Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Montrer: 20 | 50 | 100
Résultats 1 - 12 de 12
Filtrer
2.
Trials ; 22(1): 321, 2021 May 04.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33947442

RÉSUMÉ

BACKGROUND: Thoracic epidural analgesia is considered the gold standard for pain relief in video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery. This neuraxial technique blocks pain sensation by injecting a local anesthetic agent in the epidural space near the spinal cord to block spinal nerve roots. Recently, the erector spinae plane block has been introduced as a practical alternative to the thoracic epidural. This interfascial regional anesthesia technique interrupts pain sensation by injecting a local anesthetic agent in between the muscular layers of the thoracic wall. Several case series and three RCTs described it as an effective pain management technique in video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (Scimia et al., Reg Anesth Pain Med 42:537, 2017; Adhikary et al., Indian J Anaesth 62:75-8, 2018; Kim, A randomized controlled trial comparing continuous erector spinae plane block with thoracic epidural analgesia for postoperative pain management in video-assisted thoracic surgery, n.d.; Yao et al., J Clin Anesth 63:109783, 2020; Ciftci et al., J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 34:444-9, 2020). The objective of this study is to test the hypothesis that a continuous erector spinae plane block incorporated into an opioid-based systemic multimodal analgesia regimen is non-inferior in terms of the quality of postoperative recovery compared to continuous thoracic epidural local anesthetic-opioid analgesia in patients undergoing elective unilateral video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery. METHODS: This is a prospective randomized open label non-inferiority trial. A total of 90 adult patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery will be randomized 1:1 to receive pain treatment with either (1) continuous erector spinae plane block plus intravenous patient-controlled analgesia with piritramide (study group) or (2) continuous thoracic epidural analgesia with a local anesthetic-opioid infusate (control group). All patients will receive additional systemic multimodal analgesia with paracetamol and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. The primary endpoint is the quality of recovery as measured by the Quality of Recovery-15 score. Secondary endpoints are postoperative pain as Numerical Rating Score scores, length of hospital stay, failure of analgesic technique, postoperative morphine-equivalent consumption, itching, nausea and vomiting, total operative time, complications related to surgery, perioperative hypotension, complications related to pain treatment, duration of bladder catheterization, and time of first assisted mobilization > 20 m and of mobilization to sitting in a chair. DISCUSSION: This randomized controlled trial aims to confirm whether continuous erector spinae plane block plus patient-controlled opioid analgesia can equal the analgesic effect of a thoracic epidural local anesthetic-opioid infusion in patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register NL6433 . Registered on 1 March 2018. This trial was prospectively registered.


Sujet(s)
Analgésie péridurale , Bloc nerveux , Adulte , Analgésie péridurale/effets indésirables , Analgésiques morphiniques/effets indésirables , Humains , Bloc nerveux/effets indésirables , Pays-Bas , Douleur postopératoire/diagnostic , Douleur postopératoire/étiologie , Douleur postopératoire/prévention et contrôle , Études prospectives , Essais contrôlés randomisés comme sujet , Chirurgie thoracique vidéoassistée/effets indésirables
4.
Anaesthesia ; 76 Suppl 1: 110-126, 2021 Jan.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33426660

RÉSUMÉ

Ultrasound-guided fascial plane blocks of the chest wall are increasingly popular alternatives to established techniques such as thoracic epidural or paravertebral blockade, as they are simple to perform and have an appealing safety profile. Many different techniques have been described, which can be broadly categorised into anteromedial, anterolateral and posterior chest wall blocks. Understanding the relevant clinical anatomy is critical not only for block performance, but also to match block techniques appropriately with surgical procedures. The sensory innervation of tissues deep to the skin (e.g. muscles, ligaments and bone) can be overlooked, but is often a significant source of pain. The primary mechanism of action for these blocks is a conduction blockade of sensory afferents travelling in the targeted fascial planes, as well as of peripheral nociceptors in the surrounding tissues. A systemic action of absorbed local anaesthetic is plausible but unlikely to be a major contributor. The current evidence for their clinical applications indicates that certain chest wall techniques provide significant benefit in breast and thoracic surgery, similar to that provided by thoracic paravertebral blockade. Their role in trauma and cardiac surgery is evolving and holds great potential. Further avenues of research into these versatile techniques include: optimal local anaesthetic dosing strategies; high-quality randomised controlled trials focusing on patient-centred outcomes beyond acute pain; and comparative studies to determine which of the myriad blocks currently on offer should be core competencies in anaesthetic practice.


