Ultrasound-guided multiple-injection costotransverse block for mastectomy and primary reconstructive surgery. A study protocol

Comparison of Multiple Injection Costotransverse Block and Erector Spinae Plane Block for Post-Sternotomy Pain Relief in Pediatric Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery: A Prospective Randomized Comparative Study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of ultrasound-guided multiple injection costotransverse block (MICB) and compare it with erector spinae plane block (ESPB) for poststernotomy pain relief in pediatric cardiac surgical patients.

DESIGN

A prospective, randomized, double-blind, comparative study.

SETTING

At a single institution tertiary referral cardiac center.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 90 children with acyanotic congenital heart disease requiring surgery via sternotomy.

INTERVENTIONS

Children were allocated randomly to 1 of the 3 following groups: ESPB (group 1), MICB (group 2), or Control (group 3). Participants in groups 1 and 2 received 4 mg/kg of 0.2% ropivacaine for bilateral ultrasound-guided block after induction of anesthesia. Postoperatively, intravenous paracetamol was used for multimodal analgesia, and fentanyl/tramadol was used for rescue analgesia.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The modified objective pain score (MOPS) was evaluated at 0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 hours postextubation. After all exclusions, 84 patients were analyzed. The MOPS score was found to be significantly lower in ESPB and MICB groups compared to the control group until 10 hours postextubation (p < 0.05), with no statistically significant difference at the 12th hour (p = 0.2198). The total intraoperative fentanyl consumption (p = 0.0005), need for fentanyl supplementation on incision (p < 0.0001), and need for rescue opioid requirement in the postoperative period (p = 0.034) were significantly lower in both the ESPB and MICB groups than the control group. There were no statistically significant differences in both primary and secondary outcomes between the ESPB and MICB groups.

CONCLUSION

Ultrasound-guided MICB was effective and comparable to ESPB for post-sternotomy pain management in pediatric cardiac surgical patients.

Insignificant influence of the intertransverse process block for major breast cancer surgery: a randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled, clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

The intertransverse process (ITP) block mimics the thoracic paravertebral block and allegedly ameliorates hemithoracic postoperative pain. However, concerning major reconstructive breast cancer surgery the modality has never been tested against placebo in a randomized clinical trial. We aimed to assess the efficacy of the multiple-injection ITP block and hypothesized that the blockade would reduce postoperative opioid consumption.

METHODS

We screened 58 patients with breast cancer scheduled for unilateral subpectoral implant-based primary breast reconstruction, involving mastectomy with complete fascial dissection of the major pectoral muscle. A randomization procedure allowed for the allocation of 36 patients to receive either unilateral multiple-injection active ITP block (0.5% ropivacaine 3×10 mL) or placebo ITP block (isotonic saline 3×10 mL) at T2, T4, T6 in a prospective, blinded, clinical trial. The primary outcome was total opioid consumption within the first 24 postoperative hours. Secondary outcomes included opioid consumption at 4-hour intervals, postoperative pain, patient satisfaction with block application, time to first opioid, ambulation and discharge, opioid-related side effects, and quality of recovery.

RESULTS

Opioid consumption within the first 24 postoperative hours showed no significant reduction when comparing the active and placebo group median (IQR): 75.0 mg (45-135) vs 62.5 mg (30-115), p=0.5, respectively. We did not find any consequential clinically relevant results of the secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Following major reconstructive breast cancer surgery, a preoperative multiple-injection ITP block neither reduces 24-hour opioid consumption postoperatively nor promotes substantial clinical positive outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

EudraCT2019-001016-35.