Sharma Vipul, Atluri Harika
Anesthesiology, Dr. D. Y. Patil Medical College, Hospital and Research Centre, Dr. D. Y. Patil Vidyapeeth, Pune, IND.
Cureus. 2024 Aug 18;16(8):e67149. doi: 10.7759/cureus.67149. eCollection 2024 Aug.
Background Effective pain control is vital for patients undergoing heart surgery. Utilizing a multimodal approach to analgesia is essential, as poor pain management can result in hemodynamic and systemic complications. This study aimed to compare perioperative pain management techniques in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), specifically evaluating continuous thoracic epidural analgesia and ultrasound-guided bilateral erector spinae block. Methods This randomized comparative study was conducted at a tertiary care centre over a period of six months, with approval from the institute's ethics committee. A total of 24 patients undergoing CABG under general anesthesia participated in the study. They were randomly assigned to either the continuous thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) group (Group A) or the ultrasound-guided bilateral erector spinae plane (ESP) block group (Group B) using a simple randomization method. The study assessed intraoperative intravenous opioid requirements for maintaining stable hemodynamics, as well as postoperative resting and coughing Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores and peak inspiratory spirometry. Results Twelve patients from each group completed the study, with comparable demographics (age, gender). Both groups exhibited similar resting and coughing VAS scores at 0, 3, 6, and 12 hours postoperatively (p > 0.05). However, at 24, 36, and 48 hours, Group A had significantly higher VAS scores compared to Group B (p < 0.05). Group A maintained an overall mean VAS score of 4 or less during rest and coughing. Peak inspiratory spirometry results were consistent between both groups (p > 0.05). Conclusion The ultrasound-guided bilateral erector spinae block provided pain control comparable to thoracic epidural analgesia, making it a viable alternative for perioperative pain management. This is particularly beneficial for CABG patients where early postoperative anticoagulant therapy is crucial for graft patency. Effective pain management also contributes to faster recovery in coronary artery bypass grafting.
背景 有效的疼痛控制对于接受心脏手术的患者至关重要。采用多模式镇痛方法至关重要,因为疼痛管理不善可能导致血流动力学和全身并发症。本研究旨在比较接受冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)患者的围手术期疼痛管理技术,特别评估连续胸椎硬膜外镇痛和超声引导下双侧竖脊肌阻滞。方法 本随机对照研究在一家三级护理中心进行,为期六个月,并获得了该机构伦理委员会的批准。共有24例在全身麻醉下接受CABG的患者参与了本研究。使用简单随机化方法将他们随机分配到连续胸椎硬膜外镇痛(TEA)组(A组)或超声引导下双侧竖脊肌平面(ESP)阻滞组(B组)。该研究评估了维持稳定血流动力学所需的术中静脉注射阿片类药物用量,以及术后静息和咳嗽视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分和吸气峰流速。结果 每组12例患者完成了研究,人口统计学特征(年龄、性别)具有可比性。两组在术后0、3、6和12小时的静息和咳嗽VAS评分相似(p>0.05)。然而,在术后24、36和48小时,A组的VAS评分显著高于B组(p<0.05)。A组在静息和咳嗽期间的总体平均VAS评分为4或更低。两组的吸气峰流速结果一致(p>0.05)。结论 超声引导下双侧竖脊肌阻滞提供的疼痛控制与胸椎硬膜外镇痛相当,使其成为围手术期疼痛管理的可行替代方案。这对于CABG患者尤其有益,因为术后早期抗凝治疗对于移植物通畅至关重要。有效的疼痛管理也有助于冠状动脉旁路移植术患者更快康复。