Comparative analysis of analgesic efficacy and functional recovery in open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a randomized controlled trial of local anesthetic wound infiltration, transversus abdominis plane block, and intramuscular electrical stimulation.

IF 6.1 2区 医学 Q1 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-18 DOI:10.21037/hbsn-23-650
Hyun-Chang Kim, Jinyoung Park, Hyung Sun Kim, Yeon Hwa Hong, Young Song, Joon Seong Park
{"title":"Comparative analysis of analgesic efficacy and functional recovery in open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a randomized controlled trial of local anesthetic wound infiltration, transversus abdominis plane block, and intramuscular electrical stimulation.","authors":"Hyun-Chang Kim, Jinyoung Park, Hyung Sun Kim, Yeon Hwa Hong, Young Song, Joon Seong Park","doi":"10.21037/hbsn-23-650","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is associated with severe postoperative pain. Optimized pain management can potentially elevate patients' postoperative quality of life. This study focused on comparing the analgesic efficacy and subsequent functional recovery of three techniques, continuous local wound infiltration (LWI), four-quadrant transversus abdominis plane (4QTAP) block, and needle electrical twitch obtaining intramuscular stimulation (NETOIMS), in patients subjected to open PD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a prospective, single-blinded, randomized controlled study. Among a total of 80 eligible patients, 72 were randomized into the LWI, 4QTAP block, or NETOIMS groups for postoperative pain management. The primary outcome measured was the pain score, which was recorded on postoperative days (PODs) 0, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 14, and 28. Additionally, consumption of morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) and ibuprofen until POD 3 was analyzed. Functional recovery indicators, such as gait speed and peak cough flow (PCF), were assessed on the day before surgery (baseline), and on PODs 2, 7, 14, and 28. A one-way analysis of variance, with subsequent <i>post-hoc</i> Bonferroni analysis, was used to compare these main outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of the 72 patients, 68 (LWI, 22; 4QTAP, 23; NETOIMS 23) were included in the final analysis. Compared to the LWI group, both the 4QTAP block and NETOIMS group demonstrated significantly lower pain scores from PODs 0 through 7 (P<0.001 for POD 0-5; P=0.001 for POD 7, for both groups). The pain scores in the 4QTAP block and NETOIMS groups were comparable across all recorded time points. Up to POD 3, there was a significant reduction in both MMEs (P<0.001) and ibuprofen consumption (P=0.003) in these groups. Additionally, on POD 2, the 4QTAP block and NETOIMS groups exhibited superior PCF (P<0.001) and faster gait speed (P=0.008) compared to the LWI group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared to LWI, both 4QTAP block and NETOIMS were more effective in reducing postoperative pain, necessitated fewer analgesics, and facilitated improved functional recovery after PD.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Clinical Research Information Service of Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency; cris.nih.go.kr; registration ID: KCT0005814.</p>","PeriodicalId":12878,"journal":{"name":"Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition","volume":"13 6","pages":"950-961"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11634415/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/hbsn-23-650","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is associated with severe postoperative pain. Optimized pain management can potentially elevate patients' postoperative quality of life. This study focused on comparing the analgesic efficacy and subsequent functional recovery of three techniques, continuous local wound infiltration (LWI), four-quadrant transversus abdominis plane (4QTAP) block, and needle electrical twitch obtaining intramuscular stimulation (NETOIMS), in patients subjected to open PD.

Methods: This is a prospective, single-blinded, randomized controlled study. Among a total of 80 eligible patients, 72 were randomized into the LWI, 4QTAP block, or NETOIMS groups for postoperative pain management. The primary outcome measured was the pain score, which was recorded on postoperative days (PODs) 0, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 14, and 28. Additionally, consumption of morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) and ibuprofen until POD 3 was analyzed. Functional recovery indicators, such as gait speed and peak cough flow (PCF), were assessed on the day before surgery (baseline), and on PODs 2, 7, 14, and 28. A one-way analysis of variance, with subsequent post-hoc Bonferroni analysis, was used to compare these main outcomes.

