Dataset Information

Infrared thermography for assessment of thoracic paravertebral block: a prospective observational study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

There was no "gold standard" to assess the success or failure of thoracic paravertebral block (TPVB). Measurement of skin temperature with infrared thermography (IT) would be a reliable method to evaluate the effectiveness of regional blocks. This study aimed to explore the feasibility of using skin temperature difference (Td) determined by IT between the blocked and unblocked side to predict the spread of TPVB.

Methods

Sixty-one patients undergoing elective unilateral breast or thoracoscopic surgery were enrolled in this prospective observational study. TPVB was performed at T4 and T5 under real-time ultrasound guidance with 10 mL of 0.4% ropivacaine for each patient, respectively. Td between the blocked and unblocked side were measured with IT from T2 to T10 at the anterior chest wall before TPVB and 5 min, 10 min, 15 min and 20 min after TPVB. Pinprick test was performed at 20 min after TPVB. Successful TPVB was defined as no sensation to pinprick in 3 or more adjacent dermatomes corresponding to the site of injection at 20 min after TPVB. Td was compared to pinprick test for evaluating its effectiveness in predicting the success of TPVB. The sensitivity, specificity, and cut-off value of Td for predicting successful TPVB were determined by receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.

Results

Compared with the baseline value before block, Td from T2 to T10 were significantly increased at each time point in successful blocks. In failed blocks, Td was not increased in any dermatome. The increase of Td at T4-T7 was more than 1 °C 20 min after successful TPVB. Fifteen minutes after block, Td increase at T4 had the greatest potential to predict block success. The area under the ROC curve was 0.960 at a cut-off value of 0.63 °C with a sensitivity of 83.3% and a specificity of 100.0%.

Conclusions

This study suggested that the increase of Td at T4 dermatome determined by IT between the blocked and unblocked side is an early, quantitative, and reliable predictor of successful TPVB.

Trial registration

Clinical trial registration: NCT04078347 .

SUBMITTER: Zhang S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8194215 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objectivesParavertebral block placement was the main anesthetic technique for modified radical mastectomy in our hospital until February 2014, when its combination with blocks targeting the pectoral musculature was initiated. We compared the analgesic effects of paravertebral blocks with or without blocks targeting the pectoral musculature for modified radical mastectomy.MethodsWe retrospectively collected data from a single surgeon and anesthesiologist from June 1, 2012, to May 31, 2015. Intraoperative sedatives and analgesic requirements, time to the first analgesic request, postoperative analgesic doses, patient satisfaction, and complications were compared.ResultsFifty-four patients received a paravertebral block alone (PECS 0), and 46 received a paravertebral block combined with blocks targeting the pectoral musculature (PECS 1). The highest intraoperative effect-site concentration of propofol was significantly lower in the PECS 1 group than in the PECS 0 group [2.3 (1.5, 2.8) vs 2.5 (1.5, 4) μg/mL, p = 0.0014]. The intraoperative rescue analgesic dose was significantly lower in the PECS 1 group [0 (0, 25) vs 0 (0, 75) mg of ketamine, p = 0.0384]. Furthermore, the PECS 1 group had a significantly longer time to the first analgesic request [636.5 (15, 720) vs 182.5 (14, 720) min, p = 0.0001]. After further adjustment for age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status classification, chronic pain history, incidence of a superficial cervical plexus block placement, and operation duration, blocks targeting the pectoral musculature were determined to be the only significant factor (hazard ratio, 0.36; 95% confidence interval, 0.23-0.58; p < 0.0001). Very few patients used potent analgesics including morphine and ketorolac; the cumulative use of morphine or ketorolac was similar in the study groups. However, the incidence of all analgesic use, namely morphine, ketorolac, acetaminophen, and celecoxib, was significantly lower in the PECS 1 group [3.5 (0, 6) vs 5 (0, 12), p < 0.0001].ConclusionsCompared with the placement of a paravertebral block alone, combining blocks targeting the pectoral musculature with a paravertebral block for modified radical mastectomy reduced the sedative and analgesic requirements during operation and provided more effective postoperative analgesia.

