| Literature DB >> 30777027 |
Qiang Zhu1, Li Li1, Zhaoyun Yang1, Jinmei Shen1, Rong Zhu1, Yu Wen2, Wenwu Cai2, Lei Liu3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Quadratus lumborum (QL) block is increasingly being used as a new abdominal nerve block technique. In some studies of mid and lower abdominal and hip analgesia, continuous QL block achieved favorable outcomes as an alternative to continuous intravenous analgesia with opioids. However, the use of continuous QL block for upper abdominal pain is less well characterized. This study aimed to investigate the effects of continuous anterior QL block (CQLB) on postoperative pain and recovery in patients undergoing open liver resection.Entities:
Keywords: Continuous quadratus lumborum block; Liver resection; Postoperative analgesia; Ultrasound guidance
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30777027 PMCID: PMC6380018 DOI: 10.1186/s12871-019-0692-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Anesthesiol ISSN: 1471-2253 Impact factor: 2.217
Fig. 1Flow chart of this study. A total of 63 patients were enrolled in this study. One patient from the PCIA group was lost to follow-up due to postoperative hemorrhage, one block failure and one catheter occlusion in the CQLB group were lost to follow-up. Therefore, 30 patients in each group had completed the study
Fig. 2The ultrasound view of the CQLB. QL: Quadratus Lumborum PM: psoas major ES: erector spinae. a: ultrasound anatomical structure b: spread of local anesthetic. c: image of catheterization
Comparison of the general conditions of the two groups of patients
| CQLB group | PCIA group | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex ratio [female/male, %] | 13/17 | 13/17 | > 0.99 | |
| Age (year) | 50.7 ± 6.8 | 49.3 ± 9.1 | 0.62 | |
| Body Mass Index(kg/m2) | 23.1 ± 2.7 | 22.4 ± 2.6 | 0.37 | |
| ASA classification ratio (I/II/III) | 14/13/3 | 16/12/2 | 0.83 | |
| Rate of bile duct exploration [case (%)] | 10 (33.3%) | 10 (33.3%) | > 0.99 | |
| Comorbidity [case (%)] | Hypertension | 3 (10%) | 2 (6.7%) | 0.86 |
| Diabetes | 2 (6.7%) | 2 (6.7%) | ||
| Liver cirrhosis | 5 (16.7%) | 6 (20%) | ||
Comparison of the intraoperative conditions of the two groups of patients (mean ± standard deviation)
| CQLB group | PCIA group | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Operation time (min) | 202.6 ± 65.9 | 186.8 ± 42.7 | 0.65 |
| Propofol dosage (mg·kg−1·h− 1) | 4.3 ± 0.9 | 5.1 ± 1.1 | < 0.01 |
| Remifentanil dosage ((ug·kg− 1·h− 1) | 5.1 ± 1.3 | 6.7 ± 1.4 | < 0.01 |
| Time for recovery from anesthesia(min) | 21.0 ± 14.3 | 27.7 ± 19.4 | 0.03 |
Comparison of intraoperative SBP, DBP, and HR (mean ± standard deviation)
| T0 | T1 | T2 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SBP (mmHg) | CQLB | 133.6 ± 14.6 | 114.0 ± 8.8 | 121.8 ± 11.3ab |
| PCIA | 128.6 ± 14.3 | 110.7 ± 12.7 | 130.1 ± 13.9b | |
