Comparison of the analgesic effect of ultrasound-guided paravertebral block and ultrasound-guided retrolaminar block in Uniportal video-assisted Thoracoscopic surgery: a prospective, randomized study

Qiang Wang, Shijing Wei, Shuai Li, Jie Yu, Guohua Zhang, Cheng Ni, Li Sun, Hui Zheng, Qiang Wang, Shijing Wei, Shuai Li, Jie Yu, Guohua Zhang, Cheng Ni, Li Sun, Hui Zheng

Abstract

Background: The optimal modality for postoperative analgesia after uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (UVATS) for the treatment of lung cancer has not yet been determined. Both ultrasound-guided paravertebral block (PVB) and retrolaminar block (RLB) have been reported to be successful in providing analgesia after UVATS. However, which block technique provides superior analgesia after UVATS is still unclear. This randomized study was designed to compare the postoperative analgesic effects and adverse events associated with ultrasound-guided PVB and RLB after UVATS.

Methods: Sixty patients with lung cancer were randomized to undergo ultrasound-guided PVB (group P) or ultrasound-guided RLB (group R). In group P, 30 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine was injected at the T3 and T5 levels via ultrasound-guided PVB (15 mL at each level on the operative side). In group R, 30 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine was injected at the T3 and T5 levels via ultrasound-guided RLB (15 mL at each level on the operative side). The primary outcome was the numerical rating scale (NRS) score within 48 h after surgery. The secondary outcomes were total postoperative sufentanil consumption, time to first analgesic request and adverse events.

Results: At 3, 6, 12, 24, 36 and 48 h postoperatively, the NRS score at rest in group P was lower than that in group R (p < 0.05). At 3, 6, 12, 24 and 36 h postoperatively, the NRS score while coughing in group P was lower than that in group R (p < 0.05). The total postoperative sufentanil consumption in group P was significantly lower than that in group R (p < 0.001). Additionally, the time to first analgesic request was longer in group R than in group P (p < 0.0001). The incidence of nausea in group R was higher than that in group P (p < 0.05).

Conclusions: In patients with lung cancer undergoing UVATS, ultrasound-guided PVB with 0.5% ropivacaine provides better analgesia and results in less nausea than ultrasound-guided RLB. Compared with ultrasound-guided RLB, ultrasound-guided PVB seems to be a better technique for analgesia in UVATS.

Trial registration: The name of this study is the Effect And Mechanism Of Ultrasound-guided Multimodal Regional Nerve Block On Acute And Chronic Pain After Thoracic Surgery. This study was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ( ChiCTR2100044060 ). The date of registration was March 9, 2021.

Keywords: Adverse events; Lung cancer; Pain; Ultrasound-guided paravertebral block; Ultrasound-guided retrolaminar block; Uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

© 2021. The Author(s).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Patient inclusion and exclusion process. PCIA, patient-controlled intravenous analgesia
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
The T3 and T5 spinal segments where ultrasound-guided PVB or RLB was to be performed
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Ultrasound images of PVB and RLB. A shows an ultrasound image of the paravertebral space before the injection of ropivacaine. B shows that the paravertebral space widened after the injection of 15 ml of ropivacaine. C shows an ultrasound image of the thoracic lamina before the injection of ropivacaine. D shows the hypoechoic area formed by the injection of ropivacaine above the lamina
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
The 5-cm-long surgical incision was made in the fourth intercostal space at the anterior axillary line (A). B shows the surgical field of thoracoscopic lobectomy. A chest drain was placed at the edge of the incision at the end of the surgery (C). D shows the chest drainage system
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Postoperative pain severity NRS score at rest (in cm) at 3, 6, 12, 24, 36 and 48 h postoperatively. P, paravertebral block; R, retrolaminar block; NRS, numerical rating scale. *P < 0.05
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Postoperative pain severity NRS score during coughing (in cm) at 3, 6, 12, 24, 36 and 48 h postoperatively. P, paravertebral block; R, retrolaminar block; NRS, numerical rating scale. *P < 0.05
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
A shows the mean arterial pressure (MAP) changes at different times in each group. In both groups, the MAP showed significant changes over time, with *P < 0.001. B shows the heart rate (HR) changes at different times in each group. In both groups, the HR showed significant changes over time, with *P < 0.05. P, paravertebral block; R, retrolaminar block

