Efficacy and safety of the serratus anterior block compared to thoracic epidural analgesia in surgery: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

4区 医学 Q4 Medicine Diabetologe Pub Date : 2023-06-01 eCollection Date: 2023-10-01 DOI:10.4103/tcmj.tcmj_36_23
Lusianawati, Christian Julio Suhardi, Christrijogo Sumartono, Citrawati Dyah Kencono Wungu
{"title":"Efficacy and safety of the serratus anterior block compared to thoracic epidural analgesia in surgery: Systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Lusianawati, Christian Julio Suhardi, Christrijogo Sumartono, Citrawati Dyah Kencono Wungu","doi":"10.4103/tcmj.tcmj_36_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of serratus anterior plane block (SAPB) and thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) in thoracic region surgery.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We implemented a systematic search of PubMed, ScienceDirect, SCOPUS, and Web of Science and through gray literature for all randomized controlled trials that compared SAPB, a novel thoracic wall nerve block, and TEA in surgery. The evaluated outcomes included the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), hypotension, and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Review Manager, version 5.4.1, was implemented for the analysis of statistics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The pooled analysis included six trials that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. In total 384, surgery had received regional blocks (162 - SAPB and 163 - TEA). VAS did not differ significantly between SAPB and TEA, with a mean difference of 0.71, <i>P</i> = 0.08. PONV incidence did not differ significantly between SAPB and TEA (odds ratio = 0.25, <i>P</i> = 0.07). Hypotension incidence was lower in SAPB compared to TEA (odds ratio = 0.10, <i>P</i> = 0.0001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SAPB yielded comparable VAS with TEA in pain management of thoracic region surgery. The incidence of hypotension was lower in SAPB than in TEA. No difference in PONV incidence was observed. SAPB can be a viable alternative to TEA in thoracic region surgery.</p>","PeriodicalId":50583,"journal":{"name":"Diabetologe","volume":"3 1","pages":"329-337"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10683523/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetologe","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/tcmj.tcmj_36_23","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of serratus anterior plane block (SAPB) and thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) in thoracic region surgery.

Materials and methods: We implemented a systematic search of PubMed, ScienceDirect, SCOPUS, and Web of Science and through gray literature for all randomized controlled trials that compared SAPB, a novel thoracic wall nerve block, and TEA in surgery. The evaluated outcomes included the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), hypotension, and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Review Manager, version 5.4.1, was implemented for the analysis of statistics.

Results: The pooled analysis included six trials that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. In total 384, surgery had received regional blocks (162 - SAPB and 163 - TEA). VAS did not differ significantly between SAPB and TEA, with a mean difference of 0.71, P = 0.08. PONV incidence did not differ significantly between SAPB and TEA (odds ratio = 0.25, P = 0.07). Hypotension incidence was lower in SAPB compared to TEA (odds ratio = 0.10, P = 0.0001).

Conclusion: SAPB yielded comparable VAS with TEA in pain management of thoracic region surgery. The incidence of hypotension was lower in SAPB than in TEA. No difference in PONV incidence was observed. SAPB can be a viable alternative to TEA in thoracic region surgery.

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
手术中前锯肌阻滞与胸椎硬膜外镇痛的疗效和安全性:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
目的:本研究的目的是比较锯肌前平面阻滞(SAPB)和胸椎硬膜外镇痛(TEA)在胸椎手术中的疗效和安全性。材料和方法:我们对PubMed、ScienceDirect、SCOPUS和Web of Science进行了系统检索,并通过灰色文献对所有比较SAPB(一种新型胸壁神经阻滞)和TEA在手术中的随机对照试验进行了检索。评估结果包括视觉模拟评分(VAS)、低血压和术后恶心呕吐(PONV)。Review Manager版本5.4.1是为了统计分析而实现的。结果:合并分析包括6项符合纳入标准的试验。共有384例手术接受了局部阻滞(162例SAPB和163例TEA)。VAS在SAPB和TEA之间无显著差异,平均差异为0.71,P = 0.08。SAPB和TEA的PONV发生率无显著差异(优势比= 0.25,P = 0.07)。与TEA相比,SAPB组低血压发生率较低(优势比= 0.10,P = 0.0001)。结论:SAPB与TEA在胸区手术疼痛管理中的效果相当。SAPB组低血压发生率低于TEA组。PONV发病率无差异。SAPB在胸椎手术中可作为TEA的可行替代方案。
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
Diabetologe
Diabetologe ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM-
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
53
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Der Diabetologe offers up-to-date information for all diabetologists working in practical and clinical environments and scientists who are particularly interested in issues of diabetology. The focus is on current developments regarding prevention, diagnostic approaches, management of complications and current therapy strategies. Comprehensive reviews on a specific topical issue provide evidenced based information on diagnostics and therapy. Review articles under the rubric ''Continuing Medical Education'' present verified results of scientific research and their integration into daily practice.
期刊最新文献
Neoplastic Fever: A Rare Differential of Intractable Fever. Efficacy and safety of the serratus anterior block compared to thoracic epidural analgesia in surgery: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Signaling - transcription interactions in mouse retinal ganglion cells early axon pathfinding -a literature review. Mitteilungen des BDE Mitteilungen des BDI
×
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