4.2 Article

Postoperative analgesia in video-assisted thoracoscopy: The role of intercostal blockade

Journal

JOURNAL OF CARDIOTHORACIC AND VASCULAR ANESTHESIA
Volume 18, Issue 3, Pages 317-321

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1053/j.jvca.2004.03.012

Keywords

video-assisted thoracoscopy; intercostal blockade; fast-track surgery; bupivacaine; dextran

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: This study examined (1) the opioid and nonopioid requirement of patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopy (VATS) as a measure of postoperative pain and (2) whether percutaneous intercostal blockade might reduce morphine requirements and improve analgesia in VATS procedures. Design: A combined retrospective and prospective study. Setting: A university teaching hospital. Participants: Patients undergoing VATS procedures. Interventions: A retrospective analysis of 26 sequential patients; perioperative intercostal blockade with bupivacaine, either with or without dextran 40, in 26 prospective patients. Measurements and Main Results: Retrospective: opioid and nonopioid analgesic requirements of 26 sequential patients who had undergone VATS surgery without intercostal blockade were determined from a study of the case records. Twenty-six additional patients undergoing VATS surgery by the same surgeon were randomly divided to receive either percutaneous intercostal nerve block using plain bupivacaine 0.375% or bupivacaine 0.375% in dextran 40. The duration of local anesthesia was assessed. Postoperative opioid and nonopioid analgesic requirements were compared with the retrospective group. Conclusions: Postoperative morphine requirements after VATS surgery are considerable, with pleurectomy being the most painful procedure. Intercostal blockade with bupivacaine provided effective pain relief and a dramatic reduction in morphine requirements. This technique is recommended for VATS surgery, especially if day-case procedures are being contemplated. (C) 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available