Ultrasound-Guided Thoracic Paravertebral Block Enhances the Quality of Recovery After Modified Radical Mastectomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
breast cancer surgery
pain management
quality of recovery
regional anesthesia
thoracic paravertebral block
ultrasonography
Journal
Journal of pain research
ISSN: 1178-7090
Titre abrégé: J Pain Res
Pays: New Zealand
ID NLM: 101540514
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
20
06
2021
accepted:
31
07
2021
entrez:
30
8
2021
pubmed:
31
8
2021
medline:
31
8
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Ultrasound-guided thoracic paravertebral block (TPVB) has become increasingly popular for postoperative analgesia after breast surgery. We designed this prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to test the hypothesis that TPVB is superior to placebo in improving the patient quality of recovery following modified radical mastectomy. Sixty-eight female patients undergoing elective unilateral modified radical mastectomy were enrolled. Patients were randomized to receive preoperative ultrasound-guided TPVB with 0.5% ropivacaine (TPVB group, n=34) or 0.9% saline (Control group, n=34). The primary outcome was quality of recovery, measured 24 h after surgery using the 40-item Quality of recovery questionnaire (QoR-40). Secondary outcomes were the area under the curve of the visual analog scale pain scores over 24 h, postoperative 24-h morphine consumption, time to first rescue analgesia, length of post-anesthesia care unit stay, postoperative nausea and vomiting, and patient satisfaction. The global QoR-40 score 24 h postoperatively (median [interquartile range]) was 173 [170-177] in the TPVB group and 161 [160-164] in the control group ( A single preoperative injection of TPVB with ropivacaine enhances the quality of recovery and postoperative analgesia in patients following modified radical mastectomy.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34456586
doi: 10.2147/JPR.S325627
pii: 325627
pmc: PMC8385420
doi:
Types de publication
Case Reports
Clinical Trial
Langues
eng
Pagination
2563-2570Informations de copyright
© 2021 Rao et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.
Références
Anaesthesia. 2020 Sep;75(9):1136-1138
pubmed: 32619020
Br J Anaesth. 2013 Aug;111(2):161-9
pubmed: 23471753
Pain Med. 2009 May-Jun;10(4):708-15
pubmed: 19453965
CA Cancer J Clin. 2021 Jan;71(1):7-33
pubmed: 33433946
Can J Anaesth. 2015 Mar;62(3):241-51
pubmed: 25480319
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017 Dec;140(6):1081-1090
pubmed: 29176408
Anesthesiology. 2014 Mar;120(3):703-13
pubmed: 24071616
Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2020 Sep;45(9):727-732
pubmed: 32727818
Anesthesiology. 2016 Jul;125(1):39-45
pubmed: 27159009
Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2018 Aug;31(4):396-401
pubmed: 29846193
Br J Anaesth. 2010 Dec;105(6):842-52
pubmed: 20947592
Anesth Analg. 2017 May;124(5):1697-1708
pubmed: 27828796
BMJ. 2010 Mar 23;340:c332
pubmed: 20332509
Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2020 Dec 02;16:1165-1173
pubmed: 33293817
Anaesthesia. 2020 May;75(5):664-673
pubmed: 31984479
Br J Anaesth. 2018 Apr;120(4):705-711
pubmed: 29576111
Br J Anaesth. 2000 Jan;84(1):11-5
pubmed: 10740540
Br J Anaesth. 2020 May;124(5):638-647
pubmed: 32139134
J Clin Anesth. 2020 Feb;59:84-88
pubmed: 31280100
Br J Anaesth. 2016 Sep;117(3):382-6
pubmed: 27543533
Anesth Analg. 2007 Dec;105(6):1848-51, table of contents
pubmed: 18042892
Br J Anaesth. 2019 Nov;123(5):664-670
pubmed: 31493848
J Anesth. 2020 Feb;34(1):72-78
pubmed: 31802233
Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2020 Apr;45(4):260-266
pubmed: 31969443
Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2020 Oct;45(10):813-817
pubmed: 32817361
Anesthesiology. 2001 Sep;95(3):771-80
pubmed: 11575553
Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2017 Sep/Oct;42(5):609-631
pubmed: 28820803
Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2017 Sep/Oct;42(5):575-581
pubmed: 28665874