Intraperitoneal instillation versus wound infiltration for postoperative pain relief after cesarean delivery: A prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

AIM: To compare local anesthetic wound infiltration with intraperitoneal instillation of local anesthetic for analgesia after cesarean section under spinal anesthesia. METHODS: This study was conducted on 150 pregnant women undergoing elective cesarean section under spinal anesthesia. Spinal anesthesia was performed with 7 mg isobaric bupivacaine and 15 µcg fentanyl. The patients were randomized into three groups of 50 patients each: Group local anesthetic wound infiltration (LWI): 20 ml local anesthetic solution (10 ml 0.5% bupivacaine and 10 ml 2% lidocaine mixture) was administered subcutaneous wound infiltration at the end of surgery prior to skin closure and 20 ml saline was instilled into the uterine peritoneal area before fascia closure. Group intraperitoneal local anesthetic (IPLA): 20 ml local anesthetic solution (10 ml 0.5% bupivacaine and 10 ml 2% lidocaine mixture) was instilled into the uterine peritoneal area and 20 ml saline was administered subcutaneous wound infiltration. Group Placebo: 20 ml saline was instilled into the uterine peritoneal area and 20 ml saline was administered local subcutaneous wound infiltration. Pain scores at rest and on movement, total fentanyl consumption at 24 h, maternal satisfaction, and the time to first analgesic request were recorded. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was observed in the postoperative pain scores at rest at 2, 12, and 24 h (p = 0.314, 0.343, and 0.735, respectively) and on movement at 12 and 24 h (p = 0.318 and 0.642, respectively) between the groups. The pain scores on movement at 2 h were significantly lower in Group IPLA compared with Group Placebo (p = 0.047). There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of total fentanyl consumption and the time to first analgesic request. CONCLUSION: The use of intraperitoneal instillation of bupivacaine and lidocaine reduces early the pain score on movement in women undergoing cesarean section under spinal anesthesia.

The Comparison of Postoperative Analgesic Efficacy of Ultrasound-Guided Paravertebral Block and Mid-Point Transverse Process Pleura Block in Mastectomy Surgeries: A Randomized Study.

PURPOSE/AIM OF THE STUDY: The purpose of this triple-blind randomized study is to compare the postoperative analgesic efficacy of Mid-Point Transverse Process Pleura Block (MTP) and Paravertebral Block (PVB) in patients undergoing breast surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was retrospectively registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05332028). A total of 64 patients undergoing unilateral simple mastectomy operation due to breast cancer were included in the study. Before the anesthesia procedure, participants were randomly assigned to one of two groups: Group 1: Participants undergoing PVB or Group 2: Participants undergoing MTP block. All block applications were performed using 20 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine. Routine general anesthesia protocol was performed on all patients. In the postanesthetic care unit, fentanyl infusion was given to all patients postoperatively via a patient-controlled analgesia device. Postoperative fentanyl consumption, time to the first request for analgesia, VAS score values at rest and in motion, and blocked dermatome areas were recorded. RESULTS: Postoperative total opioid consumption, the number of patients given rescue analgesia, the time requiring postoperative supplemental analgesia, postoperative pain scores at rest and in motion, and blocked dermatome areas at both anterior and posterior lower and upper limits were not different between groups (p > 0.05, for all). CONCLUSIONS: It was concluded that ultrasound-guided PVB and MTP blocks have similar postoperative analgesic efficacy in patients undergoing breast surgery. The MTP block may be preferred as an alternative to PVB for breast surgeries with less risk of complications.