| DBP (mmHg) | CQLB | 78.3 ± 6.0 | 66.8 ± 6.1 | 70.5 ± 8.6ab |
| PCIA | 77.5 ± 7.7 | 67.5 ± 7.7 | 77.2 ± 8.0b | |
| HR (bpm) | CQLB | 78.4 ± 12.0 | 62.0 ± 9.9 | 62.8 ± 10.1a |
| PCIA | 78.3 ± 11.4 | 60.3 ± 9.1 | 67.1 ± 9.5b | |
Compared with PCIA group, aP < 0.05; compared with T1, bP < 0.05
Comparison of postoperative SBP, DBP, and HR (mean ± standard deviation)
| T3 | T4 | T5 | T6 | T7 | T8 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SBP (mmHg) | CQLB | 132.7 ± 13.7 | 125.8 ± 12.9 | 128.2 ± 14.1 | 121.7 ± 14.6 | 127.1 ± 17.5 | 123.3 ± 13.0 |
| PCIA | 134.4 ± 13.7 | 127.8 ± 13.7 | 127.7 ± 17.0 | 115.8 ± 15.5 | 121.1 ± 18.3 | 122.4 ± 16.2 | |
| DBP (mmHg) | CQLB | 69.1 ± 8.4 | 75.7 ± 7.4 | 78.3 ± 6.7 | 76.1 ± 9.4 | 77.0 ± 10.1 | 77.4 ± 8.2 |
| PCIA | 69.9 ± 9.6 | 76.5 ± 10.6 | 77.3 ± 11.0 | 72.7 ± 11.3 | 74.6 ± 14.1 | 74.6 ± 12.1 | |
| HR (bpm) | CQLB | 67.1 ± 7.7 | 73.3 ± 11.3 | 75.4 ± 10.2 | 78.9 ± 15.6 | 78.3 ± 14.4 | 80.2 ± 11.9 |
| PCIA | 67.6 ± 10.4 | 73.1 ± 11.2 | 75.8 ± 10.3 | 79.5 ± 15.7 | 78.5 ± 14.2 | 79.8 ± 11.9 | |
No significant differences in SBP, DBP, and HR were found between the two groups of patients at different postoperative time points
Comparison of postoperative pain scores and sedation scale [Score, M (IQM)]
| T3 | T4 | T5 | T6 | T7 | T8 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NRS pain score at rest | CQLB | 2.0 (2,4) | 3.0 (2,4) | 3.0 (2,4) | 2.0 (2,3) | 2.0 (1,3) | 1.0 (1,2)a |
| PCIA | 3.0 (3,4) | 3.0 (3,4) | 3.0 (3,4) | 3.0 (2,3) | 3.0 (2,3) | 2.0 (2,3) | |
| NRS pain score on coughing | CQLB | 4.0 (3,6)a, | 5.0 (4,6) a | 5.0 (4,5) a | 4.0 (4,5) a | 3.0 (3,5) a | 3.0 (1,3) a |
| PCIA | 5.0 (4,6) | 5.0 (5,6) | 5.0 (5,6) | 5.0 (3,5) | 4.0 (4,5) | 4.0 (3,4) | |
| Ramsay Sedation scale | CQLB | 3.0 (2,3) | 3.0 (2,3) | 2.0 (2,3)a | 2.0 (2,3) | 2.0 (2,2) | 2.0 (2,2) |
| PCIA | 3.0 (2,3) | 3.0 (2,3) | 3.0 (2,3) | 2.0 (2,3) | 2.0 (2,2) | 2.0 (2,2) |
Compared with the PCIA group, aP < 0.05
Comparison of postoperative conditions between the two groups of patients
| CQLB group | PCIA group | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Time to first out-of-bed activity after surgery (h) | 73.2 ± 24.9 | 85.7 ± 23.0 | 0.03 |
| Time to first flatus after surgery (h) | 61.7 ± 18.1 | 70.1 ± 15 | 0.03 |
| Self-administered analgesic counts [M (IQM)] | 3 (1, 4) | 3 (2, 4) | 0.38 |
| Rate of supplemental analgesic use [case (%)] | 4 (13.3%) | 6 (20%) | 0.73 |
Comparison of empathic rate of analgesic-related adverse effects between the two groups of patients [case (%)]
| CQLB group | PCIA group | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Postoperative agitation | 0 (0%) | 1 (3.3%) | > 0.99 |
| Respiratory depression | 0 (0%) | 1 (3.3%) | > 0.99 |
| Nausea | 4 (13.3%) | 7 (23.3%) | 0.51 |
| Vomiting | 2 (6.6%) | 4 (13.3%) | 0.67 |
| Dizziness | 0 (0%) | 3 (10%) | 0.24 |