Erector Spinae Plane Block
Anesthesia
breast neoplasms
conduction
mastectomy
pain
postoperative outcome
segmental
ultrasonography
Journal
Anticancer research
ISSN: 1791-7530
Titre abrégé: Anticancer Res
Pays: Greece
ID NLM: 8102988
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Nov 2021
Nov 2021
Historique:
received:
11
09
2021
revised:
24
09
2021
accepted:
05
10
2021
entrez:
4
11
2021
pubmed:
5
11
2021
medline:
16
11
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Erector spinae plane block (ESP Block) was introduced in 2016 as a surgical post-operative analgesia procedure. The present prospective, randomized trial aimed to compare ESP Block with serratus plane block (SPB) plus pectoral nerve blocks (PECS I) during breast conserving surgery (BCS). Between February 2019 and March 2021, 104 patients undergoing BCS were randomized to receive either ESP block (ESP group n=54) or SPB+PECS I (SPB group=49). Assessment of postoperative pain was recorded by the dynamic and static visual analog scale (VAS) and was compared between groups. Between-group two-way ANOVA did not reach a statistically significant difference in static and dynamic VAS (p=0.879; p=0.917, respectively). Despite ESP group requiring for higher value of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) bolus, no statistically significant difference was found in PCA activation pattern between groups (p=0.109). ESP block was a faster technique when compared to SPB+PECS I (p=0.007) and no complications or opioid side-effects were recorded in all groups examined. ESP Block could represent a safe, faster alternative with a single injection to SPB+PECS I in BCS.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND/AIM
OBJECTIVE
Erector spinae plane block (ESP Block) was introduced in 2016 as a surgical post-operative analgesia procedure. The present prospective, randomized trial aimed to compare ESP Block with serratus plane block (SPB) plus pectoral nerve blocks (PECS I) during breast conserving surgery (BCS).
PATIENTS AND METHODS
METHODS
Between February 2019 and March 2021, 104 patients undergoing BCS were randomized to receive either ESP block (ESP group n=54) or SPB+PECS I (SPB group=49). Assessment of postoperative pain was recorded by the dynamic and static visual analog scale (VAS) and was compared between groups.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Between-group two-way ANOVA did not reach a statistically significant difference in static and dynamic VAS (p=0.879; p=0.917, respectively). Despite ESP group requiring for higher value of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) bolus, no statistically significant difference was found in PCA activation pattern between groups (p=0.109). ESP block was a faster technique when compared to SPB+PECS I (p=0.007) and no complications or opioid side-effects were recorded in all groups examined.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
ESP Block could represent a safe, faster alternative with a single injection to SPB+PECS I in BCS.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34732440
pii: 41/11/5667
doi: 10.21873/anticanres.15383
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Equivalence Trial
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
5667-5676Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.