Project description:BackgroundTo investigate the effects of body mass index (BMI) on intensity postoperative pain in patients who underwent thoracic paravertebral block (TPVB) for postoperative analgesia after video-assissted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS).MethodsPatients aged 18-80 years, ASA I-III, and BMI 18-40 kg/m2 who underwent elective VATS were included in the study. The patients were divided into 3 groups according to their BMI levels. TPVB was performed under ultrasound-guidance at the fifth thoracic vertebrae, and 30 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine was injected. The patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) was performed by using morphine and multimodal analgesia was performed. As a rescue analgesic agent, 0.5 mg/kg tramadol was given to patients intravenously when a score of visual analog scale (VAS) at rest was ≥ 4. The primary outcome was determined as VAS scores at rest and cough. Secondary outcomes were determined as postoperative morphine consumption, additional analgesic requirement, and side effects.ResultsThe post-hoc test revealed that the VAS resting scores at the 4th hour (p: 0.007), 12th hour (p: 0.014), and 48th hour (p: 0.002) were statistically significantly lower in Group I compared to Group II. Additionally, VAS resting scores were also statistically significantly lower in Group I compared to Group III at all time points (p < 0.05). Similarly, the post-hoc test indicated that the VAS coughing scores at the 4th hour (p: 0.023), 12th hour (p: 0.011), and 48th hour (p: 0.019) were statistically significantly lower in Group I compared to Group II. Moreover, VAS coughing scores were statistically significantly lower in Group I compared to Group III at all time points (p < 0.001). Furthermore, there were statistically significant differences in terms of additional analgesic use between the groups (p: 0.001). Additionally, there was a statistically significant difference in terms of morphine consumption via PCA and morphine milligram equivalent consumption between the groups (p < 0.001).ConclusionsHigher postoperative VAS scores with TPVB applied in obese patients and the consequent increase in additional analgesics and complications require more specific postoperative management in this patient group.

Project description:BackgroundPostoperative 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.MethodsThis 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.ResultsAt 2 h (p < 0.001) and 6 h (p = 0.012) the Numeric Rating Scale was significantly lower in Thoracic Paraverterbal block group. The Numeric Rating Scale at 12, 24, and 36 postoperative hours did not show significant differences. There were no significant differences also in the number of patients requiring rescue doses of NSAIDs, in intra- and post-operative opioid consumption, in post-operative nausea and vomiting episodes and in the length of stay. No failures or complications occurred in the execution of techniques and none of the patients reported any chronic pain at six months from the surgery.ConclusionsBoth thoracic paravertebral block and erector spinae plane block can be effectively used in controlling post-mastectomy pain with no significant differences between the two blocks.Trial registrationThe study was prospectively registered on Clinicaltrials.gov (trial identifier NCT04457115) (first registration 27/04/2020).

Project description:BackgroundParavertebral block (PVB) is the most recognized regional anesthesia technique after thoracic epidural anesthesia for postoperative analgesia in thoracic and breast surgery. Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is a recently discovered blocking technique, and it has evidenced excellent postoperative analgesia for breast and thoracic surgery with fewer adverse reactions. However, there are controversies about the postoperative analgesic effects of the two analgesic techniques.ObjectiveTo assess the analgesic effects of PVB versus ESPB in postoperative thoracic and breast surgery.MethodsWe systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, and ScienceDirect databases up to April 5, 2021. The primary outcome was postoperative pain scores. Secondary outcomes included: opioid consumption, additional analgesia, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) 24 hours post-operation, and the time required for completing block procedure. This study was registered in PROSPERO, number CRD42021246160.ResultsAfter screening relevant, full-text articles, ten randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that met the inclusion criteria were retrieved for this meta-analysis. Six studies involved thoracic surgery patients, and four included breast surgery patients. Thoracic surgery studies included all of the outcomes involved in this meta-analysis while breast surgery did not report pain scores at movement and additional analgesia in 24 hours post-operation. For thoracic surgery, PVB resulted in significant reduction in the following pain scores: 0-1 hours (MD = -0.79, 95% CI: -1.54 to -0.03, P = 0.04), 4-6 hours (MD = -0.31, 95% CI: -0.57 to -0.05, P = 0.02), and 24 hours (MD = -0.42, 95% CI: -0.81 to -0.02, P = 0.04) at rest; significant reduction in pain scores at 4-6 hours (MD = -0.47, 95% CI: -0.93 to -0.01, P = 0.04), 8-12 hours (MD = -1.09, 95% CI: -2.13 to -0.04, P = 0.04), and 24 hours (MD = -0.31, 95% CI: -0.57 to -0.06, P = 0.01) at movement. Moreover, the opioid consumption at 24 hours post-operation (MD = -2.74, 95% CI: -5.41 to -0.07, P = 0.04) and the incidence of additional analgesia in 24 hours of the postoperative course (RR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.29 to 0.97, P = 0.04) were significantly lower in the PVB group than in the ESPB group for thoracic surgery. However, no significant differences were found in pain scores at rest at various time points postoperatively, and opioid consumption at 24 hours post-operation for breast surgery. The time required for completing block procedure was longer in the PVB group than in the ESPB group for thoracic and breast surgery, and the incidence of PONV between the two groups showed no significant difference.ConclusionThe postoperative analgesic effects of PVB versus ESPB are distinguished by the surgical site. For thoracic surgery, the postoperative analgesic effect of PVB is better than that of ESPB. For breast surgery, the postoperative analgesic effects of PVB and ESPB are similar.