The Use of Rectus Sheath Catheters as an Analgesic Technique for Patients Undergoing Radical Cystectomy

Comparison of the analgesic effects continuous epidural anesthesia and continuous rectus sheath block in patients undergoing gynecological cancer surgery: a non-inferiority randomized control trial

PURPOSE

We investigated the non-inferiority of continuous rectus sheath block to continuous epidural anesthesia for postoperative analgesia of gynecological cancer patients.

METHODS

One hundred ASA-PS 1-2 patients via a median incision up to 5 cm above the navel were randomized into a continuous epidural anesthesia (CEA) group and a continuous rectus sheath block (CRSB) group. Following surgery, they have controlled with intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) as basal postoperative analgesia. For patients in the CEA group were administered 0.25% levobupivacaine at 5 mg/h. Patients in the CRSB group, catheters were inserted on both sides of the posterior rectus sheath after surgery. They received 0.25% levobupivacaine on both sides at 7.5 mg/h. To determine whether CRSB is non-inferior to CEA in postoperative treatment, pain at rest and movement was assessed using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS). The non-inferiority margin of NRS difference between CRSB and CEA was set at 1.3 difference in means. The primary outcome was non-inferiority comparisons of NRS at rest/at movement after surgery, while the secondary outcome included the frequency of requesting IV-PCA and rescue drugs.

RESULTS

NRS at rest in the CRSB group was not inferior to that in the CEA group. On the other hand, the NRS at movement at 4, 6, 8, 12 h following surgery in the CRSB group was inferior to CEA. There was no difference in the frequency of requesting IV-PCA and rescue drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

CRSB showed the non-inferiority to CEA for postoperative analgesia at rest, while CRSB was not non-inferior to CEA at movement in gynecological cancer patients. CRSB would be a substitute when CEA is contraindicated as a component of postoperative multimodal analgesia.

Comparison of postoperative analgesia and opioid requirement with thoracic epidural vs. continuous rectus sheath infusion in midline incision laparotomies under general anaesthesia - A prospective randomised controlled study

Background and Aims:

To assess and compare the effect of bilateral continuous rectus sheath infusion (CRSB) for postoperative analgesia with continuous thoracic epidural infusion (TEA) in patients undergoing midline incision laparotomies.

Methods:

A prospective, randomised study involving sixty patients with Indian Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade I to III, planned for elective laparotomy were enrolled for the study. Patients were randomly allocated into two groups. In the TEA group, an epidural was sited before induction of general anaesthesia (GA), whereas in the CRSB group, bilateral ultrasound-guided RSB catheters were placed at the end of the surgical procedure, before extubation. Both groups received continuous 0.2% Ropivacaine infusion for postoperative analgesia. They were followed for two post-operative days (POD), for the opioid requirement and post-operative pain at rest, coughing, and moving. Age and body mass index (BMI) were compared using independent t-test and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores were compared by the Mann–Whitney test between the two groups. Opioid consumption, gender, and type of surgery were compared using the Chi-Square test. Statistical analysis was done using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS 21.0).

Results:

Opioid consumption in both groups was comparable, for the first two post-operative days with no statistically significant difference. Pain scores were comparable among the groups at all times except postoperative day (POD) 0 (4 h and 12 h postop) and POD 2 (8 AM and 12 PM), where lower pain scores were observed in CRSB Group.

Conclusions:

As a part of the multimodal analgesia technique, CRSB offers a reliable, safe, and effective alternative to TEA.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocols in Major Urologic Surgery

The purpose of the review

The analysis of the components of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols in urologic surgery.

Recent findings

ERAS protocols has been studied for over 20 years in different surgical procedures, mostly in colorectal surgery. The concept of improving patient care and reducing postoperative complications was also applied to major urologic surgery and especially procedure of radical cystectomy. This procedure is technically challenging, due to a major surgical resection and high postoperative complication rate that may reach 65%. Several clinical pathways were introduced to improve perioperative course and reduce the length of hospital stay. These protocols differ from ERAS modalities in other surgeries. The reasons for this are longer operative time, increased risk of perioperative transfusion and infection, and urinary diversion achieved using transposed intestinal segments. Previous studies in this area analyzed the need for mechanical bowel preparation, postoperative nasogastric tube decompression, as well as the duration of urinary drainage. Furthermore, the attention has also been drawn to perioperative fluid optimization, pain management, and bowel function.

