Comparison of Erector Spinae Plane Blocks Versus Multimodal Pain Management for Traumatic Rib Fractures: A Matched Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: Erector spinae plane blocks (ESPBs) are frequently utilized when treating patients with multiple rib fractures. While previous work has demonstrated the efficacy of ESPB as an adequate method of pain control, there has been no work comparing a continuous ESPB to "best practice" multimodal pain control. We hypothesize that a continuous ESPB catheter combined with a multimodal pain regimen may be associated with a decrease in opioid requirements when compared to a multimodal pain regimen alone. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational cohort study at a level 1 trauma center from September 2016 through September 2021. Inclusion criteria included patients 18 y or older with at least three unilateral rib fractures who were not mechanically ventilated during admission. The primary outcome was the total morphine equivalents utilized throughout the index admission. RESULTS: A total of 142 patients were included in this study, 71 in each cohort. Patients included had a mean age of 52.5 y, and 18% were female. Demographic data including injury severity score, total number of rib fractures, and length of stay were similar. While there was a trend toward a decrease in morphine equivalents in the patient cohort undergoing ESPB catheter placement, this was not found to be statistically significant (284.3 ± 244.8 versus 412.6 ± 622.2, P = 0.5). CONCLUSIONS: While ESPB catheters are frequently utilized for analgesia in the setting of multiple rib fractures, there was no decrease in total opioid usage when compared with patients who were managed with a multimodal pain regimen alone. Further assessment comparing ESPB catheters to best practice multimodal pain control regimens through a prospective, multicenter trial is required to further validate these findings.

Ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane blocks for pain management after open lumbar laminectomy.

PURPOSE: Lumbar spine surgery is associated with significant postoperative pain. The benefits of erector spinae plane blocks (ESPBs) combined with multimodal analgesia has not been adequately studied. We evaluated the analgesic effects of bilateral ESPBs as a component of multimodal analgesia after open lumbar laminectomy. METHODS: Analgesic effects of preoperative, bilateral, ultrasound-guided ESPBs combined with standardized multimodal analgesia (n = 25) was compared with multimodal analgesia alone (n = 25) in patients undergoing one or two level open lumbar laminectomy. Other aspects of perioperative care were similar. The primary outcome measure was cumulative opioid consumption at 24 h. Secondary outcomes included opioid consumption, pain scores, and nausea and vomiting requiring antiemetics on arrival to the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU), at 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h after surgery, as well as duration of the PACU and hospital stay. RESULTS: Opioid requirements at 24 h were significantly lower with ESPBs (31.9 ± 12.3 mg vs. 61.2 ± 29.9 mg, oral morphine equivalents). Pain scores were significantly lower with ESPBs in the PACU and through postoperative day two. Patients who received ESPBs required fewer postoperative antiemetic therapy (n = 3, 12%) compared to those without ESPBs (n = 12, 48%). Furthermore, PACU duration was significantly shorter with ESPBs (49.7 ± 9.5 vs. 79.9 ± 24.6 min). CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound-guided, bilateral ESPBs, when added to an optimal multimodal analgesia technique, reduce opioid consumption and pain scores, the need for antiemetic therapy, and the duration of stay in the PACU after one or two level open lumbar laminectomy.

Neuraxial Anesthesia during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Report from a Large Academic Medical Center.

OBJECTIVE: Three primary neuraxial techniques reduce labor pain: epidural, dural puncture epidural (DPE), and combined spinal-epidural (CSE). This study aims to determine whether neuraxial analgesia techniques changed after the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Given that a dural puncture confirms neuraxial placement, we hypothesized that DPE was more frequent in women with concerns for COVID-19. STUDY DESIGN: A single-center retrospective cohort study comparing neuraxial analgesia techniques for labor and delivery pain management before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and in patients with and without SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) at a maternity hospital in Dallas, Texas, with a large delivery service. Statistical analyses included the Chi-square test for categorical and Kruskal-Wallis test for nonparametric ordinal comparisons. The Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test was used to assess the association between neuraxial technique and accidental dural puncture or postdural puncture headache. RESULTS: Of 10,971 patients who received neuraxial analgesia for labor, 5,528 were delivered in 2019 and 5,443 in 2020. Epidural analgesia was the most common neuraxial technique for labor pain in 2019 and 2020. There was no difference in the frequency of neuraxial analgesia techniques or the rates of accidental dural puncture or postdural puncture headaches comparing all deliveries in 2019 to 2020. Despite a significant increase in DPEs relative to epidurals in the SARS-CoV-2-positive group compared with the SARS-CoV-2-negative group in 2020, there was no significant difference in postdural puncture headaches or accidental dural punctures. CONCLUSION: The advantages of a DPE, specifically the ability to confirm epidural placement using a small gauge spinal needle, likely led to an increase in the placement of this neuraxial in SARS-CoV-2-positive patients. There was no effect on the frequency of postdural puncture headaches or accidental dural punctures within the same period. KEY POINTS: · Epidural analgesia was the most common neuraxial technique for labor pain management.. · Dural puncture epidural placements increased in SARS-CoV-2-positive patients.. · Rates of postdural puncture headaches and accidental dural puncture after neuraxial placement did not change..

