2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Single shot ultrasound-guided thoracic paravertebral block for opioid-free radical mastectomy: a prospective observational study

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          General anesthesia (GA) is the most commonly used anesthesiological technique for radical mastectomy operations and can be associated with loco-regional anesthesia techniques. The aim of our study, carried out on 51 patients, was to assess the effectiveness of thoracic paravertebral block (TPVB) associated with GA, or as a sole anesthesiological technique for postoperative pain control and for the reduction of intra and postoperative opioids consumption.

          Materials and methods

          Fifty-one patients with neoplastic breast disease and elected as candidates for radical mastectomy were included in the study. The primary outcomes for this study were intra and postoperative opioid consumption and postoperative pain intensity. In 37 patients, TPVB was associated with GA while in 14 patients it was used as the sole anesthesiological technique. Data are reported as mean with standard deviation median with interquartile range, number, and percentage, depending on the underlying distribution.

          Results

          We did not use intra or postoperative opioids for any patient and the Numeric Rate Scale, assessed at time 0, at the end of the surgery, and 2, 6, 12, and 24 hrs after surgery, was >3 in seven patients only.

          Conclusions

          This study aims to show how TPVB can be used to carry out radical mastectomy procedures so that intra and postoperative opioids use can be avoided. In our study, TPVB was used in total mastectomy procedures in association with GA or as the sole anesthesiological technique, without the intra and postoperative use of opioids and with a significant reduction of local anesthetic dosages compared to those reported in the existing literature.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 26

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Can anesthetic technique for primary breast cancer surgery affect recurrence or metastasis?

          Regional anesthesia is known to prevent or attenuate the surgical stress response; therefore, inhibiting surgical stress by paravertebral anesthesia might attenuate perioperative factors that enhance tumor growth and spread. The authors hypothesized that breast cancer patients undergoing surgery with paravertebral anesthesia and analgesia combined with general anesthesia have a lower incidence of cancer recurrence or metastases than patients undergoing surgery with general anesthesia and patient-controlled morphine analgesia. In this retrospective study, the authors examined the medical records of 129 consecutive patients undergoing mastectomy and axillary clearance for breast cancer between September 2001 and December 2002. Fifty patients had surgery with paravertebral anesthesia and analgesia combined with general anesthesia, and 79 patients had general anesthesia combined with postoperative morphine analgesia. The follow-up time was 32 +/- 5 months (mean +/- SD). There were no significant differences in patients or surgical details, tumor presentation, or prognostic factors. Recurrence- and metastasis-free survival was 94% (95% confidence interval, 87-100%) and 82% (74-91%) at 24 months and 94% (87-100%) and 77% (68-87%) at 36 months in the paravertebral and general anesthesia patients, respectively (P = 0.012). This retrospective analysis suggests that paravertebral anesthesia and analgesia for breast cancer surgery reduces the risk of recurrence or metastasis during the initial years of follow-up. Prospective trials evaluating the effects of regional analgesia and morphine sparing on cancer recurrence seem warranted.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Efficacy of pectoral nerve block versus thoracic paravertebral block for postoperative analgesia after radical mastectomy: a randomized controlled trial.

            Pectoral nerve (PecS) block is a recently introduced technique for providing surgical anaesthesia and postoperative analgesia during breast surgery. The present study was planned to compare the efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided PecS II block with thoracic paravertebral block (TPVB) for postoperative analgesia after modified radical mastectomy.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Somatic paravertebral nerve blockade. Incidence of failed block and complications.

              The failure rate and complications following thoracic and lumbar paravertebral blocks performed in 620 adults and 42 children were recorded. The technique failure rate in adults was 6.1%. No failures occurred in children. The complications recorded were: inadvertent vascular puncture (6.8%); hypotension (4.0%); haematoma (2.4%); pain at site of skin puncture (1.3%); signs of epidural or intrathecal spread (1.0%); pleural puncture (0.8%); pneumothorax (0.5%). No complications were noted in the children. The use of a bilateral paravertebral technique was found approximately to double the likelihood of inadvertent vascular puncture (9% vs. 5%) and to cause an eight-fold increase in pleural puncture and pneumothorax (3% vs. 0.4%), when compared with unilateral blocks. The incidence of other complications was similar between bilateral and unilateral blocks.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Pain Res
                J Pain Res
                JPR
                jpainres
                Journal of Pain Research
                Dove
                1178-7090
                11 September 2019
                2019
                : 12
                : 2701-2708
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Anesthesia and Intensive Care Unit, AUSL Romagna, M. Bufalini Hospital , Cesena 47521, Italy
                [2 ]Day Surgery – Breast Unit, AUSL Romagna, M. Bufalini Hospital , Cesena 47521, Italy
                [3 ]General Surgery Unit, AUSL Romagna, Santa Maria delle Croci Hospital , Ravenna 48121, Italy
                [4 ]Breast Cancer Unit, Department of Medical Oncology, Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori (IRST) IRCCS , Meldola 47014, Italy
                [5 ]Anesthesia and Intensive Care Unit, AUSL Romagna, Santa Maria delle Croci Hospital , Ravenna 48121, Italy
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Domenico P SantonastasoAnesthesia and Intensive Care Unit, AUSL Romagna, M. Bufalini Hospital , Viale Ghirotti 286, Cesena, FC47521, Italy
Tel +39 349 258 5491Fax +39 54 735 2813Email domenicopietro.santonastaso@auslromagna.it
                Article
                211944
                10.2147/JPR.S211944
                6750160
                © 2019 Santonastaso et al.

                This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms ( https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).

                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 1, References: 32, Pages: 8
                Categories
                Case Series

                Comments

                Comment on this article