| Literature DB >> 30425560 |
Hong Zhou1, Xuefeng Ma1, Jinghua Pan2, Hanlin Shuai1, Shanshan Liu3, Xin Luo1, Ruiman Li1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block can provide effective analgesia for abdominal surgery. However, many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown controversial results in hysterectomy. We conducted a meta-analysis of RCTs to investigate the effectiveness of TAP block after hysterectomy.Entities:
Keywords: TAP block; abdominal; hysterectomy; laparoscopic; meta-analysis; ultrasound-guided
Year: 2018 PMID: 30425560 PMCID: PMC6204870 DOI: 10.2147/JPR.S172828
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Pain Res ISSN: 1178-7090 Impact factor: 3.133
Characteristics of the included studies
| Year | Authors | Group (n) | Age (years) (mean or median) | BMI (kg/m2)/weight (kg) (mean or median) | Surgery | Anesthesia | Blocking time | Block solution | Pain assessment | Primary outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||||||
| 2008 | Carney et al | TAP: 24, Sham: 26 | TAP: 54, Sham: 50 | TAP: 26, Sham: 27 | TAH | GA | Pre | 0.75% RP (1.5 mg/kg) | VAS (10) | MC |
| 2011 | Amr and Amin | TAP (pre): 23, TAP (post): 23, Sham: 22 | TAP (pre): 54, TAP (post): 52 Sham: 51 | TAP (pre): 80, TAP (post): 82, Sham: 82 | TAH | GA | Pre and post | 0.375% BP (20 mL) | VAS (100) | MC |
| 2011 | Atim et al | TAP: 18, Sham: 18, INF: 19 | TAP: 47, Sham: 44, INF: 40 | TAP: 71, Sham: 67, INF: 65 | TAH | GA | Post | 0.25% BP (20 mL) | VAS (10) | PP |
| 2011 | De Oliveira et al | TAP (0.25% RP): 21, TAP (0.5% RP): 22, Sham: 23 | TAP (0.25% RP): 46, TAP (0.5% RP): 45, Sham: 47 | TAP (0.25% RP): 27, TAP (0.5% RP): 25, Sham: 27 | LH | GA | Pre | (0.25%–0.5%) RP (20 mL) | NRS (10) | QoR-40 |
| 2012 | Kane et al | TAP: 28, NC: 28 | TAP: 46, NC: 44 | TAP: 31, NC: 30 | LH | GA | Pre | 0.5% RP+EP (20 mL) | VAS (100) | QoR-40 |
| 2013 | Gharaei et al | TAP: 21, NC: 21 | TAP: 64, NC: 65 | TAP: 71, NC: 72 | TAH | GA | Post | 0.2% RP (0.5 mg/kg) | VAS (10) | PP |
| 2014 | Bhattacharjee et al | TAP: 45, Sham: 45 | TAP: 46, Sham: 45 | TAP: 53, Sham: 53 | TAH | GA | Pre | 0.25% BP (0.5 mL/kg) | VAS (100) | PP |
| 2014 | Calle et al | TAP: 100, Sham: 97 | TAP: 44, Sham: 43 | TAP: 25, Sham: 26 | LH | GA | Post | 0.25% BP (20 mL) | VAS (10) | PP |
| 2014 | Marais et al | TAP: 15, Sham: 15 | TAP: 47, Sham: 48 | TAP: 25, Sham: 28 | TAH | GA | Pre | 0.25% BP (20 mL) | VAS (10) | MC |
| 2015 | Røjskjaer et al | TAP: 23, Sham: 23 | TAP: 49, Sham: 47 | TAP: 28, Sham: 25 | TAH | GA | Pre | 0.75% RP (20 mL) | VAS (100) | MC |
| 2015 | Torup et al | TAP: 34, Sham: 31 | TAP: 53, Sham: 57 | TAP: 24, Sham: 29 | RH | GA | Pre | 0.5% RP (20 mL) | VAS (100) | MC |
| 2016 | Ghisi et al | TAP: 22, NC: 22 | TAP: 46, NC: 48 | TAP: 59, NC: 61 | LH | GA | Pre | 0.375% LBP (20 mL) | NRS (10) | MC |
| 2016 | Moyo et al | TAP+Dxm: 16, Sham: 16 | TAP+Dxm: 41, Sham: 47 | TAP+Dxm: 24, Sham: 24 | AH | GA | Pre | 0.25 % BP (20 mL), Dxm (4 mg) | VAS (10) | PP |
Abbreviations: AH, abdominal hysterectomy; BP, bupivacaine; Dxm, dexamethasone; EP, epinephrine; GA, general anesthetic; INF, surgical site infiltration; LBP, levobupivacaine; LH, laparoscopic hysterectomy; MC, morphine consumption; NC, no block; PP, postoperative pain; Post, postoperation; Pre, preoperation; QoR-40, quality of recovery score; RH, robotic-assisted hysterectomy; RP, ropivacaine; SA, spinal anesthesia; Sham, sham block; TAH, total abdominal hysterectomy, TAP, transversus abdominis plane block; VAS, visual analogue scale; NRS, numerical rating scale.
