Cargando…

Pectoral nerve versus erector spinae block for breast surgeries: A randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Patients undergoing breast cancer surgeries face significant post-operative pain. We aimed to compare pectoral nerve (PECS) block with erector spinae (ESP) block in these patients in terms of analgesic efficacy and adverse effects. METHODS: Sixty four American Society of Anesthe...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sinha, Chandni, Kumar, Amarjeet, Kumar, Ajeet, Prasad, Chandrakant, Singh, Prashant Kumar, Priya, Diti
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6691635/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31462806
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/ija.IJA_163_19
_version_ 1783443420322201600
author Sinha, Chandni
Kumar, Amarjeet
Kumar, Ajeet
Prasad, Chandrakant
Singh, Prashant Kumar
Priya, Diti
author_facet Sinha, Chandni
Kumar, Amarjeet
Kumar, Ajeet
Prasad, Chandrakant
Singh, Prashant Kumar
Priya, Diti
author_sort Sinha, Chandni
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Patients undergoing breast cancer surgeries face significant post-operative pain. We aimed to compare pectoral nerve (PECS) block with erector spinae (ESP) block in these patients in terms of analgesic efficacy and adverse effects. METHODS: Sixty four American Society of Anesthesiologists' status I and II female patients between age 18 to 60 years scheduled for unilateral modified radical mastectomy (MRM) under general anaesthesia, were enrolled in this prospective randomised study. Patients in group I received ultrasound guided (USG) ESP block (20 cc 0.2% ropivacaine) while group II received USG guided PECS II block (25 cc 0.2% ropivacaine). General anaesthesia was administered in a standardised manner to both the groups. The various parameters observed included sensory blockade, duration of analgesia and any adverse effects. The primary outcome was the total morphine consumption in 24 hours. RESULTS: The total morphine consumption in 24 hours was less in group II (4.40 ± 0.94 mg), compared to group I (6.59 ± 1.35 mg; P = 0.000). The mean duration of analgesia in patients of group II was 7.26 ± 0.69 hours while that in the group I was 5.87 ± 1. 47 hours (P value = 0.001). 26 patients in group II (PECS) had blockade of T2 as compared to only 10 patients in group I. (P value = 0.00). There was no incidence of adverse effects in either group. CONCLUSION: PECS II block is a more effective block when compared to ESP block in patients of MRM in terms of postoperative analgesia and opioid consumption.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6691635
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66916352019-08-28 Pectoral nerve versus erector spinae block for breast surgeries: A randomised controlled trial Sinha, Chandni Kumar, Amarjeet Kumar, Ajeet Prasad, Chandrakant Singh, Prashant Kumar Priya, Diti Indian J Anaesth Original Article BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Patients undergoing breast cancer surgeries face significant post-operative pain. We aimed to compare pectoral nerve (PECS) block with erector spinae (ESP) block in these patients in terms of analgesic efficacy and adverse effects. METHODS: Sixty four American Society of Anesthesiologists' status I and II female patients between age 18 to 60 years scheduled for unilateral modified radical mastectomy (MRM) under general anaesthesia, were enrolled in this prospective randomised study. Patients in group I received ultrasound guided (USG) ESP block (20 cc 0.2% ropivacaine) while group II received USG guided PECS II block (25 cc 0.2% ropivacaine). General anaesthesia was administered in a standardised manner to both the groups. The various parameters observed included sensory blockade, duration of analgesia and any adverse effects. The primary outcome was the total morphine consumption in 24 hours. RESULTS: The total morphine consumption in 24 hours was less in group II (4.40 ± 0.94 mg), compared to group I (6.59 ± 1.35 mg; P = 0.000). The mean duration of analgesia in patients of group II was 7.26 ± 0.69 hours while that in the group I was 5.87 ± 1. 47 hours (P value = 0.001). 26 patients in group II (PECS) had blockade of T2 as compared to only 10 patients in group I. (P value = 0.00). There was no incidence of adverse effects in either group. CONCLUSION: PECS II block is a more effective block when compared to ESP block in patients of MRM in terms of postoperative analgesia and opioid consumption. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2019-08 /pmc/articles/PMC6691635/ /pubmed/31462806 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/ija.IJA_163_19 Text en Copyright: © 2019 Indian Journal of Anaesthesia http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Sinha, Chandni
Kumar, Amarjeet
Kumar, Ajeet
Prasad, Chandrakant
Singh, Prashant Kumar
Priya, Diti
Pectoral nerve versus erector spinae block for breast surgeries: A randomised controlled trial
title Pectoral nerve versus erector spinae block for breast surgeries: A randomised controlled trial
title_full Pectoral nerve versus erector spinae block for breast surgeries: A randomised controlled trial
title_fullStr Pectoral nerve versus erector spinae block for breast surgeries: A randomised controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Pectoral nerve versus erector spinae block for breast surgeries: A randomised controlled trial
title_short Pectoral nerve versus erector spinae block for breast surgeries: A randomised controlled trial
title_sort pectoral nerve versus erector spinae block for breast surgeries: a randomised controlled trial
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6691635/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31462806
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/ija.IJA_163_19
work_keys_str_mv AT sinhachandni pectoralnerveversuserectorspinaeblockforbreastsurgeriesarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT kumaramarjeet pectoralnerveversuserectorspinaeblockforbreastsurgeriesarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT kumarajeet pectoralnerveversuserectorspinaeblockforbreastsurgeriesarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT prasadchandrakant pectoralnerveversuserectorspinaeblockforbreastsurgeriesarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT singhprashantkumar pectoralnerveversuserectorspinaeblockforbreastsurgeriesarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT priyaditi pectoralnerveversuserectorspinaeblockforbreastsurgeriesarandomisedcontrolledtrial