Comparative study evaluating the efficacy of ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plain block versus intraperitoneal injection of local anesthetics in pain control following laparoscopic colectomy
Joint Authors
Shukri, Aktham A.
Nawfal, Walid H.
al-Fawal, Sana M.
Source
Ain Shams Journal of Anesthesiology
Issue
Vol. 9, Issue 3 (30 Sep. 2016), pp.358-365, 8 p.
Publisher
Ain Shams University Faculty of Medicine Department of Anesthesiology
Publication Date
2016-09-30
Country of Publication
Egypt
No. of Pages
8
Main Subjects
Abstract EN
Laparoscopic surgeries are being widely conducted nowadays for its well-known advantages such as less postoperative pain, shorter length of hospital stay, decreased morbidity and mortality, and reduced healthcare costs.
Many analgesic modalities have been applied for this type of surgery, of which we have chosen the intraperitoneal injection (IP) of local anesthetics and the transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block.
We studied the effect of both techniques on postoperative pain scores and their effect on abdominal and shoulder pain after laparoscopic colectomy.
Patients and methods Fifty patients were enrolled in the study.
All of them were of American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) physical status I or II and scheduled for elective laparoscopic colectomy surgery.
Patients were randomly allocated into one of two groups (25 patients each): the TAP block group (TAP group) and the IP of local anesthetics group (IP group).
Pain score using the numerical rating scale (NRS), hemodynamic parameters, amount of consumption of rescue analgesia, shoulder pain, and adverse reactions were recorded.
Results The main outcome variable was the pain score in the immediate postoperative period and the next 3 h; the mean NRS scores were lower in the TAP group than in the IP group in the previously mentioned time periods, with a highly significant difference.
Also, there was a significant difference in the NRS score at the fourth hour postoperatively; however, the subsequent NRS scores at the different time intervals showed no significant difference until the end of the 24th hour postoperatively.
In the TAP group, 20 patients (80%) complained of abdominal pain at least once in the first 24 h after surgery, whereas all the patients in the IP group experienced abdominal pain, with a significant difference between the two groups.
The overall analgesic consumption in milligrams and the total number of analgesic doses were found to be less in the TAP group, with a highly significant difference.
Conclusion The results of this study demonstrated that the TAP block is a more effective analgesic modality for abdominal pain than the IP local anesthetic during the early postoperative period after laparoscopic colectomy but IP is more effective in relieving postoperative shoulder pain.
American Psychological Association (APA)
Shukri, Aktham A.& Nawfal, Walid H.& al-Fawal, Sana M.. 2016. Comparative study evaluating the efficacy of ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plain block versus intraperitoneal injection of local anesthetics in pain control following laparoscopic colectomy. Ain Shams Journal of Anesthesiology،Vol. 9, no. 3, pp.358-365.
https://search.emarefa.net/detail/BIM-709945
Modern Language Association (MLA)
Shukri, Aktham A.…[et al.]. Comparative study evaluating the efficacy of ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plain block versus intraperitoneal injection of local anesthetics in pain control following laparoscopic colectomy. Ain Shams Journal of Anesthesiology Vol. 9, no. 3 (Jul. / Sep. 2016), pp.358-365.
https://search.emarefa.net/detail/BIM-709945
American Medical Association (AMA)
Shukri, Aktham A.& Nawfal, Walid H.& al-Fawal, Sana M.. Comparative study evaluating the efficacy of ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plain block versus intraperitoneal injection of local anesthetics in pain control following laparoscopic colectomy. Ain Shams Journal of Anesthesiology. 2016. Vol. 9, no. 3, pp.358-365.
https://search.emarefa.net/detail/BIM-709945
Data Type
Journal Articles
Language
English
Notes
Includes bibliographical references : p. 364-365
Record ID
BIM-709945