Li Jing, Shao Peiqi, Wen Hong, Ma Danxu, Yang Lina, He Jianshuai, Jiang Jia
Department of Anesthesiology, Beijing Tongzhou District Hospital of Integrated TCM and Western Medicine, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Department of Anesthesiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
J Pain Res. 2025 May 13;18:2427-2438. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S518558. eCollection 2025.
This study aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of costotransverse foramen block for postoperative analgesia in video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS).
Seventy-five patients undergoing elective VATS under general anaesthesia were recruited to this double-blind, non- inferiority trial and randomized to preoperatively receive a thoracic paravertebral block (TPVB group), a costotransverse foramen block (CTFB group), or an erector spinae plane block (ESPB group) with 0.5% ropivacaine 20 mL at T5 level. The primary outcome was the postoperative numerical rating scale pain score assessed at 6 h. Secondary outcomes included pain scores at other time points, total opioids consumption at 24 h postoperatively, time to first patient-controlled analgesia pump bolus, number of patients requiring rescue analgesia, dermatomal coverage at 30 min after block, time to perform the block, satisfaction scores of the analgesic effect, block-related side effects, and other complications. The health-related quality of life was evaluated one month after surgery.
The pain scores at 6 h after surgery were 0 (0, 3) in the TPVB group, 0 (0, 2) in the CTFB group, and 4 (3, 4) in the ESPB group. The 95% CI of median difference was 0 to 0 comparing CTFB with TPVB and -4 to -2 comparing CTFB with ESPB. Both the upper 95% CI limits were lower than the predefined noninferiority margin of 1. The pain scores at postanaesthesia care unit, 1 h, 6 h and 12 h after surgery, number of block dermatomes, patient satisfaction scores, time to perform the block as well as the time to first analgesia pump bolus were significantly different between the CTFB group and ESPB group. No differences were detected in other secondary outcomes.
Ultrasound-guided CTFB provided noninferior analgesia compared to TPVB at 6 h after VATS. Additionally, CTFB might provide better analgesia to ESPB although larger confirmatory researches for superiority are further warranted.
本研究旨在探讨肋横突孔阻滞用于电视辅助胸腔镜手术(VATS)术后镇痛的安全性和有效性。
75例在全身麻醉下接受择期VATS手术的患者被纳入这项双盲、非劣效性试验,并随机分为术前接受胸段椎旁阻滞(TPVB组)、肋横突孔阻滞(CTFB组)或竖脊肌平面阻滞(ESPB组),于T5水平注射20 mL 0.5%罗哌卡因。主要结局是术后6小时评估的数字评分量表疼痛评分。次要结局包括其他时间点的疼痛评分、术后24小时的总阿片类药物消耗量、首次使用患者自控镇痛泵推注的时间、需要补救镇痛的患者数量、阻滞后30分钟的皮节覆盖范围、实施阻滞的时间、镇痛效果满意度评分、阻滞相关副作用及其他并发症。术后1个月评估与健康相关的生活质量。
TPVB组术后6小时疼痛评分为0(0,3),CTFB组为0(0,2),ESPB组为4(3,4)。CTFB组与TPVB组比较,中位数差异的95%CI为0至0;CTFB组与ESPB组比较,中位数差异的95%CI为 -4至 -2。两个95%CI上限均低于预先定义的非劣效界值1。CTFB组与ESPB组在麻醉后恢复室、术后1小时、6小时和12小时的疼痛评分、阻滞皮节数量、患者满意度评分、实施阻滞的时间以及首次使用镇痛泵推注的时间方面存在显著差异。在其他次要结局方面未检测到差异。
超声引导下的CTFB在VATS术后6小时提供了与TPVB相当的镇痛效果。此外,CTFB可能比ESPB提供更好的镇痛效果,尽管仍需要更大规模的确证性研究来证实其优越性。