Multimodal opioid-sparing pain management for emergent cesarean delivery under general anesthesia: a quality improvement project.

BACKGROUND: Opioid-sparing multimodal analgesic approach has been shown to provide effective postoperative pain relief and reduce postoperative opioid consumption and opioid-associated adverse effects. While many studies have evaluated analgesic strategies for elective cesarean delivery, few studies have investigated analgesic approaches in emergent cesarean deliveries under general anesthesia. The primary aim of this quality improvement project is to evaluate opioid consumption with the use of a multimodal opioid-sparing pain management pathway in patients undergoing emergent cesarean delivery under general anesthesia. METHODS: Seventy-two women (age > 16 years) undergoing emergent cesarean delivery under general anesthesia before (n = 36) and after (n = 36) implementation of a multimodal opioid-sparing pain management pathway were included. All patients received a standardized general anesthetic. Prior to implementation of the pathway, postoperative pain management was primarily limited to intravenous patient-controlled opioid administration. The new multimodal pathway included scheduled acetaminophen and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medications and ultrasound-guided classic lateral transversus abdominis plane blocks with postoperative opioids reserved only for rescue analgesia. Data obtained from electronic records included demographics, intraoperative opioid use, and pain scores and opioid consumption upon arrival to the recovery room, at 2, 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 h postoperatively. RESULTS: Patients receiving multimodal opioid sparing analgesia (AFTER group) had lower opioid use for 72 h, postoperatively. Only 2 of the 36 patients (5.6%) in the AFTER group required intravenous opioids through patient-controlled analgesia while 30 out of 36 patients (83.3%) in the BEFORE group required intravenous opioids. CONCLUSIONS: Multimodal opioid-sparing analgesia is associated with reduced postoperative opioid consumption after emergent cesarean delivery.

Safety of Erector Spinae Plane Blocks in Patients With Chest Wall Trauma on Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines for severe rib fractures recommend neuraxial blockade in addition to multimodal pain therapies. While the guidelines for venous thromboembolism prevention recommend chemoprophylaxis, these medications must be held for neuraxial blockade placement. Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is a newly described block for thoracic pain control. Advantages include its quick learning curve and potential for less bleeding complications. We describe the use of ESPB for rib fractures in patients on chemoprophylaxis. We hypothesize that ESPB can be performed in this patient population without holding chemoprophylaxis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective observational cohort study of a level 1 trauma center from 9/2016 to 12/2018. All patients with trauma with rib fractures undergoing neuraxial blockade or ESPB were included. Demographics, chemoprophylaxis and anticoagulation regimens, outcomes, and complications were collected. RESULTS: Nine hundred sixty-four patients with rib fracture(s) were admitted. Of these, 73 had a pain management consult. Thirteen had epidural catheters and 25 had ESPBs placed. There was no difference in demographics, injury patterns, bleeding complications, or venous thromboembolism rates among the groups. Patients with ESPB were less likely to have a dose of chemoprophylaxis held because of placement of a catheter (25% versus 100%, P < 0.00001). Three patients with ESPB were on oral anticoagulation on admission, and two were able to continue their regimen during placement. CONCLUSIONS: ESPB can be safely placed in patients on chemoprophylaxis. It should be considered over traditional blocks in patients with blunt chest wall trauma because of its technical ease and ability to be performed with chemoprophylaxis.

A Positive Cocaine Urine Toxicology Test and the Effect on Intraoperative Hemodynamics Under General Anesthesia.

