Moustafa Moustafa A, Alabd Ahmad S, Ahmed Aly M M, Deghidy Ehsan A
Anaesthesia and Surgical Intensive Care, Alexandria Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria, Egypt.
Department of Biomedical Informatics and Medical Statistics, Medical Research Institute, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
Indian J Anaesth. 2020 Jan;64(1):49-54. doi: 10.4103/ija.IJA_536_19. Epub 2020 Jan 7.
Regional analgesia may play a role in pain management during breast surgery. Ultrasound approach to paravertebral block may be challenging. This study compared success rates of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block (ESPB) versus parasagittal in-plane thoracic paravertebral block among senior anaesthesia residents in modified radical mastectomy.
One hundred and two female patients undergoing modified radical mastectomy were randomly categorized into PARA group receiving sagittal in-plane paravertebral block and ESPB group receiving erector spinae plane block. The block in the 1 six cases in each group was done by an experienced consultant as a demonstration for three anaesthesia residents not experienced in either block. Primary endpoint was assessing success rate of the blocks. Secondary endpoint was the haemodynamic response to skin incision and postoperative analgesia.
All patients were females undergoing modified radical mastectomy. Success rate among residents was 100% in ESPB versus 77.8% in PARA group ( = 0.002). Duration to perform the block was less in ESPB group (4.39 ± 1.2 min) than PARA group (8.18 ± 2.42 min) ( < 0.0001). Guidance frequency by consultants was significantly higher in PARA than ESPB group. Time to 1 analgesic requirement and morphine consumption postoperatively were insignificant between the groups. There was no significant difference regarding haemodynamics.
ESPB may be a simple and safe alternative to parasagittal in-plane paravertebral block to provide postoperative analgesia in modified radical mastectomy especially in novice practitioners. It provides equivalent profile of postoperative analgesia with less time to perform the block.
区域镇痛可能在乳腺手术的疼痛管理中发挥作用。超声引导下椎旁阻滞可能具有挑战性。本研究比较了在改良根治性乳房切除术中,资深麻醉住院医师实施超声引导竖脊肌平面阻滞(ESPB)与矢状面平面内胸椎旁阻滞的成功率。
102例行改良根治性乳房切除术的女性患者被随机分为接受矢状面平面内椎旁阻滞的PARA组和接受竖脊肌平面阻滞的ESPB组。每组中的16例阻滞由一位经验丰富的顾问进行示范操作,供三位对两种阻滞均无经验的麻醉住院医师学习。主要终点是评估阻滞的成功率。次要终点是对皮肤切口的血流动力学反应和术后镇痛情况。
所有患者均为行改良根治性乳房切除术的女性。ESPB组住院医师的成功率为100%,而PARA组为77.8%(P = 0.002)。ESPB组完成阻滞的时间(4.39±1.2分钟)比PARA组(8.18±2.42分钟)短(P < 0.0001)。顾问指导频率在PARA组显著高于ESPB组。两组之间术后首次镇痛需求时间和吗啡消耗量无显著差异。血流动力学方面无显著差异。
在改良根治性乳房切除术中,尤其是对于新手从业者,ESPB可能是矢状面平面内椎旁阻滞的一种简单且安全的替代方法,可提供术后镇痛。它能提供相当的术后镇痛效果,且完成阻滞的时间更短。