Recovery quality of transversus abdominis plane block with liposomal bupivacaine after cesarean delivery: A randomized trial

IF 5 2区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Heng-Hua Liu MD , Di Qiu MD , De-Rong Xu MD , Jian-Jun Yang MD, PhD , Pei-Lan Teng MD
{"title":"Recovery quality of transversus abdominis plane block with liposomal bupivacaine after cesarean delivery: A randomized trial","authors":"Heng-Hua Liu MD ,&nbsp;Di Qiu MD ,&nbsp;De-Rong Xu MD ,&nbsp;Jian-Jun Yang MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Pei-Lan Teng MD","doi":"10.1016/j.jclinane.2024.111608","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Study objective</h3><p>This study aimed to investigate the effect of liposomal bupivacaine in transversus abdominis plane block (TAP) on recovery quality after cesarean delivery.</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>A randomized trial.</p></div><div><h3>Setting</h3><p>An operating room, a post-anesthesia care unit, and a hospital ward.</p></div><div><h3>Patients</h3><p>A total of 147 women scheduled for cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia were enrolled and randomized to receive a TAP block with plain bupivacaine (bupivacaine group), liposomal bupivacaine (liposomal group), or a mixture of plain bupivacaine and liposomal bupivacaine (mixture group).</p></div><div><h3>Interventions</h3><p>The bupivacaine group received bilateral TAP blocks with plain bupivacaine 50 mg alone. The liposomal group received bilateral TAP blocks with liposomal bupivacaine 266 mg alone. The mixture group received bilateral TAP blocks with plain bupivacaine 50 mg followed by liposomal bupivacaine 266 mg.</p></div><div><h3>Measurements</h3><p>The primary outcome was the Quality of Recovery−15 (QoR − 15) score assessed 24 h postoperatively. Secondary outcomes encompassed the QoR − 15 score at 48 h post-surgery, the VAS pain score at rest and with movement at 24, 48, and 72 h postoperatively, opioid consumption within the 0–24 h and 24–48 h periods following surgery, as well as patient's satisfaction with analgesic.</p></div><div><h3>Main results</h3><p>The QoR − 15 score at 24 h postoperatively was significantly higher in both the liposomal group and the mixture group compared to the bupivacaine group. Specifically, the QoR − 15 score for the liposomal group versus the bupivacaine group (median [IQR]: 120 [107, 128] vs. 109 [104, 120]; median difference, 7; 95 % CI, 2 to 13; <em>P</em> = 0.011) and for the mixture group versus the bupivacaine group (median [IQR]: 122 [112, 128] vs. 109 [104, 120]; median difference, 9; 95 % CI, 4 to 14; <em>P</em> = 0.001). The QoR − 15 score in both the liposomal group and the mixture group were also higher than those in the bupivacaine group at 48 h postoperatively, though the difference was not clinically meaningful. Additionally, both the liposomal and mixture groups exhibited lower pain score at 24 h and 48 h postoperatively compared to the bupivacaine group, but no significant clinical differences were achieved in either pain scores or opioid consumption. Patients in both the liposomal and mixture groups reported higher satisfaction score with analgesia than those in the bupivacaine group.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>TAP block using either liposomal bupivacaine or a mixture of plain bupivacaine and liposomal bupivacaine provided superior quality of recovery at 24 h after cesarean delivery compared to using plain bupivacaine alone.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":15506,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Anesthesia","volume":"99 ","pages":"Article 111608"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Anesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095281802400237X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Study objective

This study aimed to investigate the effect of liposomal bupivacaine in transversus abdominis plane block (TAP) on recovery quality after cesarean delivery.

Design

A randomized trial.

Setting

An operating room, a post-anesthesia care unit, and a hospital ward.

Patients

A total of 147 women scheduled for cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia were enrolled and randomized to receive a TAP block with plain bupivacaine (bupivacaine group), liposomal bupivacaine (liposomal group), or a mixture of plain bupivacaine and liposomal bupivacaine (mixture group).

Interventions

The bupivacaine group received bilateral TAP blocks with plain bupivacaine 50 mg alone. The liposomal group received bilateral TAP blocks with liposomal bupivacaine 266 mg alone. The mixture group received bilateral TAP blocks with plain bupivacaine 50 mg followed by liposomal bupivacaine 266 mg.