BACKGROUND: Cocaine has a short biological half-life, but inactive urine metabolites may be detectable for a week following use. It is unclear if patients who test positive for cocaine but have a normal electrocardiogram and vital signs have a greater percentage of hemodynamic events intraoperatively. METHODS: A total of 328 patients with a history of cocaine use who were scheduled for elective noncardiac surgery under general anesthesia were enrolled. Patients were categorized into cocaine-positive versus cocaine-negative groups based on the results of their urine cocaine toxicology test. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate whether asymptomatic cocaine-positive patients had similar percentages of intraoperative hemodynamic events, defined as (1) a mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) of <65 or >105 mm Hg and (2) a heart rate (HR) of <50 or >100 beats per minute (bpm) compared to cocaine-negative patients. The study was powered to assess if the 2 groups had an equivalent mean percent of intraoperative hemodynamic events within specific limits using an equivalence test of means consisting of 2 one-sided tests. RESULTS: The cocaine-positive group had a blood pressure (BP) that was outside the set limits 19.4% (standard deviation [SD] 17.7%) of the time versus 23.1% (SD 17.7%) in the cocaine-negative group (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.5-7.0). The cocaine-positive group had a HR outside the set limits 9.6% (SD 16.2%) of the time versus 8.2% (SD 14.9%) in the cocaine-negative group (95% CI, 4.3-1.5). Adjusted for age, sex, body mass index (BMI), smoking status, and the presence of comorbid hypertension, renal disease, and psychiatric illness, the cocaine-positive and cocaine-negative patients were similar within a 7.5% margin of equivalence for MAP data (ß coefficient = 2%, P = .003, CI, 2-6) and within a 5% margin of equivalence for HR data (ß coefficient = 0.2%, P < .001, CI, 4-3). CONCLUSIONS: Asymptomatic cocaine-positive patients undergoing elective noncardiac surgery under general anesthesia have similar percentages of intraoperative hemodynamic events compared to cocaine-negative patients.

Comparison of Regional Anesthesia Timing on Pain, Opioid Use, and Postanesthesia Care Unit Length of Stay in Patients Undergoing Open Reduction and Internal Fixation of Ankle Fractures.

Regional nerve blocks are an effective method of managing acute pain associated with surgery. The relative benefit of preoperative versus postoperative peripheral nerve blocks is not entirely clear. The primary aim of this study was to determine differences in pain scores in patients undergoing preoperative block versus postoperative block versus no block. We hypothesized that patients receiving preoperative blocks would have reduced pain scores and decreased opioid use in the immediate postoperative period. We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of 302 consecutive patients undergoing unilateral open reduction and internal fixation of ankle fracture under general anesthesia. We identified 3 groups: preoperative block, postoperative block, or no block. Data obtained from our electronic medical records included demographic information, postanesthesia care unit length of stay, pain scores obtained preoperatively, upon arrival to the postanesthesia care unit, and upon discharge from the postanesthesia care unit as well as intraoperative and postanesthesia care unit opioid utilization. Patients receiving preoperative block had significantly lower pain scores, less intraoperative or postanesthesia care unit opioid use, and shorter postanesthesia care unit dwell time compared with patients receiving postoperative block or no block. Preoperative popliteal sciatic and adductor canal blocks in patients undergoing ankle fracture surgery appears to be more effective than either postoperative block or no block.

Spinal anesthesia for ambulatory surgery: current controversies and concerns.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: General anesthesia is a popular choice for ambulatory surgery. Spinal anesthesia is often avoided because of perceived delays due to time required to administer it and prolonged onset, as well as concerns of delayed offset, which may delay recovery and discharge home. However, the reports of improved outcomes in hospitalized patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty have renewed the interest in spinal anesthesia. This review article critically assesses the role of spinal anesthesia in comparison with fast-track general anesthesia for the outpatient setting. RECENT FINDINGS: The purported benefits of spinal anesthesia include avoidance of airway manipulation and the adverse effects of drugs used to provide general anesthesia, improved postoperative pain, and reduced postoperative opioid requirements. Improved postoperative outcomes after spinal anesthesia in hospitalized patients may not apply to the outpatient population that tends to be relatively healthier. Also, it is unclear if spinal anesthesia is superior to fast-track general anesthesia techniques, which includes avoidance of benzodiazepine premedication, avoidance of deep anesthesia, use of an opioid-sparing approach, and minimization of neuromuscular blocking agents with appropriate reversal of residual paralysis. SUMMARY: The benefits of spinal anesthesia in the outpatient setting remain questionable at best. Further studies should seek clarification of these goals and outcomes.

Preoperative Continuation Versus Interruption of Oral Hypoglycemics in Type 2 Diabetic Patients Undergoing Ambulatory Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus receiving oral hypoglycemic drugs (OHDs) are usually instructed to stop them before surgery. We hypothesize that continuing OHD preoperatively should result in lower perioperative blood glucose (BG) levels. Ambulatory surgery patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus on OHDs were randomized to continue (n = 69) or withhold (n = 73) OHDs preoperatively. Log-transformed BG levels at pre-, intra-, and postoperative periods were analyzed. Perioperative BG levels were significantly lower (mean, 138 mg/dL; 95% confidence interval, 130-146 mg/dL) in the group that continued versus the group that discontinued OHDs (mean, 156 mg/dL; 95% confidence interval, 146-167 mg/dL; P < .001).

Transversus Abdominis Plane Block Versus Surgical Site Infiltration for Pain Management After Open Total Abdominal Hysterectomy.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infiltration and transversus abdominis plane (TAP) blocks are commonly used to improve pain relief after lower abdominal surgery. This randomized, observer-blinded study was designed to compare the analgesic efficacy of TAP blocks with surgical site infiltration in patients undergoing open total abdominal hysterectomy via a Pfannenstiel incision. METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive either bilateral ultrasound-guided TAP blocks using bupivacaine 0.5% 20 mL on each side (n = 30) or surgical site infiltration with liposomal bupivacaine 266 mg diluted to 60 mL injected in the preperitoneal, subfascial, and subcutaneous planes (n = 30). The remaining aspects of the perioperative care were standardized. An investigator blinded to the group allocation documented pain scores at rest and with coughing, opioid requirements, nausea, vomiting, and rescue antiemetics in the postanesthesia care unit and at 2, 6, 12, 24, and 48 hours postoperatively. The primary outcome measure was pain scores on coughing at 6 hours postoperatively. RESULTS: One patient in each group was excluded from the analysis because of reoperation within 24 hours in the TAP block group and change of incision type in the infiltration group. The pain scores at rest and with coughing were significantly lower in the surgical site infiltration group at all postoperative time points (P < 0.0001) except at rest in the postanesthesia care unit. The opioid requirements between 24 and 48 hours were significantly lower in the infiltration group (P = 0.009). The nausea scores, occurrence of vomiting, and need for rescue antiemetics were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical site infiltration provided superior pain relief at rest and on coughing, as well as reduced opioid consumption for up to 48 hours. Future studies need to compare TAP blocks with liposomal bupivacaine with surgical site infiltration with liposomal bupivacaine.

Ultrasound-guided transversus abdominal plane block with multimodal analgesia for pain management after total abdominal hysterectomy.

BACKGROUND: Transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block has been shown to provide pain relief after abdominal procedures. However, TAP block combined with multimodal analgesia technique have not been assessed in a randomized controlled trial. This randomized, controlled, observer-blinded study was designed to evaluate the analgesic efficacy of bilateral ultrasound-guided TAP blocks with or without acetaminophen and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) combination. METHODS: Patients undergoing total abdominal hysterectomy were randomized to one of three groups. Group 1 (n = 25) received a TAP block and ketorolac 30 mg, IV at the end of surgery and then ketorolac plus paracetamol 650 mg, orally, every 6 h for 24 h. Group 2 (n = 24) received only TAP block at the end of surgery. Group 3 (n = 25) received ketorolac 30 mg, IV at the end of surgery and then ketorolac plus paracetamol 650 mg, orally, every 6 h for 24 h. All patients received IV-PCA morphine for 24-h, postoperatively. All patients received a standardized general anaesthetic technique and dexamethasone 4 mg and ondansetron 4 mg, IV for antiemetic prophylaxis. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in pain at rest between the groups. However, the pain on coughing (dynamic pain) in Group 1 was significantly less variable, compared with the other two groups (P = 0.012). Opioid consumption and occurrences of nausea, vomiting, and rescue antiemetic were similar in three the groups. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of TAP block and acetaminophen and NSAID provided less variability in dynamic pain compared with either treatment alone.

Pain Management After Open Liver Resection: Epidural Analgesia Versus Ultrasound-Guided Erector Spinae Plane Block.

