Comparison of the effects of transversus thoracic muscle plane block and pecto-intercostal fascial block on postoperative opioid consumption in patients undergoing open cardiac surgery: a prospective randomized study.

BACKGROUND: There is an association exists between cardiac surgery, performed through median sternotomy, and a considerable postoperative pain. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the current study is to compare the effects of transversus thoracic muscle plane block (TTMPB) and pecto-intercostal fascial plane block (PIFB) upon postoperative opioid consumption among the patients who underwent open cardiac surgery. METHODS: The present prospective, randomized, comparative study was conducted among 80 patients who underwent elective on-pump cardiac surgery with sternotomy. The subjects were randomly assigned to two groups with each group containing 40 individuals. For the TTMPB group, bilateral ultrasound-guided TTMPB was adopted in which 20 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine was used on each side. In case of PIFB group, bilateral ultrasound-guided PIFB was adopted with the application of 20 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine on each side. The researchers recorded the first time for rescue analgesia, the overall dosage of rescue analgesia administered in the first 24 h after the operation and the postoperative complications. RESULTS: The PIFB group took significantly longer time to raise the first request for rescue analgesia (7.8 ± 1.7 h) than the TTMPB group (6.7 ± 1.4 h). Likewise, the PIFB group subjects had a remarkably lower 'overall morphine usage' in the first 24 h after the operation (4.8 ± 1.0 mg) than TTMPB group (7.8 ± 2.0 mg). CONCLUSION: Bilateral ultrasound-guided PIFB provided a longer time for the first analgesic demand than bilateral ultrasound-guided TTMPB in patients undergoing open cardiac surgery. In addition to this, the PIFB reported less postoperative morphine usage than the TTMPB and increases satisfaction in these patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered at Clinical Trials.gov on 28/11/2022 (registration number: NCT05627869).

A randomized trial to compare the analgesic effect of pecto-intercostal fascial plane block with erector spinae plane block after mid-sternotomy incision for cardiac surgery.

Introduction: Most cardiac surgeries are performed through a median sternotomy, of which 49% of these patients experience severe pain at rest postoperatively and up to 78% on coughing and deep breathing. Regional thoracic wall blocks targeting thoracic nerve roots improve the analgesia quality and limit opioid use. Truncal blocks through the posterior approach can often be cumbersome in patients with multiple lines and catheters. Pecto-Intercostal Fascial Plane Block (PIFB) can be a convenient alternative for achieving comparable analgesia. Material and methods: The patients were randomly assigned to receive either an ultrasound-guided Pecto-Intercostal Fascial Plane Block (PIFB) or Erector Spinae Plane Block (ESPB). The outcomes measured and compared postoperative pain scores at rest and on deep breathing at 2, 6, 12, 24 h, total opioid (fentanyl) consumption in the postoperative period, time to rescue analgesia and total rescue analgesic doses required, between the two groups. Results: Data from 30 patients were analysed. Post-operative pain scores at rest and during deep breathing were found to be comparable in both groups. The total opioid consumed, time to rescue analgesia and total doses of rescue analgesia was not found to be statistically different in the two groups. Conclusions: PIFB was found to be comparable to ESPB in alleviating post-operative pain in patients who underwent cardiac surgeries through sternotomy. And it/PIFB can be a quicker alternative to posterior truncal blocks since it can be safely given in a supine position with an ultrasound.

