A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing the Analgesic Efficacy of Programmed Intermittent Bolus vs. Continuous Infusion of Ropivacaine and Fentanyl in Ultrasound-Guided Infraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block for Upper Limb Surgery.
Prateek Upadhyay, Sukanya Mitra, Jasveer Singh, Ravi Gupta, Rajeev Kansay
{"title":"A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing the Analgesic Efficacy of Programmed Intermittent Bolus vs. Continuous Infusion of Ropivacaine and Fentanyl in Ultrasound-Guided Infraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block for Upper Limb Surgery.","authors":"Prateek Upadhyay, Sukanya Mitra, Jasveer Singh, Ravi Gupta, Rajeev Kansay","doi":"10.6859/aja.202310/PP.0003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Programmed intermittent bolus (PIB) is a novel method of intermittent drug delivery commonly employed in labor epidural analgesia. This study aimed to evaluate the potential benefits of PIB over continuous infusion (CI) for postoperative analgesia following upper limb surgeries distal to the mid-humerus level using ultrasound-guided infraclavicular brachial plexus block (USG-IBPB).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The USG-IBPB was performed on a total of 30 patients scheduled for upper limb surgery distal to the mid-humerus level. The patient-controlled regional analgesia pump delivered a combination of 6 mL of 0.2% ropivacaine and 2 μg/mL fentanyl via a perineural catheter as PIB in group I and as a CI in group II. The primary outcome measure was overall drug consumption, and secondary outcomes included pain scores, patient satisfaction, sensory and motor blockade, and adverse effects.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The PIB group exhibited significantly lower overall drug consumption (306.20 ± 13.07 mL vs. 323.73 ± 11.79 mL; P = 0.001), a reduced need for patient-controlled analgesia boluses (3.87 ± 2.67 vs. 7.13 ± 2.36; P = 0.001), and higher patient satisfaction (91.93 ± 10.09 vs. 78.67 ± 17.57; P = 0.017) compared to the CI group. Pain scores at rest were significantly lower at the 24-hour mark (P = 0.007), and on movement, lower scores were observed after 1, 24, and 36 hours (P = 0.031, P = 0.031, and P = 0.011, respectively). Sensory block, motor block, and adverse effects were similar between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PIB demonstrated superior efficacy in postoperative analgesia compared to the CI technique for upper limb surgeries distal to the mid-humerus level. Therefore, PIB may be considered an effective alternative to CI for optimal postoperative pain management.</p>","PeriodicalId":8482,"journal":{"name":"Asian journal of anesthesiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian journal of anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6859/aja.202310/PP.0003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Programmed intermittent bolus (PIB) is a novel method of intermittent drug delivery commonly employed in labor epidural analgesia. This study aimed to evaluate the potential benefits of PIB over continuous infusion (CI) for postoperative analgesia following upper limb surgeries distal to the mid-humerus level using ultrasound-guided infraclavicular brachial plexus block (USG-IBPB).
Methods: The USG-IBPB was performed on a total of 30 patients scheduled for upper limb surgery distal to the mid-humerus level. The patient-controlled regional analgesia pump delivered a combination of 6 mL of 0.2% ropivacaine and 2 μg/mL fentanyl via a perineural catheter as PIB in group I and as a CI in group II. The primary outcome measure was overall drug consumption, and secondary outcomes included pain scores, patient satisfaction, sensory and motor blockade, and adverse effects.
Results: The PIB group exhibited significantly lower overall drug consumption (306.20 ± 13.07 mL vs. 323.73 ± 11.79 mL; P = 0.001), a reduced need for patient-controlled analgesia boluses (3.87 ± 2.67 vs. 7.13 ± 2.36; P = 0.001), and higher patient satisfaction (91.93 ± 10.09 vs. 78.67 ± 17.57; P = 0.017) compared to the CI group. Pain scores at rest were significantly lower at the 24-hour mark (P = 0.007), and on movement, lower scores were observed after 1, 24, and 36 hours (P = 0.031, P = 0.031, and P = 0.011, respectively). Sensory block, motor block, and adverse effects were similar between the two groups.
Conclusion: PIB demonstrated superior efficacy in postoperative analgesia compared to the CI technique for upper limb surgeries distal to the mid-humerus level. Therefore, PIB may be considered an effective alternative to CI for optimal postoperative pain management.
背景:程序性间歇推注(PIB)是一种常用于分娩硬膜外镇痛的新型间歇给药方法。本研究旨在评估超声引导下锁骨下臂丛神经阻滞(USG-IBPB)用于肱骨中远端上肢手术后持续输注(CI)的PIB对术后镇痛的潜在益处。患者控制的区域镇痛泵通过神经导管输送6 mL 0.2%罗哌卡因和2μg/mL芬太尼的组合,作为第一组的PIB和第二组的CI。主要结果指标是总体药物消耗,次要结果包括疼痛评分、患者满意度、感觉和运动阻滞以及不良反应。结果:与CI组相比,PIB组的总体药物消耗量显著降低(306.20±13.07 mL vs.323.73±11.79 mL;P=0.001),对患者自控镇痛药丸的需求减少(3.87±2.67 vs.7.13±2.36;P=0.001),患者满意度更高(91.93±10.09 vs.78.67±17.57;P=0.017)。休息时的疼痛评分在24小时时显著降低(P=0.007),运动时,在1、24和36小时后观察到较低的评分(分别为P=0.031、P=0.031和P=0.011)。两组患者的感觉障碍、运动障碍和不良反应相似。结论:与CI技术相比,PIB在肱骨中远端上肢手术的术后镇痛效果更好。因此,PIB可能被认为是CI的一种有效替代方案,用于优化术后疼痛管理。
期刊介绍:
Asian Journal of Anesthesiology (AJA), launched in 1962, is the official and peer-reviewed publication of the Taiwan Society of Anaesthesiologists. It is published quarterly (March/June/September/December) by Airiti and indexed in EMBASE, Medline, Scopus, ScienceDirect, SIIC Data Bases. AJA accepts submissions from around the world. AJA is the premier open access journal in the field of anaesthesia and its related disciplines of critical care and pain in Asia. The number of Chinese anaesthesiologists has reached more than 60,000 and is still growing. The journal aims to disseminate anaesthesiology research and services for the Chinese community and is now the main anaesthesiology journal for Chinese societies located in Taiwan, Mainland China, Hong Kong and Singapore. AJAcaters to clinicians of all relevant specialties and biomedical scientists working in the areas of anesthesia, critical care medicine and pain management, as well as other related fields (pharmacology, pathology molecular biology, etc). AJA''s editorial team is composed of local and regional experts in the field as well as many leading international experts. Article types accepted include review articles, research papers, short communication, correspondence and images.