Randomized comparison between transversus abdominis and erector spinae blocks in cesarean section

Introduction: Transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block provides somatic analgesia postoperatively in cesarean sections, however erector spinae plane (ESP) block has shown to provide both somatic and visceral analgesia. Objective: To compare the efficacy of TAP and ESP blocks for pain control after cesarean section under spinal anesthesia. Methods: In a double-blind superiority trial, pregnant patients undergoing cesarean section were randomized into either bilateral TAP or ESP block groups. Primary outcome was total consumption of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) tramadol in the first 24 hours. Secondary outcomes included time required for first rescue analgesia, post-surgery visual analog score (VAS) for pain, patient satisfaction, and adverse effects. Results: 50 pregnant patients were randomized into TAP and ESP blocks. There was no difference in the amount of PCA tramadol within the first 24 hours between both groups [100mg (63-125) in TAP group vs 75mg (38-100) ESP group]. Pain score at rest and on movement and patient satisfaction were comparable in both groups, with no difference in adverse effects. There was a slight difference in the median time for first rescue analgesia [210min (135-315) in TAP group and 270min (225-405) ESP group] (p=0.03). Conclusions: TAP and ESP blocks provide similar analgesia with comparable consumption of tramadol in the first 24 hours post-cesarean section and no difference in pain scores at rest/on movement.

Introducción: El bloqueo del plano transverso abdominal (TAP - por sus siglas en inglés), ofrece analgesia somática postoperatoria en cesárea; sin embargo, el bloqueo del plano erector de la espina (ESP - por sus siglas en inglés) ha demostrado proporcionar analgesia tanto somática, como visceral. Objetivo: Comparar la eficacia de los bloqueos TAP y ESP para el control del dolor posterior a la cesárea, bajo anestesia raquídea. Métodos: En un estudio de superioridad doble ciego, las pacientes embarazadas sometidas a cesárea se aleatorizaron bien sea al grupo de bloqueo bilateral TAP o ESP? El desenlace principal fue el consumo total de analgesia controlada por la paciente (PCA - por sus siglas en inglés) con tramadol en las primeras 24 horas. Los desenlaces secundarios incluyeron el tiempo transcurrido para la primera analgesia de rescate, el puntaje en la escala visual analógica (EVA) para dolor, la satisfacción del paciente y los efectos adversos. Resultados: 50 pacientes embarazadas se aleatorizaron entre bloqueo TAP y bloqueo ESP. No hubo diferencia en la cantidad de tramadol de la PCA dentro de las primeras 24 horas entre los dos grupos [100mg (63-125) en el grupo TAP vs 75mg (38-100) en el grupo ESP]. El puntaje de dolor en reposo y en movimiento y la satisfacción de la paciente fueron comparables en ambos grupos, sin diferencia en los efectos adversos. Hubo una ligera diferencia en la media de tiempo hasta la primera analgesia de rescate [210 min (135-315) en el grupo de TAP y 270 min (225-405) en el grupo ESP] (p=0,03). Conclusiones: Los bloqueos TAP y ESP ofrecen una analgesia similar, con un consumo comparable de tramadol en las primeras 24 horas posteriores a la cesárea y no hay diferencia en los puntajes de dolor en reposo, o en movimiento.

Comparison of Nasopharyngeal Temperature Measured at Fossa of Rosenmuller and Blindly Inserted Temperature Probe with Esophageal Temperature: A Cross-Sectional Study.

INTRODUCTION: Monitoring body temperature and maintaining normothermia are now essentially the standard-of-care during anesthesia. This study was designed to compare the temperature measured by nasopharyngeal temperature probes inserted by landmark method and fiberscope-guided method with esophageal temperature. We hypothesized that placing the temperature probe at the level of fossa of Rosenmuller will reflect core temperature as it is in close relationship to the brain. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Sixty-five patients aged 18-60 years were enrolled in this cross-sectional study. Two methods were used in our study to place the temperature probes. In landmark-based method, we inserted temperature probe through nostril for a depth equal to philtrum-tragus distance. In fiberscope-guided method, the temperature probe was inserted into nostril and its tip was positioned at fossa of Rosenmuller under fiberscope guidance. RESULTS: The nasopharyngeal temperatures were recorded at seven time intervals along with esophageal temperature. Mean temperatures were calculated at three different sites. The degree of agreement between two methods at seven time intervals was also calculated. Both methods had good correlation with esophageal temperature. Depth of insertion of temperature probes was documented. There was difference in depth of insertion of temperature probe of around 4.26 cm between two methods, probe length from philtrum to tragus (D1) being longer than distance from fossa of Rosenmuller to nares (D2). CONCLUSIONS: Nasopharyngeal temperature measured at fossa of Rosenmuller with probe inserted by fiberscope-guided method and that measured by landmark-based method with probe inserted according to philtrum-tragus distance shows good correlation with esophageal temperature.