Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Rev. colomb. anestesiol ; 51(3)sept. 2023.
Artigo em Inglês | LILACS-Express | LILACS | ID: biblio-1535692

RESUMO

Introduction: Transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block provides somatic analgesia postoperatively in cesarean sections, however erector spinae plane (ESP) block has shown to provide both somatic and visceral analgesia. Objective: To compare the efficacy of TAP and ESP blocks for pain control after cesarean section under spinal anesthesia. Methods: In a double-blind superiority trial, pregnant patients undergoing cesarean section were randomized into either bilateral TAP or ESP block groups. Primary outcome was total consumption of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) tramadol in the first 24 hours. Secondary outcomes included time required for first rescue analgesia, post-surgery visual analog score (VAS) for pain, patient satisfaction, and adverse effects. Results: 50 pregnant patients were randomized into TAP and ESP blocks. There was no difference in the amount of PCA tramadol within the first 24 hours between both groups [100mg (63-125) in TAP group vs 75mg (38-100) ESP group]. Pain score at rest and on movement and patient satisfaction were comparable in both groups, with no difference in adverse effects. There was a slight difference in the median time for first rescue analgesia [210min (135-315) in TAP group and 270min (225-405) ESP group] (p=0.03). Conclusions: TAP and ESP blocks provide similar analgesia with comparable consumption of tramadol in the first 24 hours post-cesarean section and no difference in pain scores at rest/on movement.


Introducción: El bloqueo del plano transverso abdominal (TAP - por sus siglas en inglés), ofrece analgesia somática postoperatoria en cesárea; sin embargo, el bloqueo del plano erector de la espina (ESP - por sus siglas en inglés) ha demostrado proporcionar analgesia tanto somática, como visceral. Objetivo: Comparar la eficacia de los bloqueos TAP y ESP para el control del dolor posterior a la cesárea, bajo anestesia raquídea. Métodos: En un estudio de superioridad doble ciego, las pacientes embarazadas sometidas a cesárea se aleatorizaron bien sea al grupo de bloqueo bilateral TAP o ESP? El desenlace principal fue el consumo total de analgesia controlada por la paciente (PCA - por sus siglas en inglés) con tramadol en las primeras 24 horas. Los desenlaces secundarios incluyeron el tiempo transcurrido para la primera analgesia de rescate, el puntaje en la escala visual analógica (EVA) para dolor, la satisfacción del paciente y los efectos adversos. Resultados: 50 pacientes embarazadas se aleatorizaron entre bloqueo TAP y bloqueo ESP. No hubo diferencia en la cantidad de tramadol de la PCA dentro de las primeras 24 horas entre los dos grupos [100mg (63-125) en el grupo TAP vs 75mg (38-100) en el grupo ESP]. El puntaje de dolor en reposo y en movimiento y la satisfacción de la paciente fueron comparables en ambos grupos, sin diferencia en los efectos adversos. Hubo una ligera diferencia en la media de tiempo hasta la primera analgesia de rescate [210 min (135-315) en el grupo de TAP y 270 min (225-405) en el grupo ESP] (p=0,03). Conclusiones: Los bloqueos TAP y ESP ofrecen una analgesia similar, con un consumo comparable de tramadol en las primeras 24 horas posteriores a la cesárea y no hay diferencia en los puntajes de dolor en reposo, o en movimiento.

2.
Braz J Anesthesiol ; 72(2): 253-260, 2022.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33915192

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Our goal was to evaluate whether TAP block offers the same analgesic pain control compared to epidural technique in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy surgery through the morphine consumption in the first 48 hours. METHODS: In this study, 45 patients were recruited and assigned to either TAP or epidural. The main study outcome was morphine consumption during the first 48 hours after surgery. Other data recorded were pain at rest and upon movement, technique-related complications and adverse effects, surgical and postoperative complications, length of surgery, need for rescue analgesia, postoperative nausea and vomiting, start of intake, sitting and perambulation, first flatus, and length of in-hospital stay. RESULTS: From a total of 45 patients, two were excluded due to reconversion to open surgery (TAP group = 20; epidural group = 23). There were no differences in morphine consumption (0.96 vs. 0.8 mg; p = 0.78); mean postoperative VAS pain scores at rest (0.7 vs. 0.5; p = 0.72); or upon movement (1.6 vs. 1.6; p = 0.32); in the TAP vs. epidural group, respectively. Sitting and perambulation began sooner in TAP group (19 vs. 22 hours, p = 0.03; 23 vs. 32 hours, p = 0.01; respectively). The epidural group had more technique-related adverse effects. CONCLUSION: TAP blocks provide the same analgesic quality with optimal pain control than epidural technique, with less adverse effects.


Assuntos
Analgesia Epidural , Analgesia , Laparoscopia , Músculos Abdominais , Analgesia Epidural/métodos , Analgésicos Opioides/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Laparoscopia/métodos , Masculino , Morfina/efeitos adversos , Medição da Dor , Dor Pós-Operatória/tratamento farmacológico , Dor Pós-Operatória/prevenção & controle , Prostatectomia/efeitos adversos , Ultrassonografia de Intervenção
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA