Yeung Joyce H Y, Gates Simon, Naidu Babu V, Wilson Matthew J A, Gao Smith Fang
Academic Department of Anaesthesia, Critical Care, Pain and Resuscitation, Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham Heartlands Hospital, 1/F MIDRU Building, Birmingham Heartlands Hospital, Bordersley Green East, Birmingham, UK, B9 5SS.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Feb 21;2(2):CD009121. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009121.pub2.
Operations on structures in the chest (usually the lungs) involve cutting between the ribs (thoracotomy). Severe post-thoracotomy pain can result from pleural (lung lining) and muscular damage, costovertebral joint (ribcage) disruption and intercostal nerve (nerves that run along the ribs) damage during surgery. Poor pain relief after surgery can impede recovery and increase the risks of developing complications such as lung collapse, chest infections and blood clots due to ineffective breathing and clearing of secretions. Effective management of acute pain following thoracotomy may prevent these complications and reduce the likelihood of developing chronic pain. A multi-modal approach to analgesia is widely employed by thoracic anaesthetists using a combination of regional anaesthetic blockade and systemic analgesia, with both non-opioid and opioid medications and local anaesthesia blockade.There is some evidence that blocking the nerves as they emerge from the spinal column (paravertebral block, PVB) may be associated with a lower risk of major complications in thoracic surgery but the majority of thoracic anaesthetists still prefer to use a thoracic epidural blockade (TEB) as analgesia for their patients undergoing thoracotomy. In order to bring about a change in practice, anaesthetists need a review that evaluates the risk of all major complications associated with thoracic epidural and paravertebral block in thoracotomy.
To compare the two regional techniques of TEB and PVB in adults undergoing elective thoracotomy with respect to:1. analgesic efficacy;2. the incidence of major complications (including mortality);3. the incidence of minor complications;4. length of hospital stay;5. cost effectiveness.
We searched for studies in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2013, Issue 9); MEDLINE via Ovid (1966 to 16 October 2013); EMBASE via Ovid (1980 to 16 October 2013); CINAHL via EBSCO host (1982 to 16 October 2013); and reference lists of retrieved studies. We handsearched the Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery and Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia (16 October 2013). We reran the search on 31st January 2015. We found one additional study which is awaiting classification and will be addressed when we update the review.
We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PVB with TEB in thoracotomy, including upper gastrointestinal surgery.
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors (JY and SG) independently assessed the studies for inclusion and then extracted data as eligible for inclusion in qualitative and quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis).
We included 14 studies with a total of 698 participants undergoing thoracotomy. There are two studies awaiting classification. The studies demonstrated high heterogeneity in insertion and use of both regional techniques, reflecting real-world differences in the anaesthesia techniques. Overall, the included studies have a moderate to high potential for bias, lacking details of randomization, group allocation concealment or arrangements to blind participants or outcome assessors. There was low to very low-quality evidence that showed no significant difference in 30-day mortality (2 studies, 125 participants. risk ratio (RR) 1.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39 to 4.23, P value = 0.68) and major complications (cardiovascular: 2 studies, 114 participants. Hypotension RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.01 to 6.62, P value = 0.45; arrhythmias RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.29, P value = 0.36, myocardial infarction RR 3.19, 95% CI 0.13, 76.42, P value = 0.47); respiratory: 5 studies, 280 participants. RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.52, P value = 0.30). There was moderate-quality evidence that showed comparable analgesic efficacy across all time points both at rest and after coughing or physiotherapy (14 studies, 698 participants). There was moderate-quality evidence that showed PVB had a better minor complication profile than TEB including hypotension (8 studies, 445 participants. RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.38, P value < 0.0001), nausea and vomiting (6 studies, 345 participants. RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.75, P value = 0.001), pruritis (5 studies, 249 participants. RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.59, P value = 0.0005) and urinary retention (5 studies, 258 participants. RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.46, P value < 0.0001). There was insufficient data in chronic pain (six or 12 months). There was no difference found in and length of hospital stay (3 studies, 124 participants). We found no studies that reported costs.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Paravertebral blockade reduced the risks of developing minor complications compared to thoracic epidural blockade. Paravertebral blockade was as effective as thoracic epidural blockade in controlling acute pain. There was a lack of evidence in other outcomes. There was no difference in 30-day mortality, major complications, or length of hospital stay. There was insufficient data on chronic pain and costs. Results from this review should be interpreted with caution due to the heterogeneity of the included studies and the lack of reliable evidence. Future studies in this area need well-conducted, adequately-powered RCTs that focus not only on acute pain but also on major complications, chronic pain, length of stay and costs.
胸部结构(通常是肺部)的手术涉及在肋骨间切开(开胸手术)。开胸手术后的剧痛可能源于手术过程中胸膜(肺内膜)和肌肉的损伤、肋椎关节(胸廓)的破坏以及肋间神经(沿肋骨走行的神经)的损伤。术后疼痛缓解不佳会阻碍恢复,并增加因呼吸无效和分泌物清除不畅而引发诸如肺萎陷、胸部感染和血栓等并发症的风险。开胸术后急性疼痛的有效管理可能预防这些并发症,并降低慢性疼痛发生的可能性。胸科麻醉医生广泛采用多模式镇痛方法,联合使用区域麻醉阻滞和全身镇痛,包括非阿片类和阿片类药物以及局部麻醉阻滞。有证据表明,在脊柱旁阻滞神经(椎旁阻滞,PVB)可能与胸科手术中主要并发症风险较低相关,但大多数胸科麻醉医生仍更倾向于使用胸段硬膜外阻滞(TEB)作为开胸手术患者的镇痛方法。为了改变这种做法,麻醉医生需要一项评估开胸手术中与胸段硬膜外阻滞和椎旁阻滞相关的所有主要并发症风险的综述。
比较TEB和PVB这两种区域技术在接受择期开胸手术的成年人中的以下方面:1. 镇痛效果;2. 主要并发症(包括死亡率)的发生率;3. 次要并发症的发生率;4. 住院时间;5. 成本效益。
我们检索了Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL 2013年第9期);通过Ovid检索MEDLINE(1966年至2013年10月16日);通过Ovid检索EMBASE(1980年至2013年10月16日);通过EBSCOhost检索CINAHL(1982年至2013年10月16日);以及检索到的研究的参考文献列表。我们手工检索了《心胸外科杂志》和《心胸与血管麻醉杂志》(2013年10月16日)。我们于2015年1月31日重新进行了检索。我们发现了一项额外的研究,该研究正在等待分类,将在我们更新综述时进行处理。
我们纳入了所有比较开胸手术(包括上消化道手术)中PVB与TEB的随机对照试验(RCT)。
我们采用了Cochrane期望的标准方法程序。两位综述作者(JY和SG)独立评估研究是否纳入,然后提取符合纳入定性和定量综合分析(荟萃分析)条件的数据。
我们纳入了14项研究,共有698名接受开胸手术的参与者。有两项研究正在等待分类。这些研究表明,两种区域技术在穿刺和使用方面存在高度异质性,反映了麻醉技术在实际应用中的差异。总体而言,纳入的研究存在中度到高度的偏倚可能性,缺乏随机化细节、组分配隐藏或使参与者或结果评估者盲法的安排。有低到极低质量的证据表明,30天死亡率(2项研究,125名参与者。风险比(RR)1.28,95%置信区间(CI)0.39至4.23,P值 = 0.68)和主要并发症(心血管方面:2项研究,114名参与者。低血压RR 0.30,95%CI 0.01至6.62,P值 = 0.45;心律失常RR 0.36,95%CI 0.04至3.29,P值 = 0.36,心肌梗死RR 3.19,95%CI 0.13至76.42,P值 = 0.47);呼吸方面:5项研究,280名参与者。RR 0.