Comparison of regional blocks performed under ultrasound navigation during thoracoscopic surgical interventions in children with malignant neoplasms: prospective randomized single center study



Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Thoracic epidural anesthesia is the gold standard for postoperative analgesia after thoracic surgery; its alternatives include paravertebral block (PVB) and erector spinae plane block (ESPB). However, ESPB has not been evaluated in comparison with intraoperative PVB for effectiveness and speed of recovery in the early postoperative period after thoracoscopic surgery in children with cancer.

AIM: Our aim was to investigate the analgesic effectiveness of erector spinae muscle block compared to thoracic paravertebral block for intra and postoperative analgesia during thoracoscopic surgical interventions in children with thoracic tumors.

MATERIALS AND METODS: A prospective, randomized, single-center study was conducted. The sample size was 90 patients (ESPB group, 45; PVB group, 45). Randomization was performed using computer-generated codes applying the hidden envelope method. Patient representatives and the investigators collecting outcome data were informed about the study. Participants were children aged <18 years with malignancy, ASA class I–II, and undergoing thoracoscopic surgery. The patients underwent ultrasound-guided blockades with the administration of local anesthetic at 2 mg/kg (ropivacaine) after general anesthesia induction and before surgical incision. Moreover, both groups received the same standardized pain management protocol during and after surgery. The main outcome was the effectiveness of analgesia, determined by the need for additional intraoperative opioid administration. The secondary outcomes included pain scores at rest and with movement within 24 hours postsurgery, 24-hour analgesic consumption, time to first analgesia, and postoperative complication incidence and severity.

RESULTS: The time (min) required to perform the block was significantly shorter (p <0.05) in the ESPB 5.5 (6; 8.5) group than in the PVB 11 (9; 12) group. No significant difference was found in the intraoperative fentanyl dose between the ESPB and PVB groups, which was 150 (100; 300) µg and 150 (100; 200) µg (p <0.65), respectively. The PVB group had lower VAS scores at 24 hours postoperatively (<0.001). In the ESPB group, the mean (standard deviation) of total tramadol consumption was 120 (25) mg/day, and in the PVB group, 54 (12) mg/day (p <0.001). Pain scores according to the VAS and Wong–Becker scales during movement were lower in the PVB group at 1, 2, 6,12, and 24 hours postsurgery (p=0.025, 0.015, 0.03, 0.02, and 0.006).

CONCLUSION: In children with thoracic tumors who underwent thoracoscopic surgical interventions, ultrasound-guided PVB was more effective compared to ultrasound-guided ESPB performed in the postoperative period and induced a more pronounced and prolonged postoperative analgesic effect, although it was not inferior in providing intraoperative analgesia regarding opioid consumption. However, ESPB was easier to implement and required less time.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

Ekaterina I. Belousova

Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology, Moscow

Email: e.belousova_36@gmail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-9602-3052
SPIN-code: 8936-8053

MD, Cand. Sci. (Med.), anesthesiologist-resuscitator

Russian Federation, 23 Kashirskoye Hwy, 115522 Moscow, Russia

Nune V. Matinyan

Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology, Moscow; Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University, Moscow

Email: n9031990633@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-7805-5616
SPIN-code: 9829-6657

MD, Dr. Sci. (Med.), professor

Russian Federation, 23 Kashirskoye Hwy, 115522 Moscow, Russiaж 1 Ostrovityanova Str., 117997 Moscow, Russia

Anastasia A. Tsintsadze

Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology, Moscow; Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow

Email: anestesia228@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1897-0331
SPIN-code: 6513-9338

MD, Cand. Sci. (Med.), anesthesiologist-resuscitator

Russian Federation, 23 Kashirskoye Hwy, 115522 Moscow, Russia; Bldg 2, 8 Trubetskaya Str., 119048 Moscow, Russia

