超声引导下竖脊平面阻滞与超声引导下尾部硬膜外阻滞对小儿腹部手术的镇痛效果--一项患者与评估者盲法随机对照研究。

IF 1.3 Q3 ANESTHESIOLOGY Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-02 DOI:10.4103/sja.sja_518_23
Ashutosh Pandey, Zainab Ahmad, Shikha Jain, Abhijit Pakhare, Pramod K Sharma, Vaishali Waindeskar, Pranita Mandal, Sunaina T Karna
{"title":"超声引导下竖脊平面阻滞与超声引导下尾部硬膜外阻滞对小儿腹部手术的镇痛效果--一项患者与评估者盲法随机对照研究。","authors":"Ashutosh Pandey, Zainab Ahmad, Shikha Jain, Abhijit Pakhare, Pramod K Sharma, Vaishali Waindeskar, Pranita Mandal, Sunaina T Karna","doi":"10.4103/sja.sja_518_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Literature on the efficacy and safety of erector spinae plane block (ESPB) in pediatric patients is limited. Hence, we aimed to compare ESPB versus caudal epidural block (CEB) in children undergoing abdominal surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this patient and assessor-blind study, fifty-two ASA I-II patients, between 1 to 9 years of age, were randomized into groups of 26 each. ESPB group received unilateral or bilateral ultrasound (USG)-guided ESPB with 0.5 ml/kg of 0.25% bupivacaine per side. CEB group received USG-guided CEB with 1 ml/kg of 0.25% bupivacaine. The primary objective was to estimate the proportion of patients requiring postoperative rescue analgesia. The secondary objectives were to assess postoperative Face, Legs, Activity, Cry and Consolability (FLACC) scale scores, duration of analgesia, and consumption of rescue analgesic drugs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>More patients in the ESPB group (88.4%), compared to the CEB group (42.3%), required rescue analgesics (<i>P</i> value <0.001). FLACC scores in the ESPB group, though satisfactory, were inferior, to the CEB group. The duration of postoperative analgesia was shorter in the ESPB group by 9.54 h (95% CI: 4.51 to 14.57 h, <i>P</i> value <0.001). The median (IQR) consumption of rescue paracetamol was significantly higher in the ESPB group (20 mg/kg (10,20) compared to the CEB group (0.0 mg/kg (0.0,10) <i>P</i> value <0.001)). No adverse effects were reported.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In children undergoing abdominal surgery, both ESPB and CEB were safe and efficacious. CEB provided a longer duration and better quality of analgesia. ESPB may be considered when CEB is contraindicated or difficult.</p>","PeriodicalId":21533,"journal":{"name":"Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10833007/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The analgesic efficacy of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block versus ultrasound-guided caudal epidural block for abdominal surgery in pediatric patients - A patient and assessor-blind, randomized controlled study.\",\"authors\":\"Ashutosh Pandey, Zainab Ahmad, Shikha Jain, Abhijit Pakhare, Pramod K Sharma, Vaishali Waindeskar, Pranita Mandal, Sunaina T Karna\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/sja.sja_518_23\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Literature on the efficacy and safety of erector spinae plane block (ESPB) in pediatric patients is limited. Hence, we aimed to compare ESPB versus caudal epidural block (CEB) in children undergoing abdominal surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this patient and assessor-blind study, fifty-two ASA I-II patients, between 1 to 9 years of age, were randomized into groups of 26 each. ESPB group received unilateral or bilateral ultrasound (USG)-guided ESPB with 0.5 ml/kg of 0.25% bupivacaine per side. CEB group received USG-guided CEB with 1 ml/kg of 0.25% bupivacaine. The primary objective was to estimate the proportion of patients requiring postoperative rescue analgesia. The secondary objectives were to assess postoperative Face, Legs, Activity, Cry and Consolability (FLACC) scale scores, duration of analgesia, and consumption of rescue analgesic drugs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>More patients in the ESPB group (88.4%), compared to the CEB group (42.3%), required rescue analgesics (<i>P</i> value <0.001). FLACC scores in the ESPB group, though satisfactory, were inferior, to the CEB group. The duration of postoperative analgesia was shorter in the ESPB group by 9.54 h (95% CI: 4.51 to 14.57 h, <i>P</i> value <0.001). The median (IQR) consumption of rescue paracetamol was significantly higher in the ESPB group (20 mg/kg (10,20) compared to the CEB group (0.0 mg/kg (0.0,10) <i>P</i> value <0.001)). No adverse effects were reported.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In children undergoing abdominal surgery, both ESPB and CEB were safe and efficacious. CEB provided a longer duration and better quality of analgesia. ESPB may be considered when CEB is contraindicated or difficult.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21533,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10833007/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/sja.sja_518_23\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/2 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/sja.sja_518_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:有关竖脊肌平面阻滞(ESPB)在儿童患者中的有效性和安全性的文献有限。因此,我们旨在对接受腹部手术的儿童进行 ESPB 与尾硬膜外阻滞(CEB)的比较:在这项患者和评估者盲法研究中,52 名年龄在 1 到 9 岁之间的 ASA I-II 级患者被随机分为两组,每组 26 人。ESPB组接受单侧或双侧超声波(USG)引导下的ESPB,每侧0.5毫升/千克0.25%布比卡因。CEB 组在 USG 引导下接受 CEB,每侧注射 1 毫升/千克 0.25% 布比卡因。首要目标是估计需要术后镇痛抢救的患者比例。次要目标是评估术后面部、腿部、活动、哭泣和舒适度(FLACC)量表评分、镇痛持续时间和镇痛抢救药物消耗量:结果:ESPB 组(88.4%)与 CEB 组(42.3%)相比,有更多的患者需要使用镇痛抢救药物(P 值 P 值 P 值 P 值 结论:ESPB 组与 CEB 组相比,有更多的患者需要使用镇痛抢救药物(P 值 P 值 P 值 P 值):在接受腹部手术的儿童中,ESPB和CEB均安全有效。CEB提供的镇痛时间更长,质量更好。如果禁用或难以使用 CEB,可考虑使用 ESPB。
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
The analgesic efficacy of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block versus ultrasound-guided caudal epidural block for abdominal surgery in pediatric patients - A patient and assessor-blind, randomized controlled study.

