4.1 Article

The Benefits of Local Anesthesia Used in Mastectomy Without Reconstruction

期刊

AMERICAN SURGEON
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/00031348221091959

关键词

mastectomy; local anesthetic; no reconstruction; bupivacaine; liposomal bupivacaine

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A study found that the use of local anesthesia during mastectomy can reduce postoperative opioid use, alleviate pain, shorten hospital stay, and has no impact on nausea and vomiting.
Background The opioid epidemic has driven renewed interest in local anesthesia to reduce postoperative opioid use. Our objective was to determine if local anesthesia decreased hospital pain scores, oral morphine equivalents (OME), length of stay (LOS), and nausea/vomiting. Methods Single institution retrospective study of females who underwent mastectomy without reconstruction. Results Overall, 712 patients were included; 63 (8.8%) received bupivacaine (B), 512 (72%) liposomal bupivacaine (LB), and 137 (19%) no local. 95% were discharged on POD1. Liposomal bupivacaine use increased from 2014 to 2019. Additional factors associated with use of local regimen were surgeon and extent of axillary surgery. Fewer patients used postop opioids during their hospital stay if any local was used compared to none (76 vs 88%; 0.003). Compared to none, local had shorter mean PACU LOS (95 vs 87 min; P = .02), lower mean intraoperative-OME (96 vs 106; P < .001), and lower mean postoperative OME/hr (1.4 vs 1.8 P = .001). Multivariable analysis (MVA) showed lower OME/hr with LB compared to B and none (P = .002); this translates to 22 mg and 30 mg of oxycodone in a 24-hr period, respectively. MVA showed lower POD1 pain scores with LB relative to none (P = .049). Local did not impact nausea/emesis. Conclusion Local anesthesia was superior to no local in several measures. However, a consistent benefit of a specific local anesthetic agent was not demonstrated (LB vs B). A prospective study is warranted to determine the optimal local regimen for this cohort and further inform clinical relevance.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据