在接受改良根治性乳房切除术的患者术后镇痛中,胸肌 II 和胸横肌平面联合阻滞与竖脊肌平面阻滞的比较:随机临床试验

IF 0.6 Q3 ANESTHESIOLOGY Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia Pub Date : 2023-11-28 DOI:10.1080/11101849.2023.2287892
A. Abedalmohsen, Abdelrahman H. Mohammed, M. Bakri, Ahmed H. Othman, Mohammed A. Osman, Ola M. Wahba
{"title":"在接受改良根治性乳房切除术的患者术后镇痛中,胸肌 II 和胸横肌平面联合阻滞与竖脊肌平面阻滞的比较:随机临床试验","authors":"A. Abedalmohsen, Abdelrahman H. Mohammed, M. Bakri, Ahmed H. Othman, Mohammed A. Osman, Ola M. Wahba","doi":"10.1080/11101849.2023.2287892","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Background About 30% of Egyptian females had breast cancer. Surgery is a cornerstone of the treatment plan. New fascial plane block techniques enhance recovery and improve intra-operative and post-operative pain control. Aim of the study Effect of combined pectoralis II plus transversus thoracic plane blocks (PECS II- TTP) versus erector spinae plane block (ESPB) on post-operative morphine consumption, and interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels 24 hours after surgery. Methods Sixty-four female patients 18–60 years of age, ASA I or II were divided into two equal groups (32 patients each). Group (P) received a combination of PECS II and TTP blocks (injection of 10 ml 0.25% bupivacaine between pectoralis major (PM) and minor (Pm) muscles and 10 ml between the Pm and serratus anterior (Sa) muscles) at the third or the fourth rib, then 10 ml and the internal inter-costal muscles and the transversus thoracic muscle. Group (E) received ESPB (30 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine injected deep to the erector spinae muscle at the transverse process of the fifth thoracic vertebrae). Results Morphine consumption was significantly lower in group (E) throughout the 24 hours period of post-operative follow-up (0.93 ± 0.63 vs. 2.13 ± 0.42 (mg); p = 0.03). Both groups had comparable time till the first analgesic request (p = 0.23). There was statistically non-significant difference between the two groups regarding the numeric rating scale (NRS) (P > 0.05), and post-operative IL6 either at baseline (10.03 ± 4.09 vs. 10.73 ± 3.54; p = 0.48) or at 24 hours after surgery (239.01 ± 122.11 vs. 278.08 ± 151.29; p = 0.30). Both groups had non-significant difference regarding post-operative nausea and vomiting. Conclusion ESPB is as effective as PECS II-TTP with lower morphine consumption in the first 24 hours and comparable NRS, time to first analgesic request, and interleukin-6 levels. Both blocks were safe without any major complications.","PeriodicalId":11437,"journal":{"name":"Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia","volume":"20 1","pages":"921 - 928"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Combined pectoralis II block and transversus thoracic plane block compared to erector spinae plane block for post-operative analgesia in patients undergoing modified radical mastectomy: A randomized clinical trial\",\"authors\":\"A. Abedalmohsen, Abdelrahman H. Mohammed, M. Bakri, Ahmed H. Othman, Mohammed A. Osman, Ola M. Wahba\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/11101849.2023.2287892\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Background About 30% of Egyptian females had breast cancer. Surgery is a cornerstone of the treatment plan. New fascial plane block techniques enhance recovery and improve intra-operative and post-operative pain control. Aim of the study Effect of combined pectoralis II plus transversus thoracic plane blocks (PECS II- TTP) versus erector spinae plane block (ESPB) on post-operative morphine consumption, and interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels 24 hours after surgery. Methods Sixty-four female patients 18–60 years of age, ASA I or II were divided into two equal groups (32 patients each). Group (P) received a combination of PECS II and TTP blocks (injection of 10 ml 0.25% bupivacaine between pectoralis major (PM) and minor (Pm) muscles and 10 ml between the Pm and serratus anterior (Sa) muscles) at the third or the fourth rib, then 10 ml and the internal inter-costal muscles and the transversus thoracic muscle. Group (E) received ESPB (30 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine injected deep to the erector spinae muscle at the transverse process of the fifth thoracic vertebrae). Results Morphine consumption was significantly lower in group (E) throughout the 24 hours period of post-operative follow-up (0.93 ± 0.63 vs. 2.13 ± 0.42 (mg); p = 0.03). Both groups had comparable time till the first analgesic request (p = 0.23). There was statistically non-significant difference between the two groups regarding the numeric rating scale (NRS) (P > 0.05), and post-operative IL6 either at baseline (10.03 ± 4.09 vs. 10.73 ± 3.54; p = 0.48) or at 24 hours after surgery (239.01 ± 122.11 vs. 278.08 ± 151.29; p = 0.30). Both groups had non-significant difference regarding post-operative nausea and vomiting. Conclusion ESPB is as effective as PECS II-TTP with lower morphine consumption in the first 24 hours and comparable NRS, time to first analgesic request, and interleukin-6 levels. Both blocks were safe without any major complications.