Sujet(s)
Bloc nerveux/méthodes , Paroi thoracique , Échographie interventionnelle/méthodes , Humains
6.
Anaesthesia ; 75(10): 1372-1385, 2020 10.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32062870

RÉSUMÉ

Serratus anterior plane and pectoral nerves blocks are recently described alternatives to established regional anaesthesia techniques in cardiac surgery, thoracic surgery and trauma. We performed a systematic review to establish the current state of evidence for the analgesic role of these fascial plane blocks in these clinical settings. We identified relevant studies by searching multiple databases and trial registries from inception to June 2019. Study heterogeneity prevented meta-analysis and studies were instead qualitatively summarised and stratified by type of surgery and comparator. We identified 51 studies: nine randomised control trials; 13 cohort studies; 19 case series; and 10 case reports. The majority of randomised controlled trials studied the serratus anterior plane block in thoracotomy or video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery, with only two investigating pectoral nerves blocks. The evidence in thoracic trauma comprised only case series and reports. Results indicate that single-injection serratus anterior plane and the pectoral nerves blocks reduce pain scores and opioid consumption compared with systemic analgesia alone in cardiothoracic surgery, cardiac-related interventional procedures and chest trauma for approximately 6-12 h. The duration of action appears longer than intercostal nerve blocks but may be shorter than thoracic paravertebral blockade. Block duration may be prolonged by a continuous catheter technique with potentially similar results to thoracic epidural analgesia. There were no reported complications and the risk of haemodynamic instability appears to be low. The current evidence, though limited, supports the efficacy and safety of serratus anterior plane and the pectoral nerves blocks as analgesic options in cardiothoracic surgery.


Sujet(s)
Bloc nerveux , Nerfs thoraciques , Procédures de chirurgie cardiaque , Humains , Bloc nerveux/effets indésirables , Bloc nerveux/méthodes , Essais contrôlés randomisés comme sujet , Procédures de chirurgie thoracique
8.
Trials ; 20(1): 441, 2019 Jul 17.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31315670

RÉSUMÉ

BACKGROUND: Spine surgery is associated with considerable postoperative pain and can be challenging to treat. A loco-regional technique suitable for spine surgery should cover the dorsal root of the spinal nerves at the levels where surgery is performed. The erector spinae block is a loco-regional technique with promising results and was recently described at the thoracic level. There are no randomized trials of this technique on a lumbar level. This study tests the hypothesis that the 24-h postoperative morphine consumption is significantly lower in patients undergoing posterior lumbar inter-body fusion surgery with a lumbar erector spinae (LUMBES) block when compared with a sham block. METHODS: This prospective randomized double-blind multicenter study will randomly allocate 80 adult patients undergoing elective posterior lumbar inter-body fusion surgery during general anesthesia to one of two groups as follows: (1) bilateral erector spinae block (20 mL 0.25% levobupivacaine) or (2) bilateral sham block (20 mL NaCl 0.9%). Our primary endpoint is 24-h postoperative morphine consumption. Secondary endpoints include 72-h morphine consumption, intraoperative sufentanil dosage, postoperative pain scores at regular time intervals both at rest and during movement, time to first postoperative mobilization, and the Quality of Recovery 40 survey score. DISCUSSION: The LUMBES trial is a pragmatic clinical study that will provide evidence of whether a bilateral lumbar erector spinae block is effective in reducing 24-h postoperative morphine consumption in patients undergoing lumbar inter-body fusion surgery. If this hypothesis is confirmed, this finding could contribute to more widespread implementation of this technique. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Local ethics committee B300201837508, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03825198 . Registered on 31 Jan 2019.


Sujet(s)
Analgésiques morphiniques/administration et posologie , Anesthésiques locaux/administration et posologie , Muscles du dos/innervation , Dorsalgie/prévention et contrôle , Lévobupivacaïne/administration et posologie , Vertèbres lombales/chirurgie , Morphine/administration et posologie , Bloc nerveux/méthodes , Douleur postopératoire/prévention et contrôle , Arthrodèse vertébrale/effets indésirables , Adolescent , Adulte , Sujet âgé , Analgésiques morphiniques/effets indésirables , Anesthésiques locaux/effets indésirables , Dorsalgie/diagnostic , Dorsalgie/étiologie , Dorsalgie/physiopathologie , Belgique , Méthode en double aveugle , Femelle , Humains , Lévobupivacaïne/effets indésirables , Mâle , Adulte d'âge moyen , Morphine/effets indésirables , Études multicentriques comme sujet , Bloc nerveux/effets indésirables , Mesure de la douleur , Douleur postopératoire/diagnostic , Douleur postopératoire/étiologie , Douleur postopératoire/physiopathologie , Essais cliniques pragmatiques comme sujet , Études prospectives , Facteurs temps , Résultat thérapeutique , Jeune adulte
9.
Anaesthesia ; 74(5): 663-673, 2019 May.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30957884