Background: Literature on the efficacy and safety of erector spinae plane block (ESPB) in pediatric patients is limited. Hence, we aimed to compare ESPB versus caudal epidural block (CEB) in children undergoing abdominal surgery.

Methods: In this patient and assessor-blind study, fifty-two ASA I-II patients, between 1 to 9 years of age, were randomized into groups of 26 each. ESPB group received unilateral or bilateral ultrasound (USG)-guided ESPB with 0.5 ml/kg of 0.25% bupivacaine per side. CEB group received USG-guided CEB with 1 ml/kg of 0.25% bupivacaine. The primary objective was to estimate the proportion of patients requiring postoperative rescue analgesia. The secondary objectives were to assess postoperative Face, Legs, Activity, Cry and Consolability (FLACC) scale scores, duration of analgesia, and consumption of rescue analgesic drugs.

Results: More patients in the ESPB group (88.4%), compared to the CEB group (42.3%), required rescue analgesics (P value <0.001). FLACC scores in the ESPB group, though satisfactory, were inferior, to the CEB group. The duration of postoperative analgesia was shorter in the ESPB group by 9.54 h (95% CI: 4.51 to 14.57 h, P value <0.001). The median (IQR) consumption of rescue paracetamol was significantly higher in the ESPB group (20 mg/kg (10,20) compared to the CEB group (0.0 mg/kg (0.0,10) P value <0.001)). No adverse effects were reported.

Conclusion: In children undergoing abdominal surgery, both ESPB and CEB were safe and efficacious. CEB provided a longer duration and better quality of analgesia. ESPB may be considered when CEB is contraindicated or difficult.

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
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
141
审稿时长
36 weeks
期刊最新文献
The trapezius plane block: Extended use in perioperative pain management in nerve transfer surgeries. Intermittent apnoea and manual jet ventilation: A successful anesthetic management for infant with acquired Myer-Cotton class III subglottic stenosis undergoing endoscopic balloon dilatation Challenges in the anesthetic management of a pediatric patient with glottic web – A lesson Effect of bispectral index on intra-operative awareness: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies Incidence of post-dural lumbar puncture headache (PDLPH) in comparison between emergency and elective lower segment cesarean section (LSCS) with 26G Quincke–Babcock cutting-beveled spinal needle
×
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