Comparison of postoperative back pain between paramedian and midline approach for thoracic epidural anesthesia.

Anesthesia and pain medicine Pub Date : 2022-07-01 Epub Date: 2022-06-20 DOI:10.17085/apm.22139
Ji Hee Hong, Eun Young Cho, Jin Woo Shim, Ki Beom Park
{"title":"Comparison of postoperative back pain between paramedian and midline approach for thoracic epidural anesthesia.","authors":"Ji Hee Hong,&nbsp;Eun Young Cho,&nbsp;Jin Woo Shim,&nbsp;Ki Beom Park","doi":"10.17085/apm.22139","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The development of back pain following epidural analgesia is one reason for patient refusal of neuraxial analgesia. The primary endpoint of this study was to compare the incidence and severity of back pain following midline and paramedian epidural technique. The secondary endpoint was to identify the risk factors associated with the occurrence of back pain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective randomized study included 114 patients receiving thoracic epidural catheterization for pain management following upper abdominal or thoracic surgery. Patients were allocated to either the midline or the paramedian group by computer-generated randomization. An investigator who was blinded to the patient group interviewed patients at 24, and 48 h, and 3-5 days after surgery about the existence of back pain and its severity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The total incidence of back pain following epidural anesthesia was 23.8% in the midline group and 7.8% in the paramedian group. The numerical rating scale of back pain was not different between the two groups at 24 h and 4 days after surgery. The paramdian technique was associated with a lower incidence of back pain than the midline technique (95% confidence interval 0.05-0.74, odds ratio 0.2, P < 0.01). However, the number of attempts, surgical position, body mass index, and duration of surgery were not associated with back pain.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study showed that the midline group of thoracic epidural analgesia demonstrated higher incidence of back pain than the paramedian group. However, the pain was mild in intensity and decreased with time in both groups.</p>","PeriodicalId":7801,"journal":{"name":"Anesthesia and pain medicine","volume":" ","pages":"320-326"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/0f/c9/apm-22139.PMC9346204.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anesthesia and pain medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17085/apm.22139","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/6/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The development of back pain following epidural analgesia is one reason for patient refusal of neuraxial analgesia. The primary endpoint of this study was to compare the incidence and severity of back pain following midline and paramedian epidural technique. The secondary endpoint was to identify the risk factors associated with the occurrence of back pain.

Methods: This prospective randomized study included 114 patients receiving thoracic epidural catheterization for pain management following upper abdominal or thoracic surgery. Patients were allocated to either the midline or the paramedian group by computer-generated randomization. An investigator who was blinded to the patient group interviewed patients at 24, and 48 h, and 3-5 days after surgery about the existence of back pain and its severity.

Results: The total incidence of back pain following epidural anesthesia was 23.8% in the midline group and 7.8% in the paramedian group. The numerical rating scale of back pain was not different between the two groups at 24 h and 4 days after surgery. The paramdian technique was associated with a lower incidence of back pain than the midline technique (95% confidence interval 0.05-0.74, odds ratio 0.2, P < 0.01). However, the number of attempts, surgical position, body mass index, and duration of surgery were not associated with back pain.

Conclusions: This study showed that the midline group of thoracic epidural analgesia demonstrated higher incidence of back pain than the paramedian group. However, the pain was mild in intensity and decreased with time in both groups.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

胸段硬膜外麻醉中线入路与旁线入路术后腰痛的比较。
背景:硬膜外镇痛后腰痛的发生是患者拒绝轴向镇痛的原因之一。这项研究的主要目的是比较中线和旁线硬膜外技术后背部疼痛的发生率和严重程度。次要终点是确定与背部疼痛发生相关的危险因素。方法:这项前瞻性随机研究纳入了114例在上腹部或胸外科手术后接受胸椎硬膜外置管治疗疼痛的患者。通过计算机生成的随机化,患者被分配到中线组或副中线组。一名对患者组不知情的研究者在术后24、48小时和3-5天对患者进行了采访,了解背痛的存在及其严重程度。结果:硬膜外麻醉后腰痛发生率中线组为23.8%,旁线组为7.8%。两组术后24 h和4 d的背痛数值评定量表差异无统计学意义。与中线技术相比,顺线技术腰痛发生率较低(95%可信区间0.05-0.74,优势比0.2,P < 0.01)。然而,手术次数、手术体位、体重指数和手术时间与背部疼痛无关。结论:本研究显示胸椎硬膜外镇痛中线组腰痛发生率高于旁线组。然而,两组患者的疼痛强度均较轻,且随时间延长而减轻。
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
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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