ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Pectoralis-II and paravertebral nerve blocks are both used to treat pain following breast surgery. Most previous studies involving mastectomy identified little difference of significance between the two approaches. Whether this is also accurate for non-mastectomy procedures remains unknown. METHODS: Participants undergoing uni- or bilateral non-mastectomy breast surgery anticipated to have at least moderate postoperative pain were randomized to a pectoralis-II or paravertebral block (90 mg ropivacaine/side for both). Surgeons and recovery room staff were masked to treatment group assignment, and participants were not informed of their treatment group. Injectate for pectoralis-II blocks was ropivacaine 0.3% (30 mL) per side. Injectate for paravertebral blocks was ropivacaine 0.5% (9 mL in each of 2 levels) per side. We hypothesized that pectoralis-II blocks would have noninferior (1) analgesia [Numeric Rating Scale] and (2) cumulative opioid consumption within the operating and recovery rooms combined (dual primary outcomes). The study was adequately powered with n=100, but the target enrollment was raised to n=150 to account for higher-than-anticipated variability. RESULTS: The trial was ended prematurely with 119 (79%) of the original target of 150 participants enrolled due to (masked) surgeon preference. Within the recovery room, pain scores were higher in participants with pectoralis-II (n=60) than paravertebral blocks (n=59): median [IQR] 3.3 [2.3, 4.8] vs 1.3 [0, 3.6]; 95% CI: 0.5 to 2.6; P < 0.001. Similarly, intravenous morphine equivalents were higher in the pectoralis-II group: 17.5 [12.5, 21.9] vs 10.0 mg [10, 20]; 95% CI: 0.1 to 7.5; P = 0.004. No block-related adverse events were identified in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Following non-mastectomy breast surgery, 2-level paravertebral blocks provided superior analgesia and opioid sparing compared with pectoralis-II blocks. This is a contrary finding to the majority of studies in patients having mastectomy in which little significant difference was identified between the two types of blocks.
ABSTRACT
Background Severe cases of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) are treated with surgical decompression, for which regional nerve blocks are often administered. There is little data about complications associated with these regional techniques for this surgery. The primary objective was to assess the association of ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia nerve blocks in patients undergoing carpal tunnel release with symptom resolution. Methods This single-institution, retrospective study analyzed all patients undergoing open carpal tunnel release from March 2018 to November 2020. Primary exposure was either regional anesthesia (median and ulnar nerve blocks) or non-regional anesthesia (general anesthesia or local infiltration by surgeon). The primary outcome measurement was symptom resolution at postoperative follow-up at 30-60 days. Secondary outcomes were postoperative surgical site infection, time in operating room (minutes), and post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) length of stay (min). The primary outcome was analyzed using multivariable logistic regression. Results A total of 417 patients were included in this study. Of these, 269 (64.5%) subjects received regional anesthesia as their primary anesthetic. When adjusting for confounders, the use of regional anesthesia was not associated with symptoms not improving at postoperative visit (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.22 - 1.26, P = 0.15), postoperative surgical site infection (OR 1.47, 95% CI 0.44 - 4.85, p = 0.53), or operating room time duration (p = 0.09). However, the use of regional anesthesia was associated with an approximately 15-minute decrease in PACU length of stay (p < 0.001). Conclusions Regional anesthesia is a safe, effective, and time-efficient method for anesthesia in patients undergoing open carpal tunnel release.
ABSTRACT
Background Gender-affirming pelvic surgery (GAPS) can be associated with significant postoperative pelvic pain. Given the lack of available peripheral nerve blocks to the perineum, intrathecal morphine (ITM) injection could offer a potent analgesic modality for this patient population. No prior studies to date have been performed examining the analgesic effects of intrathecal morphine for these patients. Methods This retrospective case-control study aims to understand the postoperative analgesic effects of intrathecal morphine for these patients with a historical comparison group of patients who did not receive intrathecal morphine. Results Fourteen patients presented for gender-affirming pelvic surgery over an eight-month period at a single institution and were offered intrathecal morphine for postoperative analgesia. Their analgesic results were compared to a similar historical group of 13 patients who were not offered or declined intrathecal morphine. Conclusions Intrathecal morphine injection is a potent analgesic modality for patients presenting for gender-affirming pelvic surgery.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The study aim was to examine whether concomitant atrial fibrillation (AF) surgery at the time of mitral valve surgery in the elderly results in increased operative mortality (OM). METHODS: Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥65 years undergoing primary mitral valve repair or replacement between 2004 and 2006 were included. The cohort was divided into three groups: Group 1, AF- (n = 2,705); group 2, AF+AF surgery- (n = 2,119), and group 3, AF+AF surgery+ (n = 1,832). The primary outcomes were OM and long-term survival. A secondary outcome was the association between hospital annual mitral procedure volume and OM. RESULTS: The unadjusted OM was 6.4% for group 1 (AF-), 10.3% for group 2 (AF+AF surgery-), and 7.1% for group 3 (AF+AF surgery+) (p = 0.0001). Adjusted OM for AF+AF surgery+ patients was not significantly different from that of AF- patients (OR 1.16, 95% CI 0.90-1.48), or from AF+AF surgery patients (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.66-1.06). When comparisons were adjusted for differences in baseline characteristics, AF+AF surgery- patients were more likely to experience long-term mortality than AF- patients (HR 1.30, 95% CI 1.17-1.45), as well as AF+AF surgery+ patients (HR 1.17, 95% CI 1.05-1.31). An annual average mitral procedure volume ≤40 was independently predictive of OM (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.13-1.78). The effect of institutional volume on mortality was strongest in those who received AF surgery (AF+AF surgery+) (HR 1.75, 95% CI 1.15-2.65), compared to those who did not undergo surgery (AF+AF surgery-) (OR 1.20, 95% CI 0.86-1.67). CONCLUSIONS: Elderly patients undergoing mitral valve surgery do not appear to have an increased mortality when clinical judgment favored the performance of concomitant AF surgery.