Measurements

The primary outcome was the Quality of Recovery−15 (QoR − 15) score assessed 24 h postoperatively. Secondary outcomes encompassed the QoR − 15 score at 48 h post-surgery, the VAS pain score at rest and with movement at 24, 48, and 72 h postoperatively, opioid consumption within the 0–24 h and 24–48 h periods following surgery, as well as patient's satisfaction with analgesic.

Main results

The QoR − 15 score at 24 h postoperatively was significantly higher in both the liposomal group and the mixture group compared to the bupivacaine group. Specifically, the QoR − 15 score for the liposomal group versus the bupivacaine group (median [IQR]: 120 [107, 128] vs. 109 [104, 120]; median difference, 7; 95 % CI, 2 to 13; P = 0.011) and for the mixture group versus the bupivacaine group (median [IQR]: 122 [112, 128] vs. 109 [104, 120]; median difference, 9; 95 % CI, 4 to 14; P = 0.001). The QoR − 15 score in both the liposomal group and the mixture group were also higher than those in the bupivacaine group at 48 h postoperatively, though the difference was not clinically meaningful. Additionally, both the liposomal and mixture groups exhibited lower pain score at 24 h and 48 h postoperatively compared to the bupivacaine group, but no significant clinical differences were achieved in either pain scores or opioid consumption. Patients in both the liposomal and mixture groups reported higher satisfaction score with analgesia than those in the bupivacaine group.

Conclusions

TAP block using either liposomal bupivacaine or a mixture of plain bupivacaine and liposomal bupivacaine provided superior quality of recovery at 24 h after cesarean delivery compared to using plain bupivacaine alone.

剖腹产后使用脂质体布比卡因进行腹横肌平面阻滞的恢复质量:随机试验
研究目的本研究旨在探讨腹横肌平面阻滞(TAP)中使用脂质体布比卡因对剖宫产术后恢复质量的影响。干预措施布比卡因组接受单纯布比卡因50毫克的双侧TAP阻滞,脂质体组接受单纯布比卡因50毫克的双侧TAP阻滞。脂质体组接受双侧 TAP 阻滞,单用脂质体布比卡因 266 毫克。测量主要结果是术后 24 小时的恢复质量-15(QoR - 15)评分。次要结果包括术后48小时的QoR - 15评分,术后24、48和72小时静息和运动时的VAS疼痛评分,术后0-24小时和24-48小时内阿片类药物的消耗量,以及患者对镇痛剂的满意度。主要结果术后24小时的QoR - 15评分在脂质体组和混合物组均显著高于布比卡因组。具体来说,脂质体组与布比卡因组的 QoR - 15 评分(中位数 [IQR]:120[107,128] vs. 109[104,120];中位数差异,7;95 % CI,2 至 13;P = 0.011)和混合组与布比卡因组的 QoR - 15 分数(中位数[IQR]:122 [112,128] vs. 109 [104,120];中位数差异,7;95 % CI,2 至 13;P = 0.011):122 [112, 128] 对 109 [104, 120];中位数差异,9;95 % CI,4 至 14;P = 0.001)。术后 48 小时,脂质体组和混合物组的 QoR - 15 分数也高于布比卡因组,但差异没有临床意义。此外,与布比卡因组相比,脂质体组和混合物组在术后 24 小时和 48 小时的疼痛评分都较低,但无论是疼痛评分还是阿片类药物的用量都没有显著的临床差异。结论与单独使用普通布比卡因相比,使用脂质体布比卡因或普通布比卡因和脂质体布比卡因的混合液进行 AP 阻滞可在剖宫产术后 24 小时内提供更好的恢复质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
4.50%
发文量
346
审稿时长
23 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Anesthesia (JCA) addresses all aspects of anesthesia practice, including anesthetic administration, pharmacokinetics, preoperative and postoperative considerations, coexisting disease and other complicating factors, cost issues, and similar concerns anesthesiologists contend with daily. Exceptionally high standards of presentation and accuracy are maintained. The core of the journal is original contributions on subjects relevant to clinical practice, and rigorously peer-reviewed. Highly respected international experts have joined together to form the Editorial Board, sharing their years of experience and clinical expertise. Specialized section editors cover the various subspecialties within the field. To keep your practical clinical skills current, the journal bridges the gap between the laboratory and the clinical practice of anesthesiology and critical care to clarify how new insights can improve daily practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信