• Register
  • Login

European Journal of Molecular & Clinical Medicine

  • Home
  • Browse
    • Current Issue
    • By Issue
    • By Subject
    • Keyword Index
    • Author Index
    • Indexing Databases XML
  • Journal Info
    • About Journal
    • Aims and Scope
    • Editorial Board
    • Publication Ethics
    • Indexing and Abstracting
    • Peer Review Process
    • News
  • Guide for Authors
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Contact Us
Advanced Search

Notice

As part of Open Journals’ initiatives, we create website for scholarly open access journals. If you are responsible for this journal and would like to know more about how to use the editorial system, please visit our website at https://ejournalplus.com or
send us an email to info@ejournalplus.com

We will contact you soon

  1. Home
  2. Volume 10, Issue 1
  3. Author

Online ISSN: 2515-8260

Volume10, Issue1

Comparison between oblique subcostal transversus abdominis plane block and rectus sheath block for midline incision abdominal surgeries

    Vigya Goyal, Saravjot Kaur Sandhu, Vishnu Kumar Garg, Khayyam, Sudhir Sachdev, Durga Jethava

European Journal of Molecular & Clinical Medicine, 2023, Volume 10, Issue 1, Pages 3821-3829

  • Show Article
  • Download
  • Cite
  • Statistics
  • Share

Abstract

Epidural analgesia remains the gold standard for pain control for abdominal surgical procedures, yet have many potential side effects, risks and limitations. The idea of oblique subcostal transversus abdominis plane block (OSTAPB) and rectus sheath block (RSB) is to anesthetize part of or the entire abdominal wall instead of using intrathecal or epidural techniques, especially in the presence of sepsis and coagulopathy.
Materials and methods: 60 patients scheduled for midline incision abdominal surgeries were randomly assigned to receive ultrasound-guided RSB and OSTAPB blocks with 20ml 0.25% bupivacaine and 40ml 0.25% bupivacaine respectively on each side after induction with general anaesthesia and before start of surgery. Preoperative and intraoperative parameters, plus intraoperative and postoperative cumulative analgesic consumption were recorded. Both groups received intravenous paracetamol 15mg/kg 8 hourly. Postoperative pain severity was assessed using 10cm VAS score and time to request for rescue analgesia, total analgesic consumption in 24 h were recorded.
Results: Patients in the OSTAPB group had more stable hemodynamics and consumed statistically significant less opioid in comparison to RSB group either intraoperatively or postoperatively. Mean VAS scores were statistically significant less in OSTAPB group than in the RSB group at 0, 2, 6, 12, and 24 h postoperatively.  More patients’ satisfaction was reported in the OSTAPB Group.
Conclusion: Ultrasound-guided RSB and OSTAPB block is effective pain management technique for midline laparotomies in scenarios where epidural is contraindicated, has failed or in case of unexpected change in surgical plan and in patients with compromised physiology
Keywords:
    Bupivacaine Oblique Subcostal TAP Block Post‑operative analgesia Rectus Sheath Block Ultasound Guided
  • PDF (432 K)
  • XML
(2023). Comparison between oblique subcostal transversus abdominis plane block and rectus sheath block for midline incision abdominal surgeries. European Journal of Molecular & Clinical Medicine, 10(1), 3821-3829.
Vigya Goyal, Saravjot Kaur Sandhu, Vishnu Kumar Garg, Khayyam, Sudhir Sachdev, Durga Jethava. "Comparison between oblique subcostal transversus abdominis plane block and rectus sheath block for midline incision abdominal surgeries". European Journal of Molecular & Clinical Medicine, 10, 1, 2023, 3821-3829.
(2023). 'Comparison between oblique subcostal transversus abdominis plane block and rectus sheath block for midline incision abdominal surgeries', European Journal of Molecular & Clinical Medicine, 10(1), pp. 3821-3829.
Comparison between oblique subcostal transversus abdominis plane block and rectus sheath block for midline incision abdominal surgeries. European Journal of Molecular & Clinical Medicine, 2023; 10(1): 3821-3829.
  • RIS
  • EndNote
  • BibTeX
  • APA
  • MLA
  • Harvard
  • Vancouver
  • Article View: 6
  • PDF Download: 27
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Telegram
Journal Information

Publisher:

Email:  editor.ejmcm21@gmail.com

  • Home
  • Glossary
  • News
  • Aims and Scope
  • Privacy Policy
  • Sitemap

 

For Special Issue Proposal : editor.ejmcm21@gmail.com

This journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC-BY 4.0)

Powered by eJournalPlus