Thoracic Interfascial Plane Blocks and Outcomes After Minithoracotomy for Valve Surgery.

Introduction. Thoracic interfascial plane blocks are increasingly used for pain management after minimally invasive thoracotomy for valve repair and replacement procedures. We hypothesized that the addition of these blocks to the intercostal nerve block injected by the surgeon would further reduce pain scores and opioid utilization. Methods. In this retrospective cohort study, 400 consecutive patients who underwent minimally invasive thoracotomy for mitral or aortic valve replacement and were extubated within 2 hours of surgery were enrolled. The maximum pain score and opioid utilization on the day of surgery and other outcome variables were compared between patients who received interfascial plane blocks and those who did not. Results.193 (48%) received at least one interfascial plane block while 207 (52%) received no interfascial plane block. Patients who received a thoracic interfascial plane block had a maximum VAS score on the day of surgery (mean 7.4 ± 2.5) after the block was administered which was significantly lower than patients in the control group who did not receive the block (mean 7.9 ± 2.2) (P = .02). Opioid consumption in the interfascial plane block group on the day of surgery was not significantly different from the control group. Conclusion. Compared to intercostal blocks alone, the addition of thoracic interfascial plane blocks was associated with a modest reduction in maximum VAS score on the day of surgery. However, no difference in opioid consumption was noted. Patients who received interfascial plane blocks also had decreased blood transfusion requirements and a shorter hospital length of stay.

Airway Pressure Release Ventilation: A Review of the Evidence, Theoretical Benefits, and Alternative Titration Strategies.

OBJECTIVE: To review the theoretical benefits of airway pressure release ventilation (APRV), summarize the evidence for its use in clinical practice, and discuss different titration strategies. DATA SOURCE: Published randomized controlled trials in humans, observational human studies, animal studies, review articles, ventilator textbooks, and editorials. DATA SUMMARY: Airway pressure release ventilation optimizes alveolar recruitment, reduces airway pressures, allows for spontaneous breathing, and offers many hemodynamic benefits. Despite these physiologic advantages, there are inconsistent data to support the use of APRV over other modes of ventilation. There is considerable heterogeneity in the application of APRV among providers and a shortage of information describing initiation and titration strategies. To date, no direct comparison studies of APRV strategies have been performed. This review describes 2 common management approaches that bedside providers can use to optimally tailor APRV to their patients. CONCLUSION: Airway pressure release ventilation remains a form of mechanical ventilation primarily used for refractory hypoxemia. It offers unique physiological advantages over other ventilatory modes, and providers must be familiar with different titration methods. Given its inconsistent outcome data and heterogeneous use in practice, future trials should directly compare APRV strategies to determine the optimal management approach.