Ultrasound-guided deep versus superficial continuous serratus anterior plane block for pain management in patients with multiple rib fractures: A prospective randomized double-blind clinical trial.

IF 1.3 Q3 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Mohamed F Mostafa, Mohamed Abdel-Moniem Bakr, Mohamed Ismail Seddik, Mohammed Mamdouh Mohammed Mahmoud, Gamal M A Ibrahim, Ahmed Talaat Ahmed
{"title":"Ultrasound-guided deep versus superficial continuous serratus anterior plane block for pain management in patients with multiple rib fractures: A prospective randomized double-blind clinical trial.","authors":"Mohamed F Mostafa, Mohamed Abdel-Moniem Bakr, Mohamed Ismail Seddik, Mohammed Mamdouh Mohammed Mahmoud, Gamal M A Ibrahim, Ahmed Talaat Ahmed","doi":"10.4103/sja.sja_493_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Efficient analgesia is the cornerstone in multiple rib fractures (MRFs) management. The serratus anterior plane block (SAPB) shows promising outcomes. However, it is still provocative whether the superficial or deep approach is more effective in the SAPB procedure. We hypothesized that the deep approach of ultrasound (US)-guided continuous SAPB could be superior for MRFs pain management.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Sixty-two adult patients having unilateral MRFs, were randomized into two groups to receive continuous superficial SAPB (group S, n = 31) or continuous deep SAPB (group D, n = 31). As a primary outcome, we compared pain numeric rating scale (NRS), while total analgesic consumption, incentive spirometer volume (IS-V), lung ultrasound score (LUSS), basal and 24-h serum beta-endorphin (BE) levels, and any adverse events were secondary outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was a significant reduction in NRS in favor of group D when compared to group S at 30 minutes (<i>P</i> = 0.001) until 12 hours (<i>P</i> = 0.029); total analgesic consumption was significantly lower in group D (<i>P</i> = 0.005). A significant increase in the median IS-V in group D compared to group S at 90 minutes (<i>P</i> = 0.02) and 12h postblock (<i>P</i> = 0.004) LUSS was significantly lower in D group at 90 min, 12 h, and 24 h (<i>P</i> = 0.04, 0.001, 0.031). No significant differences as regards serum BE levels. No adverse events were noted.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Either superficial or deep continuous SAPB can be used safely and effectively in managing pain related to MRFs. Notably, the deep approach offered superior analgesia and improved deep breathing compared to the superficial.</p>","PeriodicalId":21533,"journal":{"name":"Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia","volume":"19 1","pages":"58-64"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11829691/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/sja.sja_493_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Efficient analgesia is the cornerstone in multiple rib fractures (MRFs) management. The serratus anterior plane block (SAPB) shows promising outcomes. However, it is still provocative whether the superficial or deep approach is more effective in the SAPB procedure. We hypothesized that the deep approach of ultrasound (US)-guided continuous SAPB could be superior for MRFs pain management.

Methods: Sixty-two adult patients having unilateral MRFs, were randomized into two groups to receive continuous superficial SAPB (group S, n = 31) or continuous deep SAPB (group D, n = 31). As a primary outcome, we compared pain numeric rating scale (NRS), while total analgesic consumption, incentive spirometer volume (IS-V), lung ultrasound score (LUSS), basal and 24-h serum beta-endorphin (BE) levels, and any adverse events were secondary outcomes.

Results: There was a significant reduction in NRS in favor of group D when compared to group S at 30 minutes (P = 0.001) until 12 hours (P = 0.029); total analgesic consumption was significantly lower in group D (P = 0.005). A significant increase in the median IS-V in group D compared to group S at 90 minutes (P = 0.02) and 12h postblock (P = 0.004) LUSS was significantly lower in D group at 90 min, 12 h, and 24 h (P = 0.04, 0.001, 0.031). No significant differences as regards serum BE levels. No adverse events were noted.

Conclusion: Either superficial or deep continuous SAPB can be used safely and effectively in managing pain related to MRFs. Notably, the deep approach offered superior analgesia and improved deep breathing compared to the superficial.

超声引导下深层与浅层连续前锯肌阻滞治疗多发性肋骨骨折患者疼痛:一项前瞻性随机双盲临床试验
背景:有效的镇痛是多发性肋骨骨折(MRFs)治疗的基石。锯肌前平面阻滞(SAPB)显示出良好的效果。然而,在SAPB程序中,究竟是浅层方法更有效还是深层方法更有效,仍然是一个争议。我们假设超声(US)引导下的持续SAPB深度入路对于MRFs疼痛管理可能更优越。方法:将62例单侧MRFs的成年患者随机分为两组,分别接受持续浅表SAPB (S组,n = 31)和持续深部SAPB (D组,n = 31)。作为主要结局,我们比较了疼痛数值评定量表(NRS),而镇痛药总用量、刺激肺活量(IS-V)、肺超声评分(LUSS)、基础和24小时血清β -内啡肽(BE)水平以及任何不良事件是次要结局。结果:与S组相比,D组的NRS在30分钟(P = 0.001)至12小时(P = 0.029)时显著降低;D组总镇痛用量显著低于对照组(P = 0.005)。D组的中位IS-V在90分钟(P = 0.02)和阻滞后12小时(P = 0.004)显著高于S组,而LUSS在90分钟、12小时和24小时显著低于S组(P = 0.04、0.001、0.031)。血清BE水平无显著差异。未发现不良事件。结论:浅表或深部连续SAPB均可安全有效地用于mrf相关疼痛的治疗。值得注意的是,与浅表入路相比,深度入路提供了更好的镇痛效果,并改善了深呼吸。
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
1.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
141
审稿时长
36 weeks
×
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