| Literature DB >> 32989202 |
Boo-Young Hwang1,2, Eunsoo Kim1,2, Jae-Young Kwon1, Ji-Youn Lee1, Dowon Lee1, Eun Ji Park1, Taewoo Kang3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The thoracic paravertebral block is an effective analgesic technique for postoperative pain management after breast surgery. The ultrasound-guided retrolaminar block (RLB) is a safer alternative to conventional paravertebral block. Thus, we assessed the analgesic efficacy of ultrasound-guided RLB for postoperative pain management after breast surgery.Entities:
Keywords: Analgesics; Anesthetics; Breast Neoplasms; Injections; Interventional; Local; Nerve Block; Opioid; Pain; Postoperative; Ropivacaine; Spinal; Ultrasonography; Visual Analog Scale
Year: 2020 PMID: 32989202 PMCID: PMC7532298 DOI: 10.3344/kjp.2020.33.4.378
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Korean J Pain ISSN: 2005-9159
Fig. 1(A) Proper longitudinal position of the curvilinear transducer with skin markings for the retrolaminar block. (B) Ultrasound image demonstrating the relationship of the vertebral lamina to needle placement with spreading local anesthetics during the retrolaminar block. T2: second thoracic vertebra, T3: third thoracic vertebra.
Fig. 2Study flow chart with specific causes of study interruptions and dropouts. The flow chart of this study is based on the CONSORT Statement. Group C: retrolaminar injection with saline, Group R: retrolaminar block with local anesthetics, PCA: controlled analgesia.
Patient and Clinical Characteristics
| Characteristic | Group C (n = 24) | Group R (n = 22) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ASA classification (I/II) | 17/7 (70.8/29.2) | 12/10 (54.5/45.5) | 0.087 |
| Apfel score | 0.288 | ||
| 1 | 2 (8.3) | 0 | |
| 2 | 13 (54.2) | 16 (72.7) | |
| 3 | 8 (33.3) | 4 (18.2) | |
| 4 | 1 (4.2) | 2 (9.1) | |
| Age (yr) | 49.8 ± 8.5 | 54.7 ± 10.7 | 0.368 |
| Height (cm) | 151.6 ± 23.5 | 154.7 ± 17.4 | 0.794 |
| Weight (kg) | 59.8 ± 20.1 | 62.7 ± 22.9 | 0.241 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 23.0 ± 3.7 | 23.6 ± 3.1 | 0.221 |
| Duration of anesthesia (min) | 160.0 ± 30.0 | 180.0 ± 33.8 | 0.780 |
| Duration of surgery (min) | 135.0 ± 41.3 | 150.0 ± 34.5 | 0.697 |
| Remifentanil consumption (μg) | 663.5 ± 300.5 | 618.5 ± 218.0 | 0.025 |
| Propofol consumption (mg) | 1,076.4 ± 286.1 | 1,032.1 ± 205.0 | 0.151 |
| Operation | 0.271 | ||
| MRM | 7 (29.2) | 8 (36.4) | |
| Quadrantectomy | 17 (70.8) | 14 (63.6) |
Data are presented as number (%) or mean ± standard deviation.
There were no differences in ASA classification, Apfel score, age, height, weight, BMI, duration of surgery, propofol consumption, and operation type between the groups.
Group C: retrolaminar injection with saline, Group R: retrolaminar block with local anesthetics, ASA: American Society of Anesthesiologists, BMI: body mass index, MRM: modified radical mastectomy.
*P < 0.05.
Incidence of Adverse Events
| Side effect | Group C | Group R | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nausea | ≤ 1 hr | 1 (4.2) | 0 | > 0.99 |
| 1 hr <–≤ 6 hr | 2 (8.3) | 0 | 0.490 | |
| 6 hr <–≤ 24 hr | 3 (12.5) | 2 (9.1) | > 0.99 | |
| 24 hr <–≤ 48 hr | 4 (16.7) | 0 | 0.110 | |
| Vomiting | < 48 hr | 2 (8.3) | 0 | 0.490 |
| Respiratory depression | < 48 hr | 0 | 0 | |
| Toxicity of local anesthetics | < 48 hr | 0 | 0 | |
| Horner’s syndrome | < 48 hr | 0 | 0 |
Data are presented as number (%).
Group C: retrolaminar injection with saline, Group R: retrolaminar block with local anesthetics.
The Satisfaction of Patient on Postoperative Pain Management
| Scale | Group C (n = 24) | Group R (n = 22) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.213 |
| 2 | 0 | 0 | |
| 3 | 2 (8.3) | 0 | |
| 4 | 19 (79.2) | 16 (72.7) | |
| 5 | 3 (12.5) | 6 (27.3) |
Data are presented as number (%).
Group C: retrolaminar injection with saline, Group R: retrolaminar block with local anesthetics.
Fig. 3(A) The visual analogue scale (VAS) of pain intensity during resting was evaluated at 1, 6, 24, and 48 hours after the operation. VAS during resting decreased in both groups as time passed and was higher in group C than group R at 1 hour postoperatively (P = 0.011). (B) VAS of pain intensity during coughing was assessed at 1, 6, 24, and 48 hours after the operation. VAS during resting decreased in both groups as time passed and was higher in group C than group R at 1 hour postoperatively (P = 0.004). Data were expressed as median ± interquartile range. Mann-Whitney U-test was used for a comparison of the two groups at each measuring point, and rank transform for parametric factorial analyses using ANOVA procedures were performed to analyze the interaction between time and group. Group C: retrolaminar injection with saline, Group R: retrolaminar block with local anesthetics. *P < 0.05 compared with group C.
Fig. 4The accumulated intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) dose was assessed at 1, 6, 24, and 48 hours after the operation. There was no significant difference between the two groups. Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation. Repeated measures ANOVA was performed to analyze the interaction between time and group.