Search

Abstract Background Postoperative analgesia in breast surgery is difficult due to the extensive nature of the surgery and the complex innervation of the breast; general anesthesia can be associated with regional anesthesia techniques to control intra- and post-postoperative pain. This randomized comparative study aimed to compare the efficacy of the erector spinae plane block and the thoracic paravertebral block in radical mastectomy procedures with or without axillary emptying. Methods This prospective randomized comparative study included 82 adult females who were randomly divided into two groups using a computer-generated random number. Both groups, Thoracic Paraverterbal block group and Erector Spinae Plane Block group (41 patients each), received general anesthesia associated with a multilevel single-shot thoracic paravertebral block and a multilevel single-shot erector spinae plane block, respectively. Postoperative pain intensity (expressed as Numeric Rating Scale), patients who needed rescue analgesic, intra- and post-operative opioid consumption, post-operative nausea and vomiting, length of stay, adverse events, chronic pain at 6 months, and the patient’s satisfaction were recorded. Results At 2 h (p

Laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH), one of the most common surgeries among women, results in moderate-to-severe postoperative pain. The use of the transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block for pain management in LH has been evaluated but with conflicting results. The erector spinae plane (ESP) block has emerged as an effective and safe technique for relieving visceral pain. This study aimed to compare the analgesic efficacy of posterior TAP block versus ESP block following LH. We conducted a prospective, randomised, multicentre study. Seventy-six patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists I–III) scheduled for elective LH were included in the final analysis. The interventions performed were posterior TAP block (TAP group) and ESP block at T8 (ESP group). We adopted numerical rating scale (NRS) scores for pain at different time points, intraoperative remifentanil need, rescue analgesic requirements, incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting in the first 36 postoperative hours, and days of hospitalisation as criteria of evaluetion. At nearly all time points, NRS scores did not significantly differ between the TAP and ESP groups. The TAP group had higher NRS scores for pain in the immediate postoperative period (p=0.008). The need for intraoperative remifentanil was higher in the TAP group (p=0.0018). When needed, remifentanil was infused at slower maximum infusion rates in the ESP group than in the TAP group (mean±SD: 0.02±0.04 vs. 0.04±0.05, respectively; p=0.006). The total rescue analgesic requirements in the first 36 postoperative hours did not significantly differ between the two groups. We conclude that following LH, the posterior TAP and ESP blocks can achieve similar levels of pain management.