Abstract

Epidural analgesia is considered the standard of care but cannot be provided to all patients Liposomal bupivacaine has been approved for field blocks such as transversus abdominis plane (TAP) blocks but has not been clinically compared against other modalities. In this retrospective propensity matched cohort study we thus tested the primary hypothesis that TAP infiltration are noninferior (not worse) to continuous epidural analgesia and superior (better) to intravenous opioid analgesia in patients recovering from major lower abdominal surgery. 318 patients were propensity matched on 18 potential factors among three groups (106 per group): 1) TAP infiltration with bupivacaine liposome; 2) continuous Epidural analgesia with plain bupivacaine; and; 3) intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV PCA). We claimed TAP noninferior (not worse) over Epidural if TAP was noninferior (not worse) on total morphine-equivalent opioid and time-weighted average pain score (10-point scale) within first 72 hours after surgery with noninferiority deltas of 1 (10-point scale) for pain and an increase less of 20% in the mean morphine equivalent opioid consumption. We claimed TAP or Epidural groups superior (better) over IV PCA if TAP or Epidural was superior on opioid consumption and at least noninferior on pain outcome. Multivariable linear regressions within the propensity-matched cohorts were used to model total morphine-equivalent opioid dose and time-weighted average pain score within first 72 hours after surgery; joint hypothesis framework was used for formal testing. TAP infiltration were noninferior to Epidural on both primary outcomes (p<0.001). TAP infiltration were noninferior to IV PCA on pain scores (p = 0.001) but we did not find superiority on opioid consumption (p = 0.37). We did not find noninferiority of Epidural over IV PCA on pain scores (P = 0.13) and nor did we find superiority on opioid consumption (P = 0.98). TAP infiltration with liposomal bupivacaine and continuous epidural analgesia were similar in terms of pain and opioid consumption, and not worse in pain compared with IV PCA. TAP infiltrations might be a reasonable alternative to epidural analgesia in abdominal surgical patients. A large randomized trial comparing these techniques is justified.

Highlights

  • Pain management after major abdominal surgery remains challenging

  • The Transversus Abdominis Plane (TAP) infiltration is an alternative approach to providing postoperative analgesia to the anterior abdominal wall [4]

  • We assessed noninferiority of TAP infiltration to Epidural on both time-weighted average pain score and opioid consumption within 72 hours of the surgery or hospital discharge with 1-tailed noninferiority t-tests and using pre-specified noninferiority deltas of 1 point higher on the 0–10 numeric rating scale (NRS) pain scale for pain sore and an increase of 20% in the mean of opioid consumption compared to the respective reference group

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The best-accepted analgesic approach is continuous epidural analgesia which is generally thought to be considerably more effective than intravenous patient-controlled opioid analgesia (IV PCA) [1, 2]. Epidural catheter insertion is contraindicated in anti-coagulated patients [3]. The Transversus Abdominis Plane (TAP) infiltration is an alternative approach to providing postoperative analgesia to the anterior abdominal wall [4]. TAP infiltration is relatively easy to perform, generally safe, and can be performed in patients who are anti-coagulated [5, 6]. TAP infiltration can be performed as a single injection, or a catheter can be inserted for continuous local anesthetic infusion [7, 8]. Single-shot TAP infiltration with conventional local anesthetics do not last sufficiently long to provide effective postoperative analgesia. Recently developed liposomal bupivacaine provides much longer-lasting analgesia than plain bupivacaine [9]

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.