Comparative Evaluation of Continuous Lumbar Paravertebral Versus Continuous Epidural Block for Post-Operative Pain Relief in Hip Surgeries

AUTHORS

Pankaj N Surange 1 , * , Brