The Effect of Erector Spinae Plane Block on Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Anesthesia: Analysis of Opioid Consumption, Sevoflurane Consumption, and Cost.

Background: Erector spinae plane (ESP) block has been increasingly suggested for laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) as a part of multimodal analgesia in many studies. However, there is not any study that investigated the perioperative effects of ESP block on anesthetic agent consumption and cost of LC anesthesia. This is the first study that evaluates the effect of ESP block in terms of cost-effectiveness, intraoperative consumption of inhalation agents, and perioperative consumption of opioids. Materials and Methods: In this prospective observational study, 81 patients who underwent LC were included. Patients were divided into two groups: In Group ESP (n = 39) bilateral ultrasound-guided ESP block was performed in preoperative period and in Group non-ESP (n = 42) ESP block was not performed. After standard general anesthesia protocol, anesthesia was maintained with 2% sevoflurane in 50% air and 50% oxygen with controlled ventilation in both groups. All patients were monitored with electrocardiography, noninvasive blood pressure, pulse oximetry, end-tidal carbon dioxide, and bispectral index. The consumption of sevoflurane and opioids in the intraoperative and postoperative 24 hours was recorded. The costs of drugs were determined by multiplying total consumed amounts with unit prices. Results: The costs and the consumed amounts of remifentanyl, sevoflurane, and tramadol were significantly higher in non-ESP group in the perioperative period (respectively, P < .001, P = .01, and P < .001). Conclusions: ESP block for LC decreased the consumed amount and cost of inhaled agents and opioids in the perioperative period.

Which Is More Effective for Minimally Invasive Pectus Repair: Epidural or Paravertebral Block?

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of epidural block (EDB) and paravertebral block (PVB) for minimally invasive pectus repair with the conventional method in terms of pain control during and after pectus operations, patient comfort, and length of stay in hospital. Materials and Methods: A retrospective review was made of patients who underwent minimally invasive pectus repair. The patients were allocated into three groups as follows: PVB group (Pre-emptive ultrasound-guided bilateral thoracic single injection PVB, n = 15); EDB group (Pre-emptive landmark-guided single injection thoracic EDB, n = 8); and Control group (Neither PVB nor EPB, n = 9). The intraoperative analgesic requirement was recorded, and a visual analog scale (VAS) for pain evaluation and the Postoperative Patient Satisfaction Scale were applied to all patients. Results: The intraoperative analgesic requirement, VAS scores, postoperative satisfaction level, and time to first requirement for postoperative analgesia were different between the control and PVB groups (P < .001) and between the control and EDB groups (P < .001), but not different between the PVB and EDB groups. Although the length of stay in hospital was shorter in the PVB and EDB groups compared to the control group, the difference was not statistically significant (P = .422). Conclusion: Epidural and bilateral paravertebral blockades performed in conjunction with general anesthesia decrease the intraoperative and postoperative need for analgesics, and might be beneficial for pain management and contribute to a shorter length of hospital stay for patients undergoing minimally invasive pectus repair operations. Both blockades also significantly improved the patient satisfaction.