Journals / Medicine Science / 2018 / Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 3

Ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis block vs wound infiltration in patients undergoing open appendectomies

Pages
634–638
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The fact that VAS scores were lower in the TAP block group showed that the multimodal analgesia regimen could be applied as an effective component.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of this study was to compare USG-guided Transversus Abdominis Plan Block (TAP) and wound infiltration in terms of intraoperative parameters, postoperative complications, VAS scores, analgesic requirement time in the patients undergoing open appendectomy.
📊
Key Findings & Data:A total of forty patients, aged 18-65 years, ASA physical status I or II scheduled to undergo open appendectomy, were enrolled in this retrospective study and allocated to two groups.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The fact that VAS scores were lower in the TAP block group showed that the multimodal analgesia regimen could be applied as an effective component.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:2014 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

The aim of this study was to compare USG-guided Transversus Abdominis Plan Block (TAP) and wound infiltration in terms of intraoperative parameters, postoperative complications, VAS scores, analgesic requirement time in the patients undergoing open appendectomy. A total of forty patients, aged 18-65 years, ASA physical status I or II scheduled to undergo open appendectomy, were enrolled in this retrospective study and allocated to two groups. We reviewed the procedures that was experienced in 2014 retrospectively. Patients were allocated into two equal groups: Transversus Abdominis Plan Block (TAP group) (n=20) group and wound infiltration (WD group) (n=20) group. The patients demographic datas such as intraoperative hearth rate (HR), noninvasive blood pressure (NBP), duration of anesthesia, postoperative Visuel Analog Scala (VAS) values, complications (nausea, vomiting, somnolence, wound infection, ichting), duration of analgesic requirement were recorded retrospectively. The data were compared using t-test and chi-square test within the groups, p values < 0.05 were considered significant. Demographic datas such age, sex, weight, lenght and ASA status were similar in both groups. The duration of anesthesia (min) was significantly higher in Group TAP (49 ± 12,2 min) compared with Group WD (32,75 ± 10,06 min) (p=0.001). Intraoperative opioid consumption (mcg) was significantly shorter in Group TAP group. There was statistically significant difference between the two groups as regards the first time of analgesic requirement (Group TAP 24,74 ± 7,77 h, Group WD 3,5 ± 3,52 h). HR values were compared between the groups, it was no significiant difference found expect HR-20, HR-25 and HR-30. it was lower in Group TAP. We didn’t find significant difference between groups at all hours for postoperative complications. VAS pain scores were lower in Group at rest and on couching at PACU, postoperative first, second and third hours (p<0.05). Wound infiltration and TAP block can perform as a part of the multimodal analgesia of the patients who undergoing open appendectomy. TAP block application prolongs the duration of anesthesia as well as reduces intraoperative analgesic requirement and initial postoperative analgesic requirement period. The fact that VAS scores were lower in the TAP block group showed that the multimodal analgesia regimen could be applied as an effective component.

🔖

Cite This Article

BAYINDIR, S., ÖZCAN, S., KOÇYİĞİT, F., BOZAN, M. B. (2018). Ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis block vs wound infiltration in patients undergoing open appendectomies. Medicine Science, Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 3, 634–638. https://ajindex.com/articles/277267

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Saia M, Buja A, Baldovin T, et al. Trend, variability, and outcome of open vs. laparoscopic appendectomy based on a large administrative database. Surg Endosc. 2012;26:2353-9.
  2. Petersen PL, Mathiesen O, Torup H, The transversus abdominis plane block: a valuable option for postoperative analgesia? A topical review. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2010;54:529-35. Rafi AN. Abdominal field block: a new approach via the lumbar triangle. Anaesthesia. 2001;56:1024-6.
  3. Hebbard P, Fujiwara Y, Shibata Y, et al. Ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2007;35:616-7.
  4. Tekelioğlu ÜY, Demirhan A, Koçoğlu H. Transverses abdominis plan (TAP) block. Abant Med J. 2013;2:156-60.
  5. Carney J, Finnerty O, Rauf J, et al. Ipsilateral transversus abdominis plane block provides effective analgesia after appendectomy in children: a randomized controlled trial. Anesth Analg. 2010;111:998-1003.
  6. El-Dawlatly AA, Turkistani A, Kettner SC, et al. Ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plane block: description of a new technique and comparison with conventional systemic analgesia during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Anaesth. 2009;102:763-7.
  7. McDonnell JG, O’Donnell B, Curley G, et al. The analgesic efficacy of transversus abdominis plane block after abdominal surgery: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Anesth Analg. 2007;104:193-7.
  8. Niraj G, Searle A, Mathews M, et al. Analgesic efficacy of ultrasoundguided transverses abdominis plane block in patients undergoing open appendicectomy. Br J Anaesth. 2009;103:601-5.
  9. Dolin SJ, Cashman JN. Effectiveness of acute postoperative pain management: I. Evidence from published data. Br J Anaesth. 2002;89:409-23.
  10. Wall PD, Melzack R. Pain measurements in persons in pain. In: Wall PD, Melzack R, eds, Textbook of Pain, 4th Edition.
  11. Edinburgh, UK: Churchill Livingstone. 1999;409-26. Netter FH. Back and spinal cord. In: Netter FH, edition, Atlas of Human Anatomy. Summit, NJ, USA: The Ciba-Geigy Corporation. 1989;145-55.
  12. Aida S, Baba H, Yamakura T, et al. The effectiveness of pre-emptive analgesia varies according to the type of surgery: a randomized, double-blind study. Anesth Analg. 1999;89:711-6.
  13. Bonnet F, Marret E. Influence of anaesthetic and analgesic techniques on outcome after surgery. Br J Anaesth. 2005;95:52-8.
  14. Tran TM, Ivanusic JJ, Hebbard P, et al. Determination of spread of injectate after ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plane block: a cadaveric study. Br J Anaesth. 2009;102:123-7. Abfelbaum JL,