BACKGROUND: Multimodal analgesia techniques, including regional analgesia, have been shown to provide effective analgesia and minimize opioid consumption after liver resection surgery. While thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) is considered the gold standard, its role in the current era of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has been questioned. Erector spinae plane blocks (ESPBs) have the potential to provide effective postoperative analgesia without the risks associated with epidural analgesia. The primary aim of this quality improvement project was to evaluate the analgesic efficacy of ultrasound-guided ESPB in comparison with TEA in patients undergoing open liver resection. METHODS: Fifty patients who underwent open liver resection and received TEA (n=25) or ESPB (n=25) as part of an ERAS pathway were retrospectively identified. The primary outcome measure was cumulative postoperative opioid consumption at 24 hours. Secondary outcomes included opioid consumption, pain scores, the incidence of nausea and vomiting requiring antiemetics, lower extremity muscle weakness, and occurrence of hypotension requiring treatment on arrival to the post-anesthesia care unit and at 2, 6, 12, 24 hours, and daily through postoperative day 7.  Results: Opioid requirements were significantly lower in the TEA group compared to the ESPB group. Postoperative pain scores at rest and with deep inspiration were significantly lower in the TEA group through postoperative day 5. There were no differences in other outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that compared with ESPB, TEA provides superior pain relief after open liver resection.

Comparison of transversus abdominis plane blocks with liposomal bupivacaine versus ropivacaine in open total abdominal hysterectomy.

Regional anesthesia is frequently employed in efforts to improve postoperative analgesia and reduce opioid requirements following abdominal surgery. The purpose of the current analysis was to determine if there was a difference in postoperative pain and opioid consumption between patients who underwent open total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH) and received ultrasound-guided bilateral transversus abdominis plane (TAP) blocks using either liposomal bupivacaine or ropivacaine. A single-center retrospective analysis was conducted of 215 patients from November 2018 through March 2020 who underwent an open TAH and received bilateral TAP blocks with either liposomal bupivacaine or ropivacaine. The primary outcome measure was opioid consumption at regular intervals until discharge, and the secondary outcome measures included pain scores, incidence of nausea/vomiting, and use of antiemetics at the same time intervals. Intraoperative opioid consumption and postanesthesia recovery unit opioid requirements were similar between the two groups. Opioid requirements at 24 hours (P < 0.04) and 48 hours (P < 0.01), as well as total morphine equivalent requirements (P < 0.05), were significantly lower in the liposomal bupivacaine group compared to the ropivacaine group. Patients undergoing open TAH who received liposomal bupivacaine TAP blocks required fewer postoperative opioids to achieve similar pain scores when compared to patients who received ropivacaine TAP blocks.

Etomidate versus ketamine for emergency endotracheal intubation: a randomized clinical trial.

PURPOSE: Etomidate and ketamine are hemodynamically stable induction agents often used to sedate critically ill patients during emergency endotracheal intubation. In 2015, quality improvement data from our hospital suggested a survival benefit at Day 7 from avoidance of etomidate in critically ill patients during emergency intubation. In this clinical trial, we hypothesized that randomization to ketamine instead of etomidate would be associated with Day 7 survival after emergency endotracheal intubation. METHODS: A prospective, randomized, open-label, parallel assignment, single-center clinical trial performed by an anesthesiology-based Airway Team under emergent circumstances at one high-volume medical center in the United States. 801 critically ill patients requiring emergency intubation were randomly assigned 1:1 by computer-generated, pre-randomized sealed envelopes to receive etomidate (0.2-0.3 mg/kg, n = 400) or ketamine (1-2 mg/kg, n = 401) for sedation prior to intubation. The pre-specified primary endpoint of the trial was Day 7 survival. Secondary endpoints included Day 28 survival. RESULTS: Of the 801 enrolled patients, 396 were analyzed in the etomidate arm, and 395 in the ketamine arm. Day 7 survival was significantly lower in the etomidate arm than in the ketamine arm (77.3% versus 85.1%, difference - 7.8, 95% confidence interval - 13, - 2.4, p = 0.005). Day 28 survival rates for the two groups were not significantly different (etomidate 64.1%, ketamine 66.8%, difference - 2.7, 95% confidence interval - 9.3, 3.9, p = 0.294). CONCLUSION: While the primary outcome of Day 7 survival was greater in patients randomized to ketamine, there was no significant difference in survival by Day 28.

