Refining a great idea: the consolidation of PECS I, PECS II and serratus blocks into a single thoracic fascial plane block, the SAP block

The Efficacy and Safety of Ultrasound-Guided, Bi-Level, Erector Spinae Plane Block With Different Doses of Dexmedetomidine for Patients Undergoing Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: The anesthetic characteristics of ultrasound-guided bi-level erector spinae plane block (ESPB) plus dexmedetomidine (Dex) remain unclear. We compared the efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided bi-level ESPB plus different doses of Dex in patients undergoing video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS).

Methods: One-hundred eight patients undergoing VATS were randomized into three groups: R group (n = 38, 15 ml of 0.375% ropivacaine with 0.1 mg/kg dexamethasone), RD1 group (n = 38, 15 ml of 0.375% ropivacaine plus 0.5 μg/kg DEX with 0.1 mg/kg dexamethasone) and RD2 group (n = 38, 15 ml of 0.375% ropivacaine plus 1.0 μg/kg DEX with 0.1 mg/kg dexamethasone). The primary outcome was the pain 12 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes included the Prince Henry Hospital Pain Score; hemodynamics; consumption of sufentanil; anesthetized dermatomal distribution; recovery time; rescue analgesia; satisfaction scores of patients and surgeon; quick recovery index; adverse effects; the prevalence of chronic pain and quality of recovery.

Results: The visual analog scale (VAS) and the Prince Henry pain score were significantly lower in both the RD1 and RD2 groups during the first 24 h after surgery (P < 0.05). Both VAS with coughing and the Prince Henry pain score were significantly lower in the RD2 group than in the RD1 group 8–24 h after surgery (P < 0.05). Both heart rate and mean arterial pressure were significantly different from T2 to T6 in the RD1 and RD2 groups (P < 0.05). The receipt of remifentanil, propofol, Dex, and recovery time was significantly reduced in the RD2 group (P < 0.05). The requirement for sufentanil during the 8–72 h after surgery, less rescue medication, and total press times were significantly lower in the RD2 group (P < 0.05). The time to the first dose of rescue ketorolac was significantly longer in the RD2 group (P < 0.05). Further, anal exhaust, removal of chest tubes, and ambulation were significantly shorter in the RD2 group (P < 0.05). The incidence of tachycardia, post-operative nausea and vomiting, and chronic pain was significantly reduced in the RD2 group, while the QoR-40 score was significantly higher in the RD2 group (P < 0.05).

Conclusions: Pre-operative bi-level, single-injection ESPB plus 1 μg/kg DEX provided superior pain relief and long-term post-operative recovery for patients undergoing VATS.

Clinical Trial Registration:http://www.chictr.org.cn/searchproj.aspx.

The effect of PECS-1 block on postoperative pain in total implantable venous access port catheter (TIVAP) insertion

BACKGROUND

The aim of this prospective, randomized, controlled study was to evaluate the analgesic effect of US-guided Pectoral (PECS) I blocks on postoperative analgesia after TIVAP insertion.

METHODS

A hundred-twenty patients were included in this study. The patients were divided into two groups: Group PECS and Group INF (infiltration). A total 0.4 mL kg^-1 0.25% bupivacaine was injected to below the middle of the clavicle in the interfascial space between the pectoralis major and minor muscles for PECS-1. The skin and deep tissue infiltration of the anterior chest wall was performed with 0.4 mL kg^-1 0.25% bupivacaine for INF group. Tramadol and paracetamol consumption, visual analog scale pain scores were recorded at 0, 1, 4, 12, and 24 h postoperatively.

RESULTS

The use of the PECS in TIVAP significantly decreased the amount of paracetamol used in the first 24 h postoperatively (p < 0.001). There was a statistically significant difference in the number of tramadol rescue analgesia administered between the groups (p < 0.001) There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of the VAS scores at 0 and 24 h. However, VAS scores at 1, 4, and 12 h were found to be significantly lower in patients who underwent PECS than in those who received infiltration anesthesia (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that US-guided PECS-1 provides adequate analgesia following TIVAP insertion as part of multimodal analgesia. The PECS-1 significantly reduced opioid consumption.

Mechanisms of action of fascial plane blocks: a narrative review

BACKGROUND

Fascial plane blocks (FPBs) target the space between two fasciae, rather than discrete peripheral nerves. Despite their popularity, their mechanisms of action remain controversial, particularly for erector spinae plane and quadratus lumborum blocks.

OBJECTIVES

This narrative review describes the scientific evidence underpinning proposed mechanisms of action, highlights existing knowledge gaps, and discusses implications for clinical practice and research.

FINDINGS

There are currently two plausible mechanisms of analgesia. The first is a local effect on nociceptors and neurons within the plane itself or within adjacent muscle and tissue compartments. Dispersion of local anesthetic occurs through bulk flow and diffusion, and the resulting conduction block is dictated by the mass of local anesthetic reaching these targets. The extent of spread, analgesia, and cutaneous sensory loss is variable and imperfectly correlated. Explanations include anatomical variation, factors governing fluid dispersion, and local anesthetic pharmacodynamics. The second is vascular absorption of local anesthetic and a systemic analgesic effect at distant sites. Direct evidence is presently lacking but preliminary data indicate that FPBs can produce transient elevations in plasma concentrations similar to intravenous lidocaine infusion. The relative contributions of these local and systemic effects remain uncertain.

CONCLUSION

Our current understanding of FPB mechanisms supports their demonstrated analgesic efficacy, but also highlights the unpredictability and variability that result from myriad factors at play. Potential strategies to improve efficacy include accurate deposition close to targets of interest, injections of sufficient volume to encourage physical spread by bulk flow, and manipulation of concentration to promote diffusion.