References

    1. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, Bray F. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209–249. doi: 10.3322/caac.21660.
    1. Sihoe ADL. Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery as the gold standard for lung cancer surgery. Respirology. 2020;(Suppl 2):49–60. 10.1111/resp.13920.
    1. Elsabeeny WY, Ibrahim MA, Shehab NN, Mohamed A, Wadod MA. Serratus anterior plane block and erector spinae plane block versus thoracic epidural analgesia for perioperative thoracotomy pain control: a randomized controlled study. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2021;35(10):2928–2936. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2020.12.047.
    1. Patané AK. Minimal invasive surgery in locally advanced N2 non-small cell lung cancer. Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2021;10(1):519–528. doi: 10.21037/tlcr.2020.03.27.
    1. Matsuura N, Igai H, Ohsawa F, Yazawa T, Kamiyoshihara M. Uniport vs. multiport video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for anatomical lung resection-which is less invasive? J Thorac Dis. 2021;13(1):244–251. doi: 10.21037/jtd-20-2759.
    1. Wang L, Wang Y, Zhang X, Zhu X, Wang G. Serratus anterior plane block or thoracic paravertebral block for postoperative pain treatment after uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery: a retrospective propensity-matched study. J Pain Res. 2019;12:2231–2238. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S209012.
    1. Zhao H, Xin L, Feng Y. The effect of preoperative erector spinae plane vs. paravertebral blocks on patient-controlled oxycodone consumption after video-assisted thoracic surgery: a prospective randomized, blinded, non-inferiority study. J Clin Anesth. 2020;62:109737. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2020.109737.
    1. Taketa Y, Irisawa Y, Fujitani T. Comparison of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block and thoracic paravertebral block for postoperative analgesia after video-assisted thoracic surgery: a randomized controlled non-inferiority clinical trial. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2019:rapm-2019-100827. 10.1136/rapm-2019-100827.
    1. Kelly ME, Nicholas DM, Killen J, Coyne J, Sweeney KJ, McDonnell J. Thoracic paravertebral blockade in breast surgery: is pneumothorax an appreciable concern? A review of over 1000 cases. Breast J. 2018;24(1):23–27. doi: 10.1111/tbj.12831.
    1. Schnabel A, Reichl SU, Kranke P, Pogatzki-Zahn EM, Zahn PK. Efficacy and safety of paravertebral blocks in breast surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Br J Anaesth. 2010;105(6):842–852. doi: 10.1093/bja/aeq265.
    1. Naja Z, Lönnqvist PA. Somatic paravertebral nerve blockade. Incidence of failed block and complications. Anaesthesia. 2001;56(12):1184–1188. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2044.2001.02084-2.x.
    1. Swisher MW, Wallace AM, Sztain JF, Said ET, Khatibi B, Abanobi M, Finneran IV JJ, Gabriel RA, Abramson W, Blair SL, Hosseini A, Dobke MK, Donohue MC, Ilfeld BM. Erector spinae plane versus paravertebral nerve blocks for postoperative analgesia after breast surgery: a randomized clinical trial. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2020;45(4):260–266. doi: 10.1136/rapm-2019-101013.
    1. Naja ZM, EI-Rajab M, AI-Tannir MA, Ziade FM, Tayara K, Younes F, et al. Thoracic paravertebral block: influence of the number of injections. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2006;31(3):196–201. doi: 10.1016/j.rapm.2005.12.004.
    1. Yang H-M, Choi YJ, Kwon H-J, O J. Cho TH, Kim SH. Comparison of injectate spread and nerve involvement between retrolaminar and erector spinae plane blocks in the thoracic region: a cadaveric study. Anaesthesia. 2018;73(10):1244–1250. doi: 10.1111/anae.14408.
    1. Nagane D, Ueshima H, Otake H. Upper lobectomy of the left lung using a left retrolaminar block. J Clin Anesth. 2018;49:74. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2018.06.014.
    1. Ryan B. Pneumothorax: assessment and diagnostic testing. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2005;20(4):251–253. doi: 10.1097/00005082-200507000-00009.
    1. Cottrell D. Iatrogenic pneumothorax. Nursing. 2010;40(3):72. doi: 10.1097/01.NURSE.0000368828.45003.3f.
    1. Netravathi M, Taly AB, Sinha S, Bindu PS, Goel G. Accidental spinal cord injury during spinal anesthesia: a report. Ann Indian Acad Neurol. 2010;13(4):297–298. doi: 10.4103/0972-2327.74200.
    1. Wong CA. Nerve injuries after neuraxial anaesthesia and their medicolegal implications. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2010;24(3):367–381. doi: 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2009.11.008.
