BACKGROUND: We wanted to determine the postoperative analgesic efficacy of preincisional caudal epidural block versus instillation (splash block) following inguinal herniorrhaphy in children. METHODS: THIRTY CHILDREN (AGE RANGE: 1-7 years) who were scheduled to undergo inguinal herniorrhaphy were divided into 2 groups: the caudal block group and the splash block group with 15 children in each group. Tracheal intubation was performed. Fifteen children received caudal block with 1.0 ml/kg of 0.25% ropivacaine (Group 1). Caudal block was performed using the loss of resistance method via the sacral hiatus. Fifteen children in Group 2 received local instillation (splash block) in the surgical site with up to 0.4 ml/kg of 0.25% ropivacaine. The patients were observed for 90 minutes in the postanesthesia care unit and then they were transferred to the ward. The pain scores were taken 4 times. We assessed pain using the Faces pain scores. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the groups regarding the pain scores at 10, 30 and 60 minutes upon entering the postanesthesia care unit. The pain scores of Group 1 were slightly lower at the last evaluation point when compared to that of Group 2. One patient in Group 1 required supplemental postoperative intravenous (IV) tramadol, while all the other patients in both groups did not require supplemental IV tramadol. The intraoperative requirement for sevoflurane was decreased in Group 1 as compared to that of Group 2. There were no major complications related to either type of block. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that a splash block can have a similar analgesic effect as that of a caudal block for the postoperative herniorrhaphy pain of children.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: We wanted to determine the postoperative analgesic efficacy of preincisional caudal epidural block versus instillation (splash block) following inguinal herniorrhaphy in children. METHODS: THIRTY CHILDREN (AGE RANGE: 1-7 years) who were scheduled to undergo inguinal herniorrhaphy were divided into 2 groups: the caudal block group and the splash block group with 15 children in each group. Tracheal intubation was performed. Fifteen children received caudal block with 1.0 ml/kg of 0.25% ropivacaine (Group 1). Caudal block was performed using the loss of resistance method via the sacral hiatus. Fifteen children in Group 2 received local instillation (splash block) in the surgical site with up to 0.4 ml/kg of 0.25% ropivacaine. The patients were observed for 90 minutes in the postanesthesia care unit and then they were transferred to the ward. The pain scores were taken 4 times. We assessed pain using the Faces pain scores. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the groups regarding the pain scores at 10, 30 and 60 minutes upon entering the postanesthesia care unit. The pain scores of Group 1 were slightly lower at the last evaluation point when compared to that of Group 2. One patient in Group 1 required supplemental postoperative intravenous (IV) tramadol, while all the other patients in both groups did not require supplemental IV tramadol. The intraoperative requirement for sevoflurane was decreased in Group 1 as compared to that of Group 2. There were no major complications related to either type of block. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that a splash block can have a similar analgesic effect as that of a caudal block for the postoperative herniorrhaphy pain of children.