[Ultrasound-guided caudal block with ropivacaine in infraumbilical surgeries in pediatric patients].

Karla Itzel Gutiérrez-Riveroll, Juan José Dosta-Herrera, Héctor Jorge Mejía-Picazo, Karla Guadalupe Lozada-Rosete, Martha Aránzazu Pérez-Penilla
{"title":"[Ultrasound-guided caudal block with ropivacaine in infraumbilical surgeries in pediatric patients].","authors":"Karla Itzel Gutiérrez-Riveroll, Juan José Dosta-Herrera, Héctor Jorge Mejía-Picazo, Karla Guadalupe Lozada-Rosete, Martha Aránzazu Pérez-Penilla","doi":"10.5281/zenodo.8319756","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The use of local anesthetics as part of multimodal analgesia is an attractive concept in pediatric patients, since the evaluation and management of pain is a challenge in children under 7 years of age. Despite having guidelines and multiple studies on volume calculation, no safe and effective recommendation has been issued.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To demonstrate that ultrasound-guided caudal block with a dose of 0.75 mL/kg of 0.2% ropivacaine has the same analgesic effect as a dose of 1.2 mL/kg.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Randomized, prospective, longitudinal, comparative equivalence clinical trial. One hundred patients 0-7 years of age scheduled for elective or emergency infraumbilical surgery were enrolled between April 2021 and January 2022. Children were randomized 1:1 to be assigned to ultrasound-guided caudal block.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>100 patients divided into two groups with 0.2% ropivacaine volumes (0.75 mL vs. 1.2 mL). Both groups demonstrated the trans-anesthetic and post-anesthetic sedoanalgesia variables without significant differences for both groups on the FLACC pain scale after surgery and in recovery (p > 0.5), in the pain reassessment on the FLACC scale in the office called chronic pain (p > 0.5) in both groups. No complications were reported in the follow-up consultations and no arrhythmias were reported in both groups during surgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>the results of both groups did not show differences between a volume of 0.75 mL and 1.2 mL, the administration of 0.2% ropivacaine is favored with the use of ultrasound, which allows effective administration of lower doses of local anesthetic with reduced risk of complications. It is necessary to carry out studies in other types of surgery to compare the use of less volume of local anesthetic compared to the Melman formula used in this study.</p>","PeriodicalId":94200,"journal":{"name":"Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10746332/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8319756","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: The use of local anesthetics as part of multimodal analgesia is an attractive concept in pediatric patients, since the evaluation and management of pain is a challenge in children under 7 years of age. Despite having guidelines and multiple studies on volume calculation, no safe and effective recommendation has been issued.

Objective: To demonstrate that ultrasound-guided caudal block with a dose of 0.75 mL/kg of 0.2% ropivacaine has the same analgesic effect as a dose of 1.2 mL/kg.

Material and methods: Randomized, prospective, longitudinal, comparative equivalence clinical trial. One hundred patients 0-7 years of age scheduled for elective or emergency infraumbilical surgery were enrolled between April 2021 and January 2022. Children were randomized 1:1 to be assigned to ultrasound-guided caudal block.

Results: 100 patients divided into two groups with 0.2% ropivacaine volumes (0.75 mL vs. 1.2 mL). Both groups demonstrated the trans-anesthetic and post-anesthetic sedoanalgesia variables without significant differences for both groups on the FLACC pain scale after surgery and in recovery (p > 0.5), in the pain reassessment on the FLACC scale in the office called chronic pain (p > 0.5) in both groups. No complications were reported in the follow-up consultations and no arrhythmias were reported in both groups during surgery.

Conclusions: the results of both groups did not show differences between a volume of 0.75 mL and 1.2 mL, the administration of 0.2% ropivacaine is favored with the use of ultrasound, which allows effective administration of lower doses of local anesthetic with reduced risk of complications. It is necessary to carry out studies in other types of surgery to compare the use of less volume of local anesthetic compared to the Melman formula used in this study.

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
[超声引导的罗哌卡因尾侧阻滞在儿童脐下手术中的应用]。
背景:局部麻醉剂作为多模式镇痛的一部分在儿科患者中是一个有吸引力的概念,因为疼痛的评估和管理在7岁以下的儿童中是一项挑战。尽管有关于体积计算的指导方针和多项研究,但尚未发布安全有效的建议。目的:证明0.75mL/kg剂量0.2%罗哌卡因超声引导尾侧阻滞与1.2mL/kg剂量罗哌卡因具有相同的镇痛效果。材料和方法:随机、前瞻性、纵向、比较等效临床试验。2021年4月至2022年1月期间,100名0-7岁的患者被安排接受选择性或紧急脐下手术。儿童被1:1随机分配到超声引导下的尾侧阻滞。结果:100名患者分为两组,罗哌卡因用量为0.2%(0.75 mL vs.1.2 mL)。两组在术后和恢复期的FLACC疼痛量表上,以及在办公室称为慢性疼痛的FLACC量表上的疼痛重新评估中(p>0.05),都证明了两组的跨麻醉和麻醉后镇痛变量没有显著差异。随访中未报告并发症,手术期间两组均未报告心律失常。结论:两组的结果在0.75 mL和1.2 mL的体积之间没有差异,0.2%罗哌卡因的给药与超声的使用相比更为有利,这可以有效地给药较低剂量的局部麻醉剂,降低并发症的风险。有必要在其他类型的手术中进行研究,以比较与本研究中使用的梅尔曼公式相比,使用较少体积的局部麻醉剂。
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
[Multifocal motor neuropathy. Report of three cases at a reference hospital in Mexico]. [Answer to "Comment on article: "Risk factors associated with cognitive impairment in older adults: cross-sectional study""]. [Comment on article: "Risk factors associated with cognitive impairment in older adults: cross-sectional study"]. [Pulmonary Hypertension Centers]. [Severe coronavirus-2 infection background for cardiovascular complications].
×
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