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11437,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"921 - 928\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/11101849.2023.2287892\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/11101849.2023.2287892","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

ABSTRACT 背景 约 30% 的埃及女性患有乳腺癌。手术是治疗计划的基石。新的筋膜平面阻滞技术可促进术后恢复,改善术中和术后疼痛控制。研究目的 联合胸肌 II 加胸横肌平面阻滞(PECS II- TTP)与竖脊肌平面阻滞(ESPB)对术后吗啡消耗量和术后 24 小时白细胞介素-6(IL-6)水平的影响。方法 将 64 名年龄在 18-60 岁之间、ASA I 级或 II 级的女性患者平均分为两组(每组 32 人)。P 组患者在第三或第四肋骨处接受 PECS II 和 TTP 联合阻滞(在胸大肌和胸小肌之间注射 10 毫升 0.25% 布比卡因,在胸大肌和前锯肌之间注射 10 毫升 0.25% 布比卡因),然后在肋间肌和胸横肌之间注射 10 毫升 0.25% 布比卡因。E 组接受 ESPB(在第五胸椎横突的竖脊肌深部注射 30 毫升 0.25% 布比卡因)。结果 E 组在术后 24 小时随访期间的吗啡消耗量明显低于 E 组(0.93 ± 0.63 对 2.13 ± 0.42(毫克);P = 0.03)。两组患者首次要求镇痛的时间相当(p = 0.23)。两组患者的数字评分量表(NRS)(P > 0.05)和术后 IL6 在基线(10.03 ± 4.09 vs. 10.73 ± 3.54;P = 0.48)或术后 24 小时(239.01 ± 122.11 vs. 278.08 ± 151.29;P = 0.30)的差异无统计学意义。两组在术后恶心和呕吐方面的差异无显著性。结论 ESPB与PECS II-TTP一样有效,在最初的24小时内吗啡消耗量较低,NRS、首次镇痛请求时间和白细胞介素-6水平相当。两种阻滞都很安全,没有出现任何重大并发症。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Combined pectoralis II block and transversus thoracic plane block compared to erector spinae plane block for post-operative analgesia in patients undergoing modified radical mastectomy: A randomized clinical trial
ABSTRACT Background About 30% of Egyptian females had breast cancer. Surgery is a cornerstone of the treatment plan. New fascial plane block techniques enhance recovery and improve intra-operative and post-operative pain control. Aim of the study Effect of combined pectoralis II plus transversus thoracic plane blocks (PECS II- TTP) versus erector spinae plane block (ESPB) on post-operative morphine consumption, and interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels 24 hours after surgery. Methods Sixty-four female patients 18–60 years of age, ASA I or II were divided into two equal groups (32 patients each). Group (P) received a combination of PECS II and TTP blocks (injection of 10 ml 0.25% bupivacaine between pectoralis major (PM) and minor (Pm) muscles and 10 ml between the Pm and serratus anterior (Sa) muscles) at the third or the fourth rib, then 10 ml and the internal inter-costal muscles and the transversus thoracic muscle. Group (E) received ESPB (30 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine injected deep to the erector spinae muscle at the transverse process of the fifth thoracic vertebrae). Results Morphine consumption was significantly lower in group (E) throughout the 24 hours period of post-operative follow-up (0.93 ± 0.63 vs. 2.13 ± 0.42 (mg); p = 0.03). Both groups had comparable time till the first analgesic request (p = 0.23). There was statistically non-significant difference between the two groups regarding the numeric rating scale (NRS) (P > 0.05), and post-operative IL6 either at baseline (10.03 ± 4.09 vs. 10.73 ± 3.54; p = 0.48) or at 24 hours after surgery (239.01 ± 122.11 vs. 278.08 ± 151.29; p = 0.30). Both groups had non-significant difference regarding post-operative nausea and vomiting. Conclusion ESPB is as effective as PECS II-TTP with lower morphine consumption in the first 24 hours and comparable NRS, time to first analgesic request, and interleukin-6 levels. Both blocks were safe without any major complications.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia
Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia Medicine-Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
78
期刊最新文献
Intrathecal levo-bupivacaine versus hyperbaric bupivacaine for inguinal hernia repairs in ex-preterm infants: A double blinded randomized prospective study Comparison of two different methods as reliable predictors of successful caudal block in children Effect of sevoflurane versus propofol on early cognitive functions in elderly patients after lumbar disc surgery Muscle wasting assessed by ultrasound versus scoring systems as early predictor of outcomes of intensive care unit stay in critically ill patients Posterior quadratus lumborum versus caudal epidural block for perioperative analgesia in pediatric patients undergoing upper abdominal surgeries: Arandomized, double-blind trial
×
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