RÉSUMÉ

Surgery is the primary therapeutic intervention for breast cancer and can result in significant postoperative pain. We searched the current literature and performed a meta-analysis in order to compare the analgesic efficacy of the pectoral type-2 (Pecs II) block with systemic analgesia alone and with a thoracic paravertebral block for breast cancer surgery. Primary outcome was postoperative opioid consumption in the first 24 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes were pain scores at 0, 3, 6, 9 and 24 h after surgery, intra-operative opioid consumption, time to first analgesic request and incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. We identified 13 randomised controlled trials that included 815 patients. The Pecs II block significantly reduced postoperative opioid consumption (standardised difference in means: -13.64 mg oral morphine equivalents; 95%CI: -21.22 to -6.05; p < 0.01) and acute postoperative pain at all intervals in the first 24 h after surgery compared with systemic analgesia alone. Compared with the thoracic paravertebral block, the Pecs II block resulted in similar postoperative opioid consumption (standardised difference in means: -8.73 mg oral morphine equivalents; 95%CI: -18.16 to 0.69; p = 0.07) and postoperative pain scores after first measurement. In conclusion, the Pecs II block offers improved analgesic efficacy compared with systemic analgesia alone and comparable analgesic efficacy to a thoracic paravertebral block for breast cancer surgery.


Sujet(s)
Tumeurs du sein/chirurgie , Mastectomie/effets indésirables , Bloc nerveux/méthodes , Douleur postopératoire/prévention et contrôle , Analgésiques morphiniques/administration et posologie , Calendrier d'administration des médicaments , Femelle , Humains , Mastectomie/méthodes , Douleur postopératoire/étiologie , Nerfs thoraciques
10.
Acta Anaesthesiol Belg ; 67(3): 101-111, 2016.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29873465

RÉSUMÉ

We assessed the practice of obstetric anesthesia in Flanders through an on-line enquiry form and investigated the advancements by comparing the results with those of the 2004 survey. 54 (86%) structured forms were completed, representative for 94% of the accredited maternity beds in Flanders. Obstetric anesthesia is provided in all Flemish acute hospitals and 7/10 deliveries are performed nowadays with neuraxial analgesia. For labor analgesia, classical epidural remains the main neuraxial technique (62%) whereas CSE is used as default technique in 17% of the hospitals and upon indication in 21%. In half of the departments a test dose is used to validate the correct placement of the catheter, with lidocaine as the most (68%) commonly used test drug; this practice is comparable to 10 years ago. Ropivacaine (84%) with or without sufentanil is typically used as loading dose and ropivacaine with sufentanil (83%) to maintain the epidural analgesia. Patient-controlled epidural analgesia is the preferred maintenance mode (76%) for labor analgesia. CSE with hyperbaric bupivacaine and sufentanil is the most used anesthesia protocol when caesarean section is required (47%). There is no clear preference for postoperative analgesia after cesarean section as both epidural/regional and parenteral/per os analgesia regimens are almost equally used in Flemish obstetric care.


Sujet(s)
Anesthésie obstétricale/statistiques et données numériques , Anesthésie/tendances , Anesthésiologie/tendances , Adulte , Analgésie péridurale , Analgésie obstétricale/statistiques et données numériques , Anesthésiques , Belgique , Femelle , Enquêtes sur les soins de santé , Hôpitaux , Humains , Nouveau-né , Douleur postopératoire/traitement médicamenteux , Positionnement du patient , Grossesse
12.
Fortschr Kieferorthop ; 50(6): 518-29, 1989 Dec.
Article de Allemand | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-2613144

RÉSUMÉ

56 patients with Angle's Class II malocclusion were treated by three different orthodontic methods, depending on facial morphology. They were examined with regard to displacement and growth of the condyle and pogonion. The changes in the area of the condyle and pogonion were differentiated by "local remodeling" and "superimposition translocation". The results show that condylar growth can be influenced by different methods of functional appliances or cervical traction, in contrast to local remodeling of pogonion which is totally independent of the type of treatment.


Sujet(s)
Face/anatomie et histologie , Malocclusion de classe II/thérapie , Malocclusion dentaire/thérapie , Mandibule/physiopathologie , Activateurs orthodontiques , Céphalométrie , Enfant , Appareils de traction extraorale , Humains , Malocclusion de classe II/physiopathologie , Facteurs temps
SÉLECTION CITATIONS
DÉTAIL DE RECHERCHE