Department of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya, 50603, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Department of Pharmacy Practice, School of Pharmacy, International Medical University, 57000, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Obes Surg. 2021 Oct;31(10):4305-4315. doi: 10.1007/s11695-021-05564-x. Epub 2021 Jul 19.
Transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block and intraperitoneal local anesthetics (IPLA) are widely investigated techniques that potentially improve analgesia after bariatric surgery. The analgesic efficacy of TAP block has been shown in previous studies, but the performance of TAP block can be difficult in patients with obesity. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the analgesic efficacy of TAP block and IPLA. An alternative technique is useful in clinical setting when TAP block is not feasible.
We searched PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL from inception until August 2020 for randomized controlled trials comparing both techniques. The primary outcome was cumulative morphine consumption at 24 h. Secondary pain-related outcomes included pain score at rest and on movement at 2, 6, 12, and 24 h; postoperative nausea and vomiting; and length of hospital stay.
We included 23 studies with a total of 2,178 patients. TAP block is superior to control in reducing opioid consumption at 24 h, improving pain scores at all the time points and postoperative nausea and vomiting. The cumulative opioid consumption at 24 h for IPLA is less than control, while the indirect comparison between IPLA with PSI and control showed a significant reduction in pain scores at rest, at 2 h, and on movement at 12 h, and 24 h postoperatively.
Transversus abdominis plane block is effective for reducing pain intensity and has superior opioid-sparing effect compared to control. Current evidence is insufficient to show an equivalent analgesic benefit of IPLA to TAP block.
腹横肌平面(TAP)阻滞和腹腔内局部麻醉(IPLA)是广泛研究的技术,可潜在改善减重手术后的镇痛效果。TAP 阻滞的镇痛效果已在先前的研究中得到证实,但在肥胖患者中,TAP 阻滞的效果可能难以实现。我们进行了系统评价和荟萃分析,比较了 TAP 阻滞和 IPLA 的镇痛效果。当 TAP 阻滞不可行时,替代技术在临床实践中很有用。
我们从建库至 2020 年 8 月,在 PubMed、Embase 和 CENTRAL 中搜索比较这两种技术的随机对照试验。主要结局是 24 小时累积吗啡消耗量。次要疼痛相关结局包括 2、6、12 和 24 小时静息和运动时的疼痛评分、术后恶心和呕吐以及住院时间。
我们纳入了 23 项研究,共计 2178 例患者。与对照组相比,TAP 阻滞在减少 24 小时阿片类药物消耗、改善所有时间点的疼痛评分以及术后恶心和呕吐方面具有优势。IPLA 的 24 小时累积阿片类药物消耗量少于对照组,而 IPLA 与 PSI 与对照组之间的间接比较显示,术后 2、6、12 和 24 小时静息和运动时的疼痛评分显著降低。
与对照组相比,TAP 阻滞可有效减轻疼痛强度,并具有更好的阿片类药物节约作用。目前的证据不足以表明 IPLA 与 TAP 阻滞具有同等的镇痛效果。