Ashutosh Pandey, Zainab Ahmad, Shikha Jain, Abhijit Pakhare, Pramod K Sharma, Vaishali Waindeskar, Pranita Mandal, Sunaina T Karna
{"title":"超声引导下竖脊平面阻滞与超声引导下尾部硬膜外阻滞对小儿腹部手术的镇痛效果--一项患者与评估者盲法随机对照研究。","authors":"Ashutosh Pandey, Zainab Ahmad, Shikha Jain, Abhijit Pakhare, Pramod K Sharma, Vaishali Waindeskar, Pranita Mandal, Sunaina T Karna","doi":"10.4103/sja.sja_518_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Literature on the efficacy and safety of erector spinae plane block (ESPB) in pediatric patients is limited. Hence, we aimed to compare ESPB versus caudal epidural block (CEB) in children undergoing abdominal surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this patient and assessor-blind study, fifty-two ASA I-II patients, between 1 to 9 years of age, were randomized into groups of 26 each. ESPB group received unilateral or bilateral ultrasound (USG)-guided ESPB with 0.5 ml/kg of 0.25% bupivacaine per side. CEB group received USG-guided CEB with 1 ml/kg of 0.25% bupivacaine. The primary objective was to estimate the proportion of patients requiring postoperative rescue analgesia. The secondary objectives were to assess postoperative Face, Legs, Activity, Cry and Consolability (FLACC) scale scores, duration of analgesia, and consumption of rescue analgesic drugs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>More patients in the ESPB group (88.4%), compared to the CEB group (42.3%), required rescue analgesics (<i>P</i> value <0.001). FLACC scores in the ESPB group, though satisfactory, were inferior, to the CEB group. The duration of postoperative analgesia was shorter in the ESPB group by 9.54 h (95% CI: 4.51 to 14.57 h, <i>P</i> value <0.001). The median (IQR) consumption of rescue paracetamol was significantly higher in the ESPB group (20 mg/kg (10,20) compared to the CEB group (0.0 mg/kg (0.0,10) <i>P</i> value <0.001)). No adverse effects were reported.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In children undergoing abdominal surgery, both ESPB and CEB were safe and efficacious. CEB provided a longer duration and better quality of analgesia. ESPB may be considered when CEB is contraindicated or difficult.</p>","PeriodicalId":21533,"journal":{"name":"Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10833007/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The analgesic efficacy of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block versus ultrasound-guided caudal epidural block for abdominal surgery in pediatric patients - A patient and assessor-blind, randomized controlled study.\",\"authors\":\"Ashutosh Pandey, Zainab Ahmad, Shikha Jain, Abhijit Pakhare, Pramod K Sharma, Vaishali Waindeskar, Pranita Mandal, Sunaina T Karna\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/sja.sja_518_23\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Literature on the efficacy and safety of erector spinae plane block (ESPB) in pediatric patients is limited. Hence, we aimed to compare ESPB versus caudal epidural block (CEB) in children undergoing abdominal surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this patient and assessor-blind study, fifty-two ASA I-II patients, between 1 to 9 years of age, were randomized into groups of 26 each. ESPB group received unilateral or bilateral ultrasound (USG)-guided ESPB with 0.5 ml/kg of 0.25% bupivacaine per side. CEB group received USG-guided CEB with 1 ml/kg of 0.25% bupivacaine. The primary objective was to estimate the proportion of patients requiring postoperative rescue analgesia. The secondary objectives were to assess postoperative Face, Legs, Activity, Cry and Consolability (FLACC) scale scores, duration of analgesia, and consumption of rescue analgesic drugs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>More patients in the ESPB group (88.4%), compared to the CEB group (42.3%), required rescue analgesics (<i>P</i> value <0.001). FLACC scores in the ESPB group, though satisfactory, were inferior, to the CEB group. The duration of postoperative analgesia was shorter in the ESPB group by 9.54 h (95% CI: 4.51 to 14.57 h, <i>P</i> value <0.001). The median (IQR) consumption of rescue paracetamol was significantly higher in the ESPB group (20 mg/kg (10,20) compared to the CEB group (0.0 mg/kg (0.0,10) <i>P</i> value <0.001)). No adverse effects were reported.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In children undergoing abdominal surgery, both ESPB and CEB were safe and efficacious. CEB provided a longer duration and better quality of analgesia. ESPB may be considered when CEB is contraindicated or difficult.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21533,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10833007/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/sja.sja_518_23\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/2 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/sja.sja_518_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:有关竖脊肌平面阻滞(ESPB)在儿童患者中的有效性和安全性的文献有限。因此,我们旨在对接受腹部手术的儿童进行 ESPB 与尾硬膜外阻滞(CEB)的比较:在这项患者和评估者盲法研究中,52 名年龄在 1 到 9 岁之间的 ASA I-II 级患者被随机分为两组,每组 26 人。ESPB组接受单侧或双侧超声波(USG)引导下的ESPB,每侧0.5毫升/千克0.25%布比卡因。CEB 组在 USG 引导下接受 CEB,每侧注射 1 毫升/千克 0.25% 布比卡因。首要目标是估计需要术后镇痛抢救的患者比例。次要目标是评估术后面部、腿部、活动、哭泣和舒适度(FLACC)量表评分、镇痛持续时间和镇痛抢救药物消耗量:结果:ESPB 组(88.4%)与 CEB 组(42.3%)相比,有更多的患者需要使用镇痛抢救药物(P 值 P 值 P 值 P 值 结论:ESPB 组与 CEB 组相比,有更多的患者需要使用镇痛抢救药物(P 值 P 值 P 值 P 值):在接受腹部手术的儿童中,ESPB和CEB均安全有效。CEB提供的镇痛时间更长,质量更好。如果禁用或难以使用 CEB,可考虑使用 ESPB。
The analgesic efficacy of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block versus ultrasound-guided caudal epidural block for abdominal surgery in pediatric patients - A patient and assessor-blind, randomized controlled study.
Background: Literature on the efficacy and safety of erector spinae plane block (ESPB) in pediatric patients is limited. Hence, we aimed to compare ESPB versus caudal epidural block (CEB) in children undergoing abdominal surgery.
Methods: In this patient and assessor-blind study, fifty-two ASA I-II patients, between 1 to 9 years of age, were randomized into groups of 26 each. ESPB group received unilateral or bilateral ultrasound (USG)-guided ESPB with 0.5 ml/kg of 0.25% bupivacaine per side. CEB group received USG-guided CEB with 1 ml/kg of 0.25% bupivacaine. The primary objective was to estimate the proportion of patients requiring postoperative rescue analgesia. The secondary objectives were to assess postoperative Face, Legs, Activity, Cry and Consolability (FLACC) scale scores, duration of analgesia, and consumption of rescue analgesic drugs.
Results: More patients in the ESPB group (88.4%), compared to the CEB group (42.3%), required rescue analgesics (P value <0.001). FLACC scores in the ESPB group, though satisfactory, were inferior, to the CEB group. The duration of postoperative analgesia was shorter in the ESPB group by 9.54 h (95% CI: 4.51 to 14.57 h, P value <0.001). The median (IQR) consumption of rescue paracetamol was significantly higher in the ESPB group (20 mg/kg (10,20) compared to the CEB group (0.0 mg/kg (0.0,10) P value <0.001)). No adverse effects were reported.
Conclusion: In children undergoing abdominal surgery, both ESPB and CEB were safe and efficacious. CEB provided a longer duration and better quality of analgesia. ESPB may be considered when CEB is contraindicated or difficult.