Department of Anaesthesia, College of Health Sciences and Medicine, Wolaita Sodo University, Wolaita Sodo, Ethiopia.
Department of Pharmacy, College of Health Sciences and Medicine, Wolaita Sodo University, Wolaita Sodo, Ethiopia.
Anaesthesia. 2024 Dec;79(12):1292-1299. doi: 10.1111/anae.16421. Epub 2024 Oct 10.
The use of erector spinae plane block and rectus sheath block for postoperative analgesia in midline abdominal procedures is becoming more common. However, the most effective and appropriate method remains unclear. We aimed to compare the postoperative analgesic effecacy of ultrasound-guided bilateral erector spinae plane blocks with rectus sheath blocks for midline abdominal surgery in a low- and middle-income country.
We allocated randomly 72 patients aged 18-65 y undergoing midline abdominal surgery to an erector spinae plane block (n = 36) or a rectus sheath block (n = 36) utilising a prospective, parallel study design. Patients, care providers and outcome assessors were blinded to the interventions. The primary outcome measures were total postoperative analgesia consumption, postoperative pain severity and time to first rescue analgesic administration. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of postoperative complications and adverse events.
Of 78 patients assessed for eligibility, six were excluded, leaving 72 for analysis. Patients allocated to erector spinae plane block had a lower mean (SD) postoperative opioid consumption compared with those allocated to rectus sheath block (3.5 (8.7) morphine milligram equivalents vs. 8.2 (2.8) morphine milligram equivalents, respectively; p = 0.003). Time to first analgesic request was greater in patients allocated to erector spinae plane block compared with those allocated to rectus sheath block (mean (95%CI) 16 (13-17) h vs. 12 (11-13) h, respectively; p < 0.001). There were no block-related complications in either group.
Erector spinae plane blocks are more effective than rectus sheath blocks for the management of postoperative pain following midline abdominal surgery. Integration of erector spinae plane blocks into multimodal opioid-sparing analgesic strategies after midline abdominal surgeries may promote enhanced patient recovery in low-and middle-income countries.
在中腹部手术中,使用竖脊肌平面阻滞和腹直肌鞘阻滞进行术后镇痛越来越普遍。然而,最有效的和最合适的方法仍不清楚。我们的目的是比较超声引导下双侧竖脊肌平面阻滞与腹直肌鞘阻滞在中腹部手术中的术后镇痛效果,该研究在中低收入国家进行。
我们采用前瞻性、平行设计,将 72 例年龄在 18-65 岁之间的中腹部手术患者随机分为竖脊肌平面阻滞组(n=36)或腹直肌鞘阻滞组(n=36)。患者、医护人员和结果评估者对干预措施均不知情。主要观察指标是术后总镇痛药物消耗、术后疼痛严重程度和首次使用解救性镇痛药物的时间。次要观察指标包括术后并发症和不良反应的发生率。
在评估的 78 例患者中,有 6 例被排除,最终有 72 例患者纳入分析。与腹直肌鞘阻滞组相比,接受竖脊肌平面阻滞的患者术后阿片类药物平均(SD)消耗量较低(3.5(8.7)吗啡毫克当量 vs. 8.2(2.8)吗啡毫克当量,p=0.003)。接受竖脊肌平面阻滞的患者首次要求镇痛的时间长于接受腹直肌鞘阻滞的患者(16(13-17)h vs. 12(11-13)h,p<0.001)。两组均无与阻滞相关的并发症。
在中腹部手术后,竖脊肌平面阻滞比腹直肌鞘阻滞更能有效管理术后疼痛。在中低收入国家,将竖脊肌平面阻滞纳入多模式阿片类药物节约型镇痛策略后,可能会促进中腹部手术后患者更快康复。