Summary

Notwithstanding partial resemblance between the pathways in major urologic surgery and other pelvic surgeries, there are still scarce guidelines for ERAS protocols in urology, which is why further studies should assess the importance of preoperative medical optimization, implementation of thoracic epidural anesthesia and analgesia, and perioperative nutritional management.

Surgical placement of rectus sheath catheters in a cadaveric cystectomy model

Introduction Surgically inserted rectus sheath catheters (RSCs) are used increasingly for analgesia after cystectomy and other abdominal surgery. Currently, there is little information on the optimal positioning of RSCs to allow maximal spread of local anaesthetic. This study sought to assess the spread of dye injected via RSCs and to highlight the extent of its coverage in a fresh unembalmed cadaveric cystectomy model in order to confirm the nerve endings that are likely to be anaesthetised with RSCs. Methods Four cadavers underwent lower midline incision with limited bladder mobilisation. A RSC was inserted into the eight hemiabdomens. The RSCs were positioned either anterior (n=5) or posterior to the rectus muscle (n=3). Dye was injected down the RSCs to evaluate spread. The eight hemiabdomens were dissected anatomically to determine the surface area of dye spread and nerve root involvement. Results The mean surface area of dye spread with anteriorly placed RSCs was 30.6cm² anterior and 25.9cm² posterior to the rectus muscle. The mean surface area of dye spread with posteriorly placed RSCs was 11.3cm² anterior and 37.3cm² posterior to the rectus muscle. The mean number of nerve roots stained with anteriorly and posteriorly placed RSCs was 3.8 and 2.7 respectively. Subcutaneous spread of dye was seen with one anterior RSC insertion. Peritoneal spread was seen with one anteriorly positioned RSC. Conclusions This study has demonstrated efficient nerve root infiltration with anteriorly and posteriorly positioned RSCs. It appears that dye spreads between the fibres of the rectus muscle rather than out laterally to the nerve roots when spreading from its initial compartment.

The Analgesic Efficiency of Ultrasound-Guided Rectus Sheath Analgesia Compared with Low Thoracic Epidural Analgesia After Elective Abdominal Surgery with a Midline Incision: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Ultrasound-guided rectus sheath blockade has been described to provide analgesia for midline abdominal incisions. We aimed to compare thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) and rectus sheath analgesia (RSA) with respect to safety and efficacy.

METHODS

Sixty patients who underwent elective laparotomies through a midline incision were assigned randomly to receive either continuous TEA (TEA group, n = 31) or intermittent RSA (RSA group, n = 29). The number of patients who required analgesia, the time to first request analgesia, the interval and the cumulative morphine doses consumption during 72 hours postoperatively, and pain intensity using visual analog score (VAS) at rest and upon coughing were reported in addition to any side effects related to both techniques or administered drugs.

RESULTS

While 17 (54.84 %) patients were in the TEA group, 25 (86.21%) patients in the RSA group required analgesia postoperatively, P = 0.008. Cumulative morphine consumed during the early 72 hours postoperatively median (interquartile range) = 33 mg (27 - 39 mg), 95% confidence interval (28.63 - 37.37 mg) for the TEA group. While in the RSA group, it was 51 mg (45 - 57 mg), 95% CI (47.4 - 54.6 mg), P < 0.001. The time for the first request of morphine was 256.77 ± 73.45 minutes in the TEA group versus 208.82 ± 64.65 min in the RSA group, P = 0.031. VAS at rest and cough were comparable in both groups at all time points of assessment, P > 0.05. The time to the ambulation was significantly shorter in the RSA group (38.47 ± 12.34 hours) as compared to the TEA group (45.89 ± 8.72 hours), P = 0.009. Sedation scores were significantly higher in the RSA group, only at 12 hours and 24 hours postoperatively than in TEA group, with P = 0.041 and 0.013, respectively. The incidence of other morphine-related side effects, time to pass flatus, and patients satisfaction scores were comparable between both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Continuous TEA had better opioid sparing effects markedly during the early 72 hours postoperatively than that of intermittent RSA with catheters inserted under real-time ultrasound guidance, both had comparable safety perspectives, and RSA had the advantage of early ambulation. RSA could be used as an effective alternative when TEA could not be employed in patients undergoing laparotomies with an extended midline incision, especially after the first postoperative day.