Scarci Marco, Joshi Abhishek, Attia Rizwan
Department of Thoracic Surgery, Guy's and St Thomas Hospital, Great Maze Pond, London, SE1 9RT, UK.
Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2010 Jan;10(1):92-6. doi: 10.1510/icvts.2009.221127. Epub 2009 Oct 23.
A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was: in patients undergoing thoracic surgery is paravertebral block (PVB) as effective as epidural analgesia for pain management? Altogether >184 papers were found using the reported search, seven of which represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. All studies agreed that PVB is at least as effective as epidural analgesia for pain control post-thoracotomy. In one paper, the visual analogue pain score (VAS) at rest and on cough was significantly lower in the paravertebral group (P=0.02 and 0.0001, respectively). Pulmonary function, as assessed by peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR), was significantly better preserved in the paravertebral group. The lowest PEFR as a fraction of preoperative control was 0.73 in the paravertebral group in contrast with 0.54 in the epidural group (P<0.004). Oximetric recordings were better in the paravertebral group (96%) compared to the epidural group (95%) (P=0.0001). Another article reported that statistically significant differences (forced vital capacity 46.8% for PVB and 39.3% for epidural group P<0.05; forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) 48.4% in PVB group and 35.9% in epidural group, P<0.05) were reached in day 2 and continued until day 3. Plasma concentrations of cortisol, as marker of postoperative stress, increased markedly in both groups, but the increment was statistically different in favour of the paravertebral group (P=0.003). Epidural block was associated with frequent side-effects [urinary retention (42%), nausea (22%), itching (22%) and hypotension (3%) and, rarely, respiratory depression (0.07%)]. Additionally, it prolonged operative time and was associated with technical failure or displacement (8%). Epidurals were also related to a higher complication rate (atelectasis/pneumonia) compared to the PVB (2 vs. 0). PVB was found to be of equal efficacy to epidural anaesthesia, but with a favourable side effect profile, and lower complication rate. The reduced rate of complication was most marked for pulmonary complications and is accompanied by quicker return to normal pulmonary function. We conclude intercostal analgesia, in the form of PVB, can be at least as effective as epidural analgesia.
根据结构化方案撰写了一篇心脏外科的最佳证据主题。所探讨的问题是:在接受胸外科手术的患者中,椎旁阻滞(PVB)在疼痛管理方面是否与硬膜外镇痛效果相同?通过报告的检索共找到184余篇论文,其中7篇代表了回答该临床问题的最佳证据。所有研究均认为,PVB在开胸术后疼痛控制方面至少与硬膜外镇痛效果相同。在一篇论文中,椎旁组静息和咳嗽时的视觉模拟疼痛评分(VAS)显著更低(分别为P = 0.02和0.0001)。通过呼气峰值流速(PEFR)评估的肺功能,在椎旁组中得到显著更好的保留。椎旁组最低PEFR占术前对照的比例为0.73,而硬膜外组为0.54(P < 0.004)。与硬膜外组(95%)相比,椎旁组的血氧饱和度记录更好(96%)(P = 0.0001)。另一篇文章报道,在术后第2天达到统计学显著差异(用力肺活量:PVB组为46.8%,硬膜外组为39.3%,P < 0.05;第1秒用力呼气量(FEV(1)):PVB组为48.4%,硬膜外组为35.9%,P < 0.05),并持续至第3天。作为术后应激标志物的皮质醇血浆浓度在两组中均显著升高,但椎旁组的升高在统计学上更有利(P = 0.003)。硬膜外阻滞与频繁的副作用相关[尿潴留(42%)、恶心(22%)、瘙痒(22%)和低血压(3%),很少有呼吸抑制(0.07%)]。此外,它延长了手术时间,并与技术失败或移位相关(8%)。与PVB相比,硬膜外阻滞还与更高的并发症发生率(肺不张/肺炎)相关(2例 vs. 0例)。发现PVB与硬膜外麻醉效果相同,但具有良好的副作用特征和更低的并发症发生率。并发症发生率的降低在肺部并发症方面最为明显,并伴随着更快恢复至正常肺功能。我们得出结论,以PVB形式的肋间镇痛至少与硬膜外镇痛效果相同。