保乳手术及前哨淋巴结活检中竖脊平面阻滞与肋间菱形阻滞术后镇痛效果的比较:一项随机非效性临床试验。

Bahadır Çiftçi, Pelin Basım, Hande Güngör, Selçuk Alver, Birzat Emre Gölboyu, Yunus Oktay Atalay
{"title":"保乳手术及前哨淋巴结活检中竖脊平面阻滞与肋间菱形阻滞术后镇痛效果的比较:一项随机非效性临床试验。","authors":"Bahadır Çiftçi, Pelin Basım, Hande Güngör, Selçuk Alver, Birzat Emre Gölboyu, Yunus Oktay Atalay","doi":"10.14744/agri.2024.00087","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Breast-conserving surgery is a common breast operation type in the world. Patients may feel severe postoperative pain after the surgery. Several regional anesthesia methods are used for postoperative pain control as a part of multimodal analgesia management after breast surgery. Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) and rhomboid intercostal plane block (RIB) are commonly used techniques for this purpose. The studies that compare these methods are limited. Therefore, we aimed to compare the efficacy of ESPB and RIB.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective, randomized study included sixty female patients with ASA class I-II physical status in the study. All patients underwent general anesthesia. We performed the blocks at the end of the surgery before extubation. Participants were randomized into two groups between the operation: the Group ESPB (n=30) and the Group RIB (n=30). We performed 30 ml volume of 0.25% bupivacaine for the blocks. 400 mg ibuprofen 3x1 was ordered postoperatively, and a fentanyl PCA device (2 ml bolus, 0 ml infusion, 20 min lock time, 4 hour limit) was attached intravenously to the participants. If the pain score was ≥4, meperidine (0.5 mg/kg) was performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no differences in terms of demographical data. The postoperative opioid use, pain scores, adverse events, and the need for rescue analgesia were similar between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both RIB and ESPB are effective regional anesthesia techniques following breast surgery. They are simple and safe methods. Anesthesiologists may prefer one or the other based on their clinical experience.</p>","PeriodicalId":101341,"journal":{"name":"Agri : Agri (Algoloji) Dernegi'nin Yayin organidir = The journal of the Turkish Society of Algology","volume":"37 1","pages":"42-49"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of postoperative analgesic efficacy between erector spinae plane block and rhomboid intercostal block in breast-conserving surgery and sentinel lymph node biopsy: A randomized non-inferiority clinical trial.\",\"authors\":\"Bahadır Çiftçi, Pelin Basım, Hande Güngör, Selçuk Alver, Birzat Emre Gölboyu, Yunus Oktay Atalay\",\"doi\":\"10.14744/agri.2024.00087\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Breast-conserving surgery is a common breast operation type in the world. Patients may feel severe postoperative pain after the surgery. Several regional anesthesia methods are used for postoperative pain control as a part of multimodal analgesia management after breast surgery. Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) and rhomboid intercostal plane block (RIB) are commonly used techniques for this purpose. The studies that compare these methods are limited. Therefore, we aimed to compare the efficacy of ESPB and RIB.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective, randomized study included sixty female patients with ASA class I-II physical status in the study. All patients underwent general anesthesia. We performed the blocks at the end of the surgery before extubation. Participants were randomized into two groups between the operation: the Group ESPB (n=30) and the Group RIB (n=30). We performed 30 ml volume of 0.25% bupivacaine for the blocks. 400 mg ibuprofen 3x1 was ordered postoperatively, and a fentanyl PCA device (2 ml bolus, 0 ml infusion, 20 min lock time, 4 hour limit) was attached intravenously to the participants. If the pain score was ≥4, meperidine (0.5 mg/kg) was performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no differences in terms of demographical data. The postoperative opioid use, pain scores, adverse events, and the need for rescue analgesia were similar between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both RIB and ESPB are effective regional anesthesia techniques following breast surgery. They are simple and safe methods. Anesthesiologists may prefer one or the other based on their clinical experience.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":101341,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Agri : Agri (Algoloji) Dernegi'nin Yayin organidir = The journal of the Turkish Society of Algology\",\"volume\":\"37 1\",\"pages\":\"42-49\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Agri : Agri (Algoloji) Dernegi'nin Yayin organidir = The journal of the Turkish Society of Algology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14744/agri.2024.00087\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agri : Agri (Algoloji) Dernegi'nin Yayin organidir = The journal of the Turkish Society of Algology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14744/agri.2024.00087","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:保乳手术是国际上常见的一种乳房手术方式。术后患者可能会感到剧烈的疼痛。作为乳房手术后多模式镇痛管理的一部分,几种区域麻醉方法用于术后疼痛控制。直立脊柱平面阻滞(ESPB)和菱形肋间平面阻滞(RIB)是常用的技术。比较这些方法的研究是有限的。因此,我们的目的是比较ESPB和RIB的疗效。方法:这项前瞻性、随机研究纳入了60例ASA I-II级身体状况的女性患者。所有患者均行全身麻醉。我们在手术结束拔管前进行了阻滞。在手术期间,参与者被随机分为两组:ESPB组(n=30)和RIB组(n=30)。我们使用30ml体积0.25%布比卡因进行阻滞。术后嘱用400mg布洛芬3x1,静脉滴注芬太尼PCA装置(2 ml丸,0 ml滴注,锁定时间20分钟,限制时间4小时)。疼痛评分≥4分,给予哌替啶(0.5 mg/kg)治疗。结果:两组在人口学数据上无差异。术后阿片类药物的使用、疼痛评分、不良事件和对镇痛的需要在两组之间相似。结论:RIB和ESPB都是乳房手术后有效的区域麻醉技术。它们是简单而安全的方法。麻醉师可能会根据他们的临床经验选择其中一种。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of postoperative analgesic efficacy between erector spinae plane block and rhomboid intercostal block in breast-conserving surgery and sentinel lymph node biopsy: A randomized non-inferiority clinical trial.

Objectives: Breast-conserving surgery is a common breast operation type in the world. Patients may feel severe postoperative pain after the surgery. Several regional anesthesia methods are used for postoperative pain control as a part of multimodal analgesia management after breast surgery. Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) and rhomboid intercostal plane block (RIB) are commonly used techniques for this purpose. The studies that compare these methods are limited. Therefore, we aimed to compare the efficacy of ESPB and RIB.

Methods: This prospective, randomized study included sixty female patients with ASA class I-II physical status in the study. All patients underwent general anesthesia. We performed the blocks at the end of the surgery before extubation. Participants were randomized into two groups between the operation: the Group ESPB (n=30) and the Group RIB (n=30). We performed 30 ml volume of 0.25% bupivacaine for the blocks. 400 mg ibuprofen 3x1 was ordered postoperatively, and a fentanyl PCA device (2 ml bolus, 0 ml infusion, 20 min lock time, 4 hour limit) was attached intravenously to the participants. If the pain score was ≥4, meperidine (0.5 mg/kg) was performed.

Results: There were no differences in terms of demographical data. The postoperative opioid use, pain scores, adverse events, and the need for rescue analgesia were similar between groups.

Conclusion: Both RIB and ESPB are effective regional anesthesia techniques following breast surgery. They are simple and safe methods. Anesthesiologists may prefer one or the other based on their clinical experience.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信