    1. Absalom AR, Martinelli G, Scott NB. Spinal cord injury caused by direct damage by local anaesthetic infiltration needle. Br J Anaesth. 2001;87(3):512–515. doi: 10.1093/bja/87.3.512.
    1. Tsui BCH, Kirkham K, Kwofie MK, Tran Q, Wong P, Chin KJ, et al. Practice advisory on the bleeding risks for peripheral nerve and interfascial plane blockade: evidence review and expert consensus. Can J Anaesth. 2019;66(11):1356–1384. doi: 10.1007/s12630-019-01466-w.
    1. Schulz-Stübner S, Kelley J. Regional anesthesia surveillance system: first experiences with a quality assessment tool for regional anesthesia and analgesia. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2007;51(3):305–315. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2006.01239.x.
    1. Sugiyama T, Kataoka Y, Shindo K, Hino M, Itoi K, Sato Y, Tanaka S. Retrolaminar block versus paravertebral block for pain relief after less-invasive lung surgery: a randomized, non-inferiority controlled trial. Cureus. 2021;13(2):e13597. doi: 10.7759/cureus.13597.
    1. Taha AM, Abd-Elmaksoud AM. Ropivacaine in ultrasound-guided femoral nerve block: what is the minimal effective anaesthetic concentration (EC90)? Anaesthesia. 2014;69(7):678–682. doi: 10.1111/anae.12607.
    1. Cappelleri G, Aldegheri G, Ruggieri F, Mamo D, Fanelli G, Casati A. Minimum effective anesthetic concentration (MEAC) for sciatic nerve block: subgluteus and popliteal approaches. Can J Anaesth. 2007;54(4):283–289. doi: 10.1007/BF03022773.
    1. Taha AM, Abd-Elmaksoud AM. Lidocaine use in ultrasound-guided femoral nerve block: what is the minimum effective anaesthetic concentration (MEAC90)? Br J Anaesth. 2013;110(6):1040–1044. doi: 10.1093/bja/aes595.
    1. Sotome S, Sawada A, Wada A, Shima H, Kutomi G, Yamakage M. Erector spinae plane block versus retrolaminar block for postoperative analgesia after breast surgery: a randomized controlled trial. J Anesth. 2021;35(1):27–34. doi: 10.1007/s00540-020-02855-y.
    1. Turhan Ö, Sivrikoz N, Sungur Z, Duman S, Özkan B, Șentürk M. Thoracic paravertebral block achieves better pain control than erector spinae plane block and intercostal nerve block in thoracoscopic surgery: a randomized study. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2020;35(10):2920–2927. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2020.11.034.
    1. Chen N, Qiao Q, Chen RM, Xu QQ, Zhang Y, Tian Y. The effect of ultrasound-guided intercostal nerve block, single-injection erector spinae plane block and multiple-injection paravertebral block on postoperative analgesia in thoracoscopic surgery: a randomized, double-blinded, clinical trial. J Clin Anesth. 2020;59:106–111. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2019.07.002.
    1. Zeballos JL, Voscopoulos C, Kapottos M, Janfaza D, Vlassakov K. Ultrasound-guided retrolaminar paravertebral block. Anaesthesia. 2013;68(6):649–651. doi: 10.1111/anae.12296.
    1. Ibrahim AF, Darwish HH. The costotransverse ligaments in human: a detailed anatomical study. Clin Anat. 2005;18(5):340–345. doi: 10.1002/ca.20102.
    1. Onishi E, Toda N, Kameyama Y, Yamauchi M. Comparison of clinical efficacy and anatomical investigation between retrolaminar block and erector spinae plane block. Biomed Res Int. 2019;2019:2578396–2578398. doi: 10.1155/2019/2578396.
    1. Seidel R, Wree A, Schulze M. Thoracic-paravertebral blocks: comparative anatomical study with different injection techniques and volumes. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2020;45(2):102–106. doi: 10.1136/rapm-2019-100896.
    1. Kang K, Meng X, Li B, Yuan J, Tian E, Zhang J, Zhang W. Effect of thoracic paravertebral nerve block on the early postoperative rehabilitation in patients undergoing thoracoscopic radical lung cancer surgery. World J Surg Oncol. 2020;18(1):298. doi: 10.1186/s12957-020-02071-8.
    1. Smith HS, Laufer A. Opioid induced nausea and vomiting. Eur J Pharmacol. 2014;722:67–78. doi: 10.1016/j.ejphar.2013.09.074.
    1. Rivedal DD, Nayar HS, Israel JS, Leverson G, Schulz AJ, Chambers T, Afifi AM, Blake JM, Poore SO. Paravertebral block associated with decreased opioid use and less nausea and vomiting after reduction mammaplasty. J Surg Res. 2018;228:307–313. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2018.03.018.
    1. Bhalla PI, Solomon S, Zhang R, Witt CE, Dagal A, Joffe AM. Comparison of serratus anterior plane block with epidural and paravertebral block in critically ill trauma patients with multiple rib fractures. Trauma Surg Acute Care Open. 2021;6(1):e000621. doi: 10.1136/tsaco-2020-000621.
    1. Elkoundi A, Balkhi H, Bensghir M, Baite A. Levobupivacaine plasma level between erector spinae plane block and thoracic paravertebral block. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2021;46(1):90–91. doi: 10.1136/rapm-2020-101406.

Source: PubMed

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

3
Sottoscrivi