methods

This was a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial in women undergoing subpectoral breast augmentation surgery. PECS I block was performed using 0.4 mL.kg‐1 of 0.9% saline on one side and bupivacaine (0.25%) on the other side, each patient being her own control. Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) pain scores (0  10) were measured at rest and during movement. The primary outcome was pain score at rest 30 minutes after arrival in the PACU. To detect a clinically significant difference of 50% in pain reduction, 14 volunteers were enrolled (power of 90% and alpha < 0.05).

Results

In the PACU, three patients had no difference in pain between sides, five had reduced pain on the placebo side, and six had reduced pain on the bupivacaine side. In the bupivacaine group, pain scores at rest at 5, 30 and 60 minutes and 24 hours were 4.89 (4.23  5.56; mean 95% CI), 3.75 (3.13  4.37), 3.79 (2.93  4.64), and 2.29 (1.56  3.01), respectively, whereas in the placebo group, they were 4.96 (4.32  5.60), 4.00 (3.50  4.49), 3.93 (3.12  4.73), and 2.29 (1.56  3.01), respectively.

Conclusions

PECS I block in patients undergoing breast augmentation surgery does not provide better pain relief than placebo. Therefore, the indications for PECS I block in breast augmentation surgery should be reconsidered.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
PECS I阻断增强乳房成形术患者术后镇痛:随机、双盲、安慰剂对照研究
背景和目的espec I阻滞首次被描述为涉及胸肌的手术。没有随机临床试验直接涉及这些肌肉的手术,如胸下隆胸。我们假设PECS I阻滞可以减轻这一人群术后的疼痛。方法:这是一项随机、双盲、安慰剂对照试验,研究对象为接受胸下隆胸手术的女性。PECS I阻滞一侧使用0.4 mL.kg - 1 0.9%生理盐水,另一侧使用0.25%布比卡因(0.25%),每位患者作为自己的对照。在休息和运动时测量数值评定量表(NRS)疼痛评分(0 - 10)。主要终点是到达PACU后30分钟休息时的疼痛评分。为了检测疼痛减轻50%的临床显著差异,14名志愿者被招募(功率为90%,alpha <0.05)。结果在PACU中,3例患者两侧疼痛无差异,5例患者安慰剂侧疼痛减轻,6例患者布比卡因侧疼痛减轻。布比卡因组5、30、60分钟和24小时休息时疼痛评分为4.89 (4.23 ~ 5.56;平均95% CI), 3.75(3.13−4.37),3.79(2.93−4.64),和2.29(1.56−3.01),分别而在安慰剂组,他们是4.96(4.32−5.60),4.00(3.50−4.49),3.93(3.12−4.73),和2.29(1.56−3.01),分别。结论specs I阻滞对隆胸手术患者的镇痛效果不优于安慰剂。因此,在隆胸手术中应用PECS I阻滞的适应症应重新考虑。
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
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
21 weeks
期刊介绍: The Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology is the official journal of the Brazilian Anesthesiology Society. It publishes articles classified into the following categories: -Scientific articles (clinical or experimental trials)- Clinical information (case reports)- Reviews- Letters to the Editor- Editorials. The journal focuses primarily on clinical trials, with scope on clinical practice, aiming at providing applied tools to the anesthesiologist and critical care physician. The Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology accepts articles exclusively forwarded to it. Articles already published in other journals are not accepted. All articles proposed for publication are previously submitted to the analysis of two or more members of the Editorial Board or other specialized consultants.
期刊最新文献
Atualização sobre reações de hipersensibilidade perioperatória: documento conjunto da Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia (SBA) e Associação Brasileira de Alergia e Imunologia (ASBAI) – Parte II: etiologia e diagnóstico Propofol‐cetamina versus dexmedetomidina‐cetamina para sedação durante endoscopia digestiva alta em pacientes pediátricos: estudo clínico randomizado Comparação entre morfina subaracnoidea e bloqueio do nervo femoral para analgesia após reconstrução ligamentar de joelho: estudo clínico randomizado Sequência de segurança de intubação: o algoritmo 10 “Ps” e ferramenta cognitiva para manuseio de vias aéreas em pacientes com COVID‐19 Dexametasona perineural em bloqueio de plexo braquial interescalênico com levobupivacaína guiado por ultrassonografia para artroscopia de ombro em regime ambulatorial: ensaio clínico controlado e randomizado
×
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