Comparing the intraoperative and postoperative analgesic effect of transabdominal block versus caudal block in children undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy

IF 0.2 Q4 ANESTHESIOLOGY Indian Anaesthetists Forum Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.4103/theiaforum.theiaforum_6_21
S. Nagappa, Nethra H. Nanjundaswamy, Vinay Maralusiddappa, Vinayak M. Nayak
{"title":"Comparing the intraoperative and postoperative analgesic effect of transabdominal block versus caudal block in children undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy","authors":"S. Nagappa, Nethra H. Nanjundaswamy, Vinay Maralusiddappa, Vinayak M. Nayak","doi":"10.4103/theiaforum.theiaforum_6_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Laparoscopic appendectomy is commonly performed in children. Regional anesthesia in children is complementary to general anesthesia, which allows conscious postoperative analgesia and reducing hospital stay. Caudal anesthesia and transverses abdominis plane (TAP) block is commonly used in children because it is easy to practice and provides effective analgesia during surgery. However, its efficacy in laparoscopic appendectomy is not tested much. Aim: The aim of this study is to evaluate the analgesic efficacy of caudal block and TAP block, when used as pre-emptive analgesia using ropivacaine in terms of opioid consumption, postoperative visual analog score (VAS), duration of analgesia, time for rescue analgesia, postoperative nausea, and vomiting and other side effects following elective laparoscopic appendectomy. Methodology: The study design was a prospective, double-blinded, comparative randomized trial on children undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy. Sixty patients between 12 and 18 years were included in the study. They were allocated into any one of two groups of 30 patients each, employing computer-generated randomization. Group I: receive ultrasound-guided caudal block using 0.2% ropivacaine 1 mL/kg. Group II: receive ultrasound-guided TAP block using 0.2% ropivacaine 1 mL/kg. Results: Total intraoperative consumption of opioid fentanyl in Group I is 14.83 ± 18.78 compared to 25.50 ± 17.88 in Group II, which is statistically significant P = 0.028*. VAS score was significantly lower in Group II compared to Group I, P < 0.001**. Conclusion: Caudal block is effective for intraoperative management, whereas TAP block is effective for postoperative management in children undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy.","PeriodicalId":42359,"journal":{"name":"Indian Anaesthetists Forum","volume":"23 1","pages":"19 - 24"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Anaesthetists Forum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/theiaforum.theiaforum_6_21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Laparoscopic appendectomy is commonly performed in children. Regional anesthesia in children is complementary to general anesthesia, which allows conscious postoperative analgesia and reducing hospital stay. Caudal anesthesia and transverses abdominis plane (TAP) block is commonly used in children because it is easy to practice and provides effective analgesia during surgery. However, its efficacy in laparoscopic appendectomy is not tested much. Aim: The aim of this study is to evaluate the analgesic efficacy of caudal block and TAP block, when used as pre-emptive analgesia using ropivacaine in terms of opioid consumption, postoperative visual analog score (VAS), duration of analgesia, time for rescue analgesia, postoperative nausea, and vomiting and other side effects following elective laparoscopic appendectomy. Methodology: The study design was a prospective, double-blinded, comparative randomized trial on children undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy. Sixty patients between 12 and 18 years were included in the study. They were allocated into any one of two groups of 30 patients each, employing computer-generated randomization. Group I: receive ultrasound-guided caudal block using 0.2% ropivacaine 1 mL/kg. Group II: receive ultrasound-guided TAP block using 0.2% ropivacaine 1 mL/kg. Results: Total intraoperative consumption of opioid fentanyl in Group I is 14.83 ± 18.78 compared to 25.50 ± 17.88 in Group II, which is statistically significant P = 0.028*. VAS score was significantly lower in Group II compared to Group I, P < 0.001**. Conclusion: Caudal block is effective for intraoperative management, whereas TAP block is effective for postoperative management in children undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy.
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
经腹阻滞与尾侧阻滞在儿童腹腔镜阑尾切除术中术中术后镇痛效果的比较
背景:腹腔镜阑尾切除术通常在儿童中进行。儿童区域麻醉是对全身麻醉的补充,全身麻醉允许有意识的术后镇痛并减少住院时间。尾部麻醉和腹横肌平面阻滞(TAP)通常用于儿童,因为它易于实践,并在手术中提供有效的镇痛。然而,它在腹腔镜阑尾切除术中的疗效并没有得到太多的检验。目的:本研究的目的是从选择性腹腔镜阑尾切除术后的阿片类药物消耗、术后视觉模拟评分(VAS)、镇痛持续时间、抢救镇痛时间、术后恶心呕吐和其他副作用等方面评估罗哌卡因用于尾侧阻滞和TAP阻滞作为先发制人镇痛的镇痛效果。方法:该研究设计是一项前瞻性、双盲、比较随机的儿童腹腔镜阑尾切除术试验。60名年龄在12至18岁之间的患者被纳入该研究。他们被分配到两组中的任何一组,每组30名患者,采用计算机生成的随机分组。第一组:采用0.2%罗哌卡因1mL/kg超声引导下尾侧阻滞。第二组:应用0.2%罗哌卡因1mL/kg超声引导TAP阻滞。结果:I组阿片类芬太尼的术中总消耗量为14.83±18.78,而II组为25.50±17.88,具有统计学意义,P=0.028*。II组VAS评分显著低于I组,P<0.001**,而TAP阻滞对于接受腹腔镜阑尾切除术的儿童的术后管理是有效的。
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
Indian Anaesthetists Forum
Indian Anaesthetists Forum ANESTHESIOLOGY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
Cardiovascular complications in coronavirus disease-2019 patients Refractory hypokalemia in intensive care unit: Efforts in vain Evaluation of effect of dexamethasone and bicarbonate as adjuvants to intracuff lignocaine on endotracheal tube tolerance during emergence and incidence of postoperative cough and sore throat Is it popliteal artery? Is it popliteal vein? No it is persistent sciatic vein Mortality predictors during the third wave of COVID-19 pandemic: A multicentric retrospective analysis from tertiary care centers of Western India
×
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