Cargando…

Effects of erector spinae plane block and retrolaminar block on analgesia for multiple rib fractures: a randomized, double-blinded clinical trial

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of Erector Spinae Plane Block (ESPB) and Retrolaminar Block (RLB) on intra- and postoperative analgesia in patients with Multiple Rib Fractures (MRFs). METHODS: A total of 80 MRFs patients were randomly divided into the ESPB (Group E) and RLB (Group R) groups. A...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhao, Yaoping, Tao, Yan, Zheng, Shaoqiang, Cai, Nan, Cheng, Long, Xie, Hao, Wang, Geng
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9373659/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33895221
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bjane.2021.04.004
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of Erector Spinae Plane Block (ESPB) and Retrolaminar Block (RLB) on intra- and postoperative analgesia in patients with Multiple Rib Fractures (MRFs). METHODS: A total of 80 MRFs patients were randomly divided into the ESPB (Group E) and RLB (Group R) groups. After general anesthesia, ESPB and RLB were performed under ultrasound guidance, respectively, together with 20 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine and Patient-Controlled Intravenous Analgesia (PCIA). RESULTS: Thirty-four cases in Group E and 33,cases in Group R showed unclear paravertebral spaces. The intraoperative dosage of remifentanil (mean ± SD) (392.8 ± 118.7 vs. 501.7 ± 190.0 μg) and postoperative morphine PCIA dosage, (7.35 ± 1.55 vs. 14.73 ± 2.18 mg) in Group R were significantly less than those in Group E; the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores in Group R at 2 (2.7 ± 1.2 vs. 3.4 ± 1.4), 4 (2.2 ± 1.1 vs. 2.8 ± 0.9), 12 (2.5 ± 0.9 vs. 3.0 ± 0.8), and 24 hours (2.6 ± 1.0 vs. 3.1 ± 0.9) after surgery were significantly lower than those in Group E. Finally, the normal respiratory diaphragm activity (2.17 ± 0.22 vs. 2.05 ± 0.19), pH (median [IQR] (7.38 [7.31–7.45] vs. 7.36 [7.30–7.42]), and partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO(2)) (44 [35–49] vs. 42.5 [30–46]) after the operation in Group R were significantly better than those in Group E (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: RLB was a more effective analgesic method than ESPB in the treatment of MRF.