Figure 1PRISMA flow diagram of study identification and selection process.
Note: Reproduced from PLoS Medicine (OPEN ACCESS) Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097.44
Figure 2Distribution of bias in the included trials.
Notes: Green = low risk of bias. Red = high risk of bias. Yellow = unclear risk of bias.
Figure 3Cochrane collaboration’s risk of bias summary: evaluation of risk of bias items for each included study.
Notes: Green = low risk of bias. Red = high risk of bias. Yellow = unclear risk of bias.
Figure 4Forest plots of the effect of TAP block group vs control group.
Notes: (A) Mean 24-hour morphine consumption. (B) Time to first request for analgesic. (C) Rate of nausea and vomiting.
Abbreviations: h, hours; TAP, transversus abdominis plane.
Pain score results at different times of postoperation of TAP vs NC/SB
| Outcomes | Subgroup | Studies included | No. of patients (Exp/Con) | Weighed mean (95% CI) | Heterogeneity
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||
| Pain score at rest at 2 hours | AH | 6 | 148/126 | −1.41 (−2.57, −0.26) | 0.002 | <0.0001 | 97% |
| LH/RH | 3 | 84/84 | −0.83 (−1.52, −0.14) | 0.02 | 0.73 | 0% | |
| Pain score at rest at 6–8 hours | AH | 6 | 146/125 | −1.29 (−1.91, −0.68) | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | 91% |
| LH/RH | 2 | 56/53 | −0.61 (−1.51, 0.29) | 0.19 | 0.06 | 73% | |
| Pain score at rest at 12 hours | AH | 3 | 91/69 | −1.25 (−2.23, −0.27) | 0.01 | 0.05 | 67% |
| Pain score at rest at 24 hours | AH | 5 | 124/104 | −0.73 (−1.33, −0.14) | 0.02 | <0.0001 | 91% |
| LH/RH | 5 | 227/201 | −0.64 (−1.45, 0.16) | 0.12 | 0.0006 | 80% | |
| Pain score at rest at 48 hours | AH | 3 | 91/69 | −1.27 (−1.91, −0.62) | 0.0001 | 0.05 | 67% |
| Pain score on movement at 2 hours | AH | 5 | 127/105 | −1.91 (−3.30, −0.53) | 0.007 | <0.0001 | 98% |
| LH/RH | 2 | 56/53 | 0.22 (−0.62, 1.06) | 0.61 | 0.56 | 0% | |
| Pain score on movement at 6–8 hours | AH | 5 | 125/104 | −1.39 (−2.16, −0.63) | 0.0004 | <0.0001 | 91% |
| LH/RH | 2 | 56/53 | 0.98 (0.58, 1.38) | <0.0001 | 0.81 | 0% | |
| Pain score on movement at 12 hours | AH | 2 | 70/48 | −1.60 (−1.93, −1.28) | <0.0001 | 0.86 | 0% |
| Pain score on movement at 24 hours | AH | 5 | 124/104 | −1.12 (−1.91, −0.33) | 0.005 | <0.0001 | 93% |
| LH/RH | 2 | 56/53 | 0.11 (−0.68, 0.90) | 0.78 | 0.78 | 0% | |
| Pain score on movement at 48 hours | AH | 2 | 70/48 | −1.62 (−2.14, −1.10) | <0.0001 | 0.24 | 27% |
Abbreviations: AH, abdominal hysterectomy; Con, control group; Exp, experimental group; LH, laparoscopic hysterectomy; NC, no block; RH, robotic-assisted hysterectomy; SB, sham block; TAP, transversus abdominis plane block.
Sensitivity analysis of studies for laparoscopic hysterectomy
| Outcomes | Studies included | References | No. of patients (Exp/Con) | Weighed mean (95% CI) | Heterogeneity
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||
| Mean 24-hour morphine consumption | 3 | 71/73 | −0.04 (−2.72, 2.64) | 0.98 | 1.00 | 0% | |
| Pain score at rest at 2 hours | 2 | 50/50 | −1.00 (−1.81, −0.19) | 0.02 | 1.00 | 0% | |
| Pain score at rest at 24 hours | 4 | 10,11,23,26 | 171/170 | −0.44 (−1.21, 0.23) | 0.20 | 0.04 | 64% |
Abbreviations: Con, control group; Exp, experimental group.
Figure 5Representative funnel plots for TAP block group vs control group. Notes: (A) Mean 24-hour morphine consumption; (B) Rest pain score at 2 hours; (C) Rate of nausea and vomiting.
Abbreviations: h, hours; MD, mean difference; SE, standard error; TAP, transver-sus abdominis plane.