Results: Out of the 72 patients, 68 (LWI, 22; 4QTAP, 23; NETOIMS 23) were included in the final analysis. Compared to the LWI group, both the 4QTAP block and NETOIMS group demonstrated significantly lower pain scores from PODs 0 through 7 (P<0.001 for POD 0-5; P=0.001 for POD 7, for both groups). The pain scores in the 4QTAP block and NETOIMS groups were comparable across all recorded time points. Up to POD 3, there was a significant reduction in both MMEs (P<0.001) and ibuprofen consumption (P=0.003) in these groups. Additionally, on POD 2, the 4QTAP block and NETOIMS groups exhibited superior PCF (P<0.001) and faster gait speed (P=0.008) compared to the LWI group.

Conclusions: Compared to LWI, both 4QTAP block and NETOIMS were more effective in reducing postoperative pain, necessitated fewer analgesics, and facilitated improved functional recovery after PD.

Trial registration: Clinical Research Information Service of Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency; cris.nih.go.kr; registration ID: KCT0005814.

背景:胰十二指肠切除术(PD胰十二指肠切除术(PD)与严重的术后疼痛有关。优化疼痛管理有可能提高患者的术后生活质量。本研究重点比较了连续局部伤口浸润(LWI)、腹横肌四象限平面(4QTAP)阻滞和针刺电抽搐肌内刺激(NETOIMS)三种技术对开腹胰十二指肠切除术患者的镇痛效果和后续功能恢复情况:这是一项前瞻性、单盲、随机对照研究。方法:这是一项前瞻性、单盲、随机对照研究,在符合条件的 80 名患者中,72 人被随机分为 LWI、4QTAP 阻滞或 NETOIMS 组,以进行术后疼痛治疗。测量的主要结果是术后第 0、1、2、3、5、7、14 和 28 天的疼痛评分。此外,还分析了 POD 3 前吗啡毫克当量(MMEs)和布洛芬的消耗量。在手术前一天(基线)以及 POD 2、7、14 和 28 日对步速和咳嗽流量峰值 (PCF) 等功能恢复指标进行了评估。采用单因素方差分析和事后 Bonferroni 分析来比较这些主要结果:在 72 名患者中,有 68 人(LWI,22 人;4QTAP,23 人;NETOIMS,23 人)被纳入最终分析。与 LWI 组相比,4QTAP 阻滞组和 NETOIMS 组从 POD 0 到 7 的疼痛评分均显著降低(结论:与 LWI 组相比,4QTAP 阻滞组和 NETOIMS 组从 POD 0 到 7 的疼痛评分均显著降低(结论:与 LWI 组相比,4QTAP 阻滞组和 NETOIMS 组从 POD 0 到 7 的疼痛评分均显著降低):与LWI相比,4QTAP阻滞和NETOIMS都能更有效地减轻术后疼痛,减少镇痛药的用量,并有助于改善PD术后的功能恢复:试验注册:韩国疾病预防控制机构临床研究信息服务处;cris.nih.go.kr;注册编号:KCT0005814:KCT0005814.
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
自引率
10.00%
发文量
392
期刊介绍: Hepatobiliary Surgery and Nutrition (HBSN) is a bi-monthly, open-access, peer-reviewed journal (Print ISSN: 2304-3881; Online ISSN: 2304-389X) since December 2012. The journal focuses on hepatopancreatobiliary disease and nutrition, aiming to present new findings and deliver up-to-date, practical information on diagnosis, prevention, and clinical investigations. Areas of interest cover surgical techniques, clinical and basic research, transplantation, therapies, NASH, NAFLD, targeted drugs, gut microbiota, metabolism, cancer immunity, genomics, and nutrition and dietetics. HBSN serves as a valuable resource for professionals seeking insights into diverse aspects of hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition.
×
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