Evaluation of ultrasound-guided pecto-intercostal block in canine cadavers.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the technique for performing an ultrasound-guided pecto-intercostal fascial (PIF) block and compare two volumes of injectate in canine cadavers. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective experimental cadaveric study. ANIMALS: A total of 11 canine cadavers (11.8 ± 1.9 kg). METHODS: Parasternal ultrasound-guided injections were performed within the PIF plane, between the deep pectoral and external intercostal muscles, at the intercostal space between ribs four and five. Each hemithorax was injected with 0.25 mL kg-1 (treatment low volume, LV) or 0.5 mL kg-1 (treatment high volume, HV) of 1% methylene blue dye. Treatments were randomly assigned to either right or left hemithorax, with each cadaver injected with both treatments, for a total of 22 injections. Anatomical dissections were performed to determine staining of ventral cutaneous branches of intercostal nerves, surrounding nerves and musculature and spread of injectate. The presence or absence of intrathoracic puncture was also noted. RESULTS: The PIF plane was identified and injected in each hemithorax. No significant differences between treatments LV and HV were found for number of ventral cutaneous nerve branches stained or any other analyzed variable. The ventral cutaneous branches of intercostal nerves (T3-T8) were variably stained, and the most commonly stained nerves were T5 (6 and 10), T6 (8 and 9) and T7 (2 and 7) in treatments LV and HV, respectively. Staining outside the immediate parasternal region was noted in both treatments, with greater spread away from the parasternal region in treatment HV. No intrathoracic staining was found. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Ultrasound-guided PIF injections resulted in staining of ventral cutaneous branches and parasternal musculature; however, the spread observed was inadequate to provide effective analgesia to the sternum. In vivo studies are warranted to investigate this regional anesthetic technique in veterinary patients.

Pectointercostal Fascial Block (PIFB) as a Novel Technique for Postoperative Pain Management in Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of pectointercostal fascial block in relieving postoperative pain in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. DESIGN: Single-blinded, prospective, randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Single-center tertiary care teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: A total 40 participants undergoing cardiac surgery aged 18 to 80 years. INTERVENTIONS: Subjects were categorized into 2 groups of 20 each. In group 2 participants (interventional group), bilateral pectointercostal fascial block was given using ropivacaine injection 0.25% after completion of surgery, before shifting to the intensive care unit. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Postoperative pain was measured after extubation at 0, 3, 6, and 12 hours, using a numeric rating scale. Pain in group 2 was significantly less and lasted for a longer duration than in group 1. Fentanyl requirement was significantly higher in group 1 (1.06 ± 0.12 µ/kg) than in group 2 (0.82 ± 0.19 µ/kg). CONCLUSIONS: Pectointercostal fascial block is an easy and efficient technique to reduce postoperative pain after cardiac surgery.

Ultrasound-Guided Pecto-Intercostal Fascial Block for Postoperative Pain Management in Cardiac Surgery: A Prospective, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the effect of pecto-intercostal fascial plane block (PIFB) on postoperative opioid requirements, pain scores, lengths of intensive care unit and hospital stays and incidence of postoperative delirium in cardiac surgical patients. DESIGN: Single- center, prospective, randomized (1:1), quadruple- blinded, placebo-controlled trial. SETTING: Single center, tertiary- care center. PARTICIPANTS: The study comprised 80 adult cardiac surgical patients (age >18 y) requiring median sternotomy. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned to receive ultrasound-guided PIFB, with either 0.25% bupivacaine or placebo, on postoperative days 0 and 1. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of the 80 patients randomized, the mean age was 65.78 ± 8.73 in the bupivacaine group and 65.70 ± 9.86 in the placebo group (p = 0.573). Patients receiving PIFB with 0.25% bupivacaine showed a statistically significant reduction in visual analog scale scores (4.8 ± 2.7 v 5.1 ± 2.6; p < 0.001), but the 48-hour cumulative opioid requirement computed as morphine milligram equivalents was similar (40.8 ± 22.4 mg v 49.1 ± 26.9 mg; p = 0.14). There was no difference in the incidence of postoperative delirium between the groups evaluated using the 3-minute diagnostic Confusion Assessment Method (3/40 [7.5%] v 5/40 [12.5%] placebo; p = 0.45). CONCLUSION: Patients who received PIFB with bupivacaine showed a decline in cumulative opioid consumption postoperatively, but this difference between the groups was not statistically significant. Low incidence of complications and improvement in visual analog scale pain scores suggested that the PIFB can be performed safely in this population and warrants additional studies with a larger sample size.