Pain Management in Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery: A Review of Current Clinical Evidence.

IF 4.1 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Pain and Therapy Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-24 DOI:10.1007/s40122-025-00739-1
Burhan Dost, Esra Turunc, Muhammed Enes Aydin, Cengiz Kaya, Aslihan Aykut, Zeliha Asli Demir, Madan Narayanan, Alessandro De Cassai
{"title":"Pain Management in Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery: A Review of Current Clinical Evidence.","authors":"Burhan Dost, Esra Turunc, Muhammed Enes Aydin, Cengiz Kaya, Aslihan Aykut, Zeliha Asli Demir, Madan Narayanan, Alessandro De Cassai","doi":"10.1007/s40122-025-00739-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Compared with conventional sternotomy, minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) is associated with significant advantages such as reduced tissue trauma, faster recovery, and shorter hospital stay. However, the management of postoperative pain caused by intercostal nerve injury, pleural irritation, and tissue retraction remains a major challenge. Despite the less invasive nature of MICS, patients often report experiencing pain similar to that experienced following conventional cardiac surgery, particularly during the acute postoperative period. Effective pain management is essential for optimizing recovery, reducing the consumption of opioids, and preventing the transition to chronic postsurgical pain. Regional anesthesia techniques play a key role in multimodal analgesia for MICS. Thoracic epidural analgesia exhibits strong analgesic efficacy; nevertheless, it remains underutilized owing to concerns regarding anticoagulation-related complications and hemodynamic instability. The thoracic paravertebral block is a safer alternative that provides comparable pain relief with fewer side effects. Similarly, ultrasound-guided fascial plane blocks, such as serratus anterior, parasternal intercostal, interpectoral + pectoserratus, and erector spinae plane blocks, have gained popularity owing to their safety and feasibility; however, the effectiveness of these blocks varies according to the surgical approach and type of incision. Systemic analgesia is an integral component of multimodal pain management in MICS. Despite the efficacy of opioids, a shift toward opioid-sparing strategies has been observed given the significant adverse effects associated with the use of opioids. Intravenous adjuncts such as dexmedetomidine, ketamine, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs can reduce opioid consumption and improve postoperative pain control. Despite advances in pain management, a single approach that can provide comprehensive analgesia for MICS remains to be established. A multimodal strategy that combines systemic and regional techniques must be developed to optimize pain management and long-term outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":19908,"journal":{"name":"Pain and Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"913-930"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12085451/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40122-025-00739-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Compared with conventional sternotomy, minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) is associated with significant advantages such as reduced tissue trauma, faster recovery, and shorter hospital stay. However, the management of postoperative pain caused by intercostal nerve injury, pleural irritation, and tissue retraction remains a major challenge. Despite the less invasive nature of MICS, patients often report experiencing pain similar to that experienced following conventional cardiac surgery, particularly during the acute postoperative period. Effective pain management is essential for optimizing recovery, reducing the consumption of opioids, and preventing the transition to chronic postsurgical pain. Regional anesthesia techniques play a key role in multimodal analgesia for MICS. Thoracic epidural analgesia exhibits strong analgesic efficacy; nevertheless, it remains underutilized owing to concerns regarding anticoagulation-related complications and hemodynamic instability. The thoracic paravertebral block is a safer alternative that provides comparable pain relief with fewer side effects. Similarly, ultrasound-guided fascial plane blocks, such as serratus anterior, parasternal intercostal, interpectoral + pectoserratus, and erector spinae plane blocks, have gained popularity owing to their safety and feasibility; however, the effectiveness of these blocks varies according to the surgical approach and type of incision. Systemic analgesia is an integral component of multimodal pain management in MICS. Despite the efficacy of opioids, a shift toward opioid-sparing strategies has been observed given the significant adverse effects associated with the use of opioids. Intravenous adjuncts such as dexmedetomidine, ketamine, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs can reduce opioid consumption and improve postoperative pain control. Despite advances in pain management, a single approach that can provide comprehensive analgesia for MICS remains to be established. A multimodal strategy that combines systemic and regional techniques must be developed to optimize pain management and long-term outcomes.

微创心脏手术中的疼痛管理:当前临床证据综述。
与传统的胸骨切开术相比,微创心脏手术(MICS)具有显著的优势,如减少组织创伤,更快的恢复,更短的住院时间。然而,术后由肋间神经损伤、胸膜刺激和组织收缩引起的疼痛的处理仍然是一个主要的挑战。尽管MICS的侵入性较小,但患者经常报告经历与传统心脏手术后相似的疼痛,特别是在术后急性期。有效的疼痛管理对于优化恢复、减少阿片类药物的消耗和防止过渡到慢性术后疼痛至关重要。区域麻醉技术在MICS多模式镇痛中起关键作用。胸部硬膜外镇痛具有较强的镇痛效果;然而,由于对抗凝相关并发症和血流动力学不稳定的担忧,它仍未得到充分利用。胸椎旁阻滞是一种更安全的替代方法,可提供类似的疼痛缓解,副作用更少。同样,超声引导的筋膜平面阻滞,如前锯肌、胸骨旁肋间肌、胸间+胸锯肌和竖脊肌平面阻滞,因其安全性和可行性而受到欢迎;然而,这些阻滞的有效性因手术入路和切口类型而异。全身性镇痛是多模式疼痛管理的一个组成部分。尽管阿片类药物有效,但鉴于与阿片类药物使用相关的显着不良反应,已经观察到向阿片类药物节约策略的转变。静脉注射辅助药物如右美托咪定、氯胺酮和非甾体抗炎药可减少阿片类药物的消耗,改善术后疼痛控制。尽管在疼痛管理方面取得了进展,但仍需建立一种能够为多指标类集集指标提供全面镇痛的单一方法。必须开发一种结合系统和区域技术的多模式策略,以优化疼痛管理和长期结果。
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
Pain and Therapy
Pain and Therapy CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
5.00%
发文量
110
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: Pain and Therapy is an international, open access, peer-reviewed, rapid publication journal dedicated to the publication of high-quality clinical (all phases), observational, real-world, and health outcomes research around the discovery, development, and use of pain therapies and pain-related devices. Studies relating to diagnosis, pharmacoeconomics, public health, quality of life, and patient care, management, and education are also encouraged. Areas of focus include, but are not limited to, acute pain, cancer pain, chronic pain, headache and migraine, neuropathic pain, opioids, palliative care and pain ethics, peri- and post-operative pain as well as rheumatic pain and fibromyalgia. The journal is of interest to a broad audience of pharmaceutical and healthcare professionals and publishes original research, reviews, case reports, trial protocols, short communications such as commentaries and editorials, and letters. The journal is read by a global audience and receives submissions from around the world. Pain and Therapy will consider all scientifically sound research be it positive, confirmatory or negative data. Submissions are welcomed whether they relate to an international and/or a country-specific audience, something that is crucially important when researchers are trying to target more specific patient populations. This inclusive approach allows the journal to assist in the dissemination of all scientifically and ethically sound research.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信