Erector spinae plane block versus thoracic paravertebral block for pain management after total bilateral mastectomies.

This prospectively designed, clinical quality improvement project compared pain scores and opioid consumption between ultrasound-guided, erector spinae plane blocks (ESPB) and thoracic paravertebral blocks (PVB) in patients undergoing total bilateral mastectomies without reconstruction. Twenty-five patients were included in an enhanced recovery pathway and received an ESPB on one side and a PVB on the contralateral side. Numeric rating scores at rest and with movement for each side were recorded in the recovery room at 2, 6, 12, 24, and 48 hours and on days 3 to 7. There were no significant differences in the resting or movement-evoked pain scores between sides receiving ESPB or PVB at any time point up to day 7 after surgery. Both ESPB and PVB confer equal analgesic effects in patients undergoing mastectomies. ESPB provides an alternative to PVB in reducing postoperative pain in patients undergoing mastectomy as part of an enhanced recovery pathway.

Sugammadex versus neostigmine for reversal of rocuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade: A randomized, double-blinded study of thoracic surgical patients evaluating hypoxic episodes in the early postoperative period.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: This objective of this study was to determine if reversal of rocuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade with sugammadex versus neostigmine results in a decreased number of hypoxic episodes in the early postoperative period in patients undergoing thoracic surgery with single lung ventilation. DESIGN: Single-center, randomized, double-blind, two-arm clinical trial. SETTING: Operating room and postanesthesia care unit. PATIENTS: 92 subjects aged ≥18, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status II-IV, and undergoing a thoracic operation necessitating single lung ventilation. INTERVENTIONS: Subjects received either 2 mg/kg sugammadex or 50 µg/kg neostigmine with 8 µg/kg glycopyrrolate for reversal of moderate neuromuscular blockade. MEASUREMENTS: For the first 90 min postoperatively, all episodes of hypoxia were recorded. Neuromuscular monitoring was performed with acceleromyography (TOF-Watch® SX) and the train of four (TOF) was recorded at 2, 5, 10, and 15 min after administration of the neuromuscular reversal agent. MAIN RESULTS: Subjects who received neostigmine had a median of 1 episode (interquartile range IQR: 0-2.2) of hypoxia versus subjects who received sugammadex who had a median of 0 episodes (IQR: 0-1) (p = 0.009). The mean time to recovery of TOF ≥ 0.9 was significantly faster with sugammadex at 10 min (95% confidence interval CI: 5-15) compared with neostigmine at 40 min (95% CI: 15-53) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In thoracic surgical patients necessitating single lung ventilation, sugammadex provides faster reversal of moderate neuromuscular blockade and results in a decreased number of postoperative hypoxic episodes compared with neostigmine.

Ultrasound-guided suprainguinal fascia iliaca compartment block versus periarticular infiltration for pain management after total hip arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Fascia iliaca compartment block (FICB) has been shown to provide excellent pain relief in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, the analgesic efficacy of FICB, in comparison with periarticular infiltration (PAI) for THA, has not been evaluated. This randomized, controlled, observer-blinded study was designed to compare suprainguinal FICB (SFICB) with PAI in patients undergoing THA via posterior approach. METHODS: After institutional review board approval, 60 consenting patients scheduled for elective THA were randomized to one of two groups: ultrasound-guided SFICB block or PAI. The local anesthetic solution for both the groups included 60 mL ropivacaine 300 mg and epinephrine 150 µg. The remaining aspects of perioperative care, including general anesthetic and non-opioid multimodal analgesic techniques, were standardized. An investigator blinded to group allocation documented pain scores at rest and with movement and supplemental opioid requirements at various time points. Patients were evaluated for sensory changes and quadriceps weakness in the operated extremity. RESULTS: There were no differences between the groups with respect to demographics, intraoperative opioid use, duration of surgery, recovery room stay, nausea scores, need for rescue antiemetics, time to ambulation and time to discharge readiness as well as 48 hours postoperative opioid requirements. The pain scores at rest and with movement also were similar at all time points. Significantly more patients in the SFICB group experienced muscle weakness at 6 hours after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Under the circumstances of our study, in patients undergoing THA, SFICB provided the similar pain relief compared with PAI, but was associated with muscle weakness at 6 hours postoperatively. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02658240.