Publication: Paravertebral catheter for three-level injection in radical mastectomy: A randomised controlled study
Issued Date
2015-06-09
Resource Type
ISSN
19326203
Other identifier(s)
2-s2.0-84936803103
Rights
Mahidol University
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
PLoS ONE. Vol.10, No.6 (2015)
Suggested Citation
Petchara Sundarathiti, Benno Von Bormann, Ronnarat Suvikapakornkul, Panuwat Lertsithichai, Vanlapa Arnuntasupakul Paravertebral catheter for three-level injection in radical mastectomy: A randomised controlled study. PLoS ONE. Vol.10, No.6 (2015). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0129539 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/35145
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Thesis
Title
Paravertebral catheter for three-level injection in radical mastectomy: A randomised controlled study
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
© 2015 Sundarathiti et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Introduction: Paravertebral block (PVB) is an alternative to general anaesthesia (GA) for breast surgery. However, for extensive surgery multiple punctures are needed increasing the immanent risk of the method. The purpose of this study was to evaluate PVB via catheter and injections at three different levels. Primary outcome was the quality of postoperative analgesia, in particular, the number of patients requiring additional morphine. Methods: In a randomised single blinded clinical study patients scheduled for breast surgery including axillary approach, were randomly allocated to different anaesthetic techniques, n = 35 each. Patients received either GA with sevoflurane or PVB with catheter at level Th 4. In PVB-patients a 1:2 mixture of bupivacaine 0.5% and lidocaine 2% with adrenaline was injected sequentially 10 ml each at three different levels. Results: Complication-free catheter insertion was possible in all 35 scheduled patients. The need for postoperative analgesics was higher after GA compared to PVB (22 vs.14 patients); p = 0.056. Postoperative morphine consumption was 1.55 (GA) and 0.26 mg (PVB) respectively (p < 0.001). Visual rating score (VRS) for pain at rest and at movement was higher in GA patients on post anaesthesia care unit (PACU) as well as on the ward at 1-6h and 6-12h. Readiness for discharge was earlier after PVB (4.96 and 6.52 hours respectively). After GA the incidence and severity of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) was higher, though not significantly. Patients' satisfaction was comparable in both groups. Conclusions: Three-level injection PVB via catheter for extensive mastectomy was efficient and well accepted. Using a catheter may enhance safety by avoiding multiple paravertebral punctures when extended spread of analgesia is required. Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrial.gov NCT02065947.