Surgeon-guided transversalis fascia plane block vs. trocar site wound infiltration in pediatric laparoscopic appendectomy.

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Ozgur Caglar, Binali Firinci, Yusuf Alper Kara, Ali Ahiskalioglu
{"title":"Surgeon-guided transversalis fascia plane block vs. trocar site wound infiltration in pediatric laparoscopic appendectomy.","authors":"Ozgur Caglar, Binali Firinci, Yusuf Alper Kara, Ali Ahiskalioglu","doi":"10.1007/s11845-025-04088-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Postoperative pain remains a significant concern in pediatric patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy. The transversalis fascia plane block (TFPB) is a recently described regional technique. In this study, we aimed to adapt this block into a laparoscopy-assisted approach and compare its analgesic efficacy with conventional wound infiltration in pediatric appendectomy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this prospective, randomized controlled trial, 60 pediatric patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy were allocated to receive either laparoscopy-assisted TFPB (n = 30) or standard wound infiltration (WI; n = 30) with 0.25% bupivacaine (0.5 mL/kg). The primary outcome was postoperative pain evaluated via the FLACC (Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability) scale at seven time points within 24 h. Secondary outcomes included paracetamol consumption and parental satisfaction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Demographic and perioperative variables were comparable between groups (p > 0.05). Paracetamol was required in significantly fewer patients in the TFPB group (36.7% vs 66.7%, p = 0.038), with fewer requiring repeated doses (13.3% vs 46.7%, p = 0.041). Although FLACC pain scores were statistically comparable between groups (p > 0.05), the TFPB group consistently showed lower median values from the fourth postoperative hour onward. Likewise, parental satisfaction was consistently high in both cohorts, with no significant variation between the analgesic techniques (p = 0.788). No adverse effects or block-related complications were reported.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Laparoscopy-assisted TFPB significantly reduced postoperative analgesic requirements compared to wound infiltration. Given its feasibility, efficacy, and safety, laparoscopy-assisted TFPB technique should be considered an alternative component of multimodal analgesia in pediatric laparoscopic abdominal surgery.</p>","PeriodicalId":14507,"journal":{"name":"Irish Journal of Medical Science","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Irish Journal of Medical Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-025-04088-y","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Postoperative pain remains a significant concern in pediatric patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy. The transversalis fascia plane block (TFPB) is a recently described regional technique. In this study, we aimed to adapt this block into a laparoscopy-assisted approach and compare its analgesic efficacy with conventional wound infiltration in pediatric appendectomy.

Methods: In this prospective, randomized controlled trial, 60 pediatric patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy were allocated to receive either laparoscopy-assisted TFPB (n = 30) or standard wound infiltration (WI; n = 30) with 0.25% bupivacaine (0.5 mL/kg). The primary outcome was postoperative pain evaluated via the FLACC (Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability) scale at seven time points within 24 h. Secondary outcomes included paracetamol consumption and parental satisfaction.

Results: Demographic and perioperative variables were comparable between groups (p > 0.05). Paracetamol was required in significantly fewer patients in the TFPB group (36.7% vs 66.7%, p = 0.038), with fewer requiring repeated doses (13.3% vs 46.7%, p = 0.041). Although FLACC pain scores were statistically comparable between groups (p > 0.05), the TFPB group consistently showed lower median values from the fourth postoperative hour onward. Likewise, parental satisfaction was consistently high in both cohorts, with no significant variation between the analgesic techniques (p = 0.788). No adverse effects or block-related complications were reported.

Conclusion: Laparoscopy-assisted TFPB significantly reduced postoperative analgesic requirements compared to wound infiltration. Given its feasibility, efficacy, and safety, laparoscopy-assisted TFPB technique should be considered an alternative component of multimodal analgesia in pediatric laparoscopic abdominal surgery.

外科医生引导下横筋膜平面阻滞与套管针部位伤口浸润在小儿腹腔镜阑尾切除术中的应用。
背景:在接受腹腔镜阑尾切除术的儿科患者中,术后疼痛仍然是一个重要的问题。横筋膜平面阻滞(TFPB)是一种最近被描述的区域性技术。在本研究中,我们的目的是将该阻滞应用于腹腔镜辅助入路,并比较其在小儿阑尾切除术中与传统伤口浸润的镇痛效果。方法:在这项前瞻性、随机对照试验中,60例接受腹腔镜阑尾切除术的儿童患者被分配接受腹腔镜辅助TFPB (n = 30)或标准伤口浸润(WI; n = 30), 0.25%布比卡因(0.5 mL/kg)。主要结局是术后疼痛,通过FLACC(面部、腿部、活动、哭泣、安慰)量表在24小时内的7个时间点进行评估。次要结局包括扑热息痛的摄入量和父母满意度。结果:组间人口学及围手术期变量具有可比性(p < 0.05)。TFPB组需要扑热息痛的患者显著减少(36.7% vs 66.7%, p = 0.038),需要重复给药的患者减少(13.3% vs 46.7%, p = 0.041)。尽管两组间FLACC疼痛评分具有统计学上的可比性(p < 0.05),但TFPB组从术后第4小时开始持续显示较低的中位值。同样,父母满意度在两个队列中始终很高,在镇痛技术之间没有显著差异(p = 0.788)。无不良反应或阻滞相关并发症报道。结论:与创面浸润相比,腹腔镜辅助TFPB明显减少了术后镇痛需求。鉴于其可行性、有效性和安全性,腹腔镜辅助TFPB技术应被视为儿童腹腔镜腹部手术中多模式镇痛的替代组成部分。
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
Irish Journal of Medical Science
Irish Journal of Medical Science 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
4.80%
发文量
357
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Irish Journal of Medical Science is the official organ of the Royal Academy of Medicine in Ireland. Established in 1832, this quarterly journal is a contribution to medical science and an ideal forum for the younger medical/scientific professional to enter world literature and an ideal launching platform now, as in the past, for many a young research worker. The primary role of both the Academy and IJMS is that of providing a forum for the exchange of scientific information and to promote academic discussion, so essential to scientific progress.
×
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