Current understanding of the fascial plane blocks for analgesia of the chest wall: techniques and indications update for 2020.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Thoracic myofascial plane blocks have gained popularity because of their ease of performance and relative safety. This review highlights current research demonstrating the efficacy of these blocks for specific surgical procedures and provides a brief description of how these techniques are performed. RECENT FINDINGS: Fascial plane blocks of the thorax and chest wall have been shown to be beneficial in providing perioperative analgesia for a variety of surgical procedures. Studies discussed in this review compare thoracic fascial plane blocks to systemic analgesia alone, contrast these novel methods of pain control to more traditional techniques, such as paravertebral nerve blocks and epidural anesthesia, and attempt to determine, which fascial plane blocks provide optimal postsurgical analgesia. SUMMARY: Thoracic fascial plane blocks provide the anesthesiologist a number of techniques to address postsurgical pain. The relative ease of performance and safety profile of these blocks make them an appealing option for pain control for many patients undergoing thoracic or chest wall surgery. Further research is needed to not only define additional indications for each of these blocks, but also explore optimal dosing including the use of continuous catheter techniques.

Peripheral Nerve Injury in Thoracic Surgery Detected by Automated Somatosensory Evoked Potential Monitoring.

Study Objective. Our objectives were to estimate the incidence of symptoms of peripheral nerve injury (sPNI) in thoracic surgical patients undergoing video-assisted thoracic surgery or open thoracotomy and to determine whether intraoperative somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs) waveform changes correlate with postoperative peripheral neuropathic symptoms. Methods. We conducted a prospective observational study in the operating room of a tertiary hospital. We measured SSEPs intraoperatively and assessed patients for sPNI postoperatively. Results. Forty-four patients consented. Six were excluded from analysis. We found that 42% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 26% to 57%) of patients undergoing thoracic surgery had significant changes in SSEP amplitude and latency. Furthermore, 16% (95% CI = 4% to 28%) of patients had new postoperative symptoms of sensory or motor deficits in an upper extremity. We calculated a sensitivity of 66.7% (95% CI = 29.0% to 100%) and a specificity of 50% (95% CI = 33% to 67.3%) for the identification of sPNI based on automated intraoperative SSEP changes. Conclusions. We identified the incidence of SSEP changes in thoracic surgery (42%) and the incidence of postoperative sPNI after thoracic surgery (16%). We identified a positive correlation between intraoperative SSEP changes and postoperative sPNI, which after multivariate analysis was not significant given the small sample size of the study. By the time sensory and/or motor changes are detected postoperatively, it may be too late to reverse the nerve damage. Future versions of the EPAD device could provide anesthesiologists a way to monitor for the development of sPNI, and make changes before a potential injury becomes permanent.