Ekaterina A. Kovaleva

Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology, Moscow

Author for correspondence.
Email: Mel_amory@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-9492-034X
SPIN-code: 7122-7508

anesthesiologist-resuscitator

Russian Federation, 23 Kashirskoye Hwy, 115522 Moscow, Russia

References

  1. Marshall K, McLaughlin K. Pain management in thoracic surgery. Thorac Surg Clin. 2020;30(3):339–346. doi: 10.1016/j.thorsurg.2020.03.001
  2. Tong J Gan. Poorly controlled postoperative pain: prevalence, consequences, and prevention. Journal of Pain Research. 2017;10:2287–2298. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S144066
  3. Kaufmann KB, Loop T, Heinrich S; Working Group of the German Thorax Registry. Risk factors for post-operative pulmonary complications in lung cancer patients after video-assisted thoracoscopic lung resection: Results of the German Thorax Registry. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2019;63(8):1009–1018. doi: 10.1111/aas.13388
  4. Baidya DK, Khanna P, Maitra S. Analgesic efficacy and safety of thoracic paravertebral and epidural analgesia for thoracic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2014;18(5):626–635. doi: 10.1093/icvts/ivt551
  5. Xiong C, Han C, Zhao D, et al. Postoperative analgesic effects of paravertebral block versus erector spinae plane block for thoracic and breast surgery: A meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2021;16(8):e0256611. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0256611
  6. Schnabel A, Reichl SU, Kranke P, Pogatzki-Zahn EM, Zahn PK. Efficacy and safety of paravertebral blocks in breast surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Br J Anaesth. 2010;105(6):842–852. doi: 10.1093/bja/aeq265
  7. Singh NP, Makkar JK, Kuberan A, et al. Efficacy of regional anesthesia techniques for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing major oncologic breast surgeries: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Can J Anaesth. 2022;69(4):527–549. doi: 10.1007/s12630-021-02183-z
  8. Taketa Y, Irisawa Y, Fujitani T. Comparison of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block and thoracic paravertebral block for postoperative analgesia after video-assisted thoracic surgery: a randomized controlled non-inferiority clinical trial. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2019:rapm-2019-100827. doi: 10.1136/rapm-2019-100827
  9. Zhao H, Xin L, Feng Y. The effect of preoperative erector spinae plane vs. paravertebral blocks on patient-controlled oxycodone consumption after video-assisted thoracic surgery: A prospective randomized, blinded, non-inferiority study. J Clin Anesth. 2020;62:109737. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2020.109737
  10. Turhan Ö, Sivrikoz N, Sungur Z, et al. Thoracic paravertebral block achieves better pain control than erector spinae plane block and intercostal nerve block in thoracoscopic surgery: A randomized study. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2021;35(10):2920–2927. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2020.11.034
  11. Chin KJ, El-Boghdadly K. Mechanisms of action of the erector spinae plane (ESP) block: a narrative review. Can J Anesth. 2021;68(3):387–408. doi: 10.1007/s12630-020-01875-2
  12. Karaca Ö. Unexpected motor block after ultrasound-guided lumbar erector spinae plane block. J Turk Soc Algol. 2023;35(2):112–114. doi: 10.14744/agri.2021.80947
  13. De Cassai A, Fasolo A, Geraldini F, Munari M. Motor block following bilateral ESP block. J Clin Anesth. 2020;60:23. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2019.08.029
  14. Diwan S, Nair A. Lumbar erector spinae plane block obtunding knee and ankle reflexes. Saudi J Anaesth. 2021;15(2):222–224. doi: 10.4103/sja.SJA_79_20

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML

Copyright (c) Eco-Vector



СМИ зарегистрировано Федеральной службой по надзору в сфере связи, информационных технологий и массовых коммуникаций (Роскомнадзор).
Регистрационный номер и дата принятия решения о регистрации СМИ: серия ПИ ФС 77 - 55827 от 30.10.2013 г
СМИ зарегистрировано Федеральной службой по надзору в сфере связи, информационных технологий и массовых коммуникаций (Роскомнадзор).
Регистрационный номер и дата принятия решения о регистрации СМИ: серия ЭЛ № ЭЛ № ФС 77 - 80651 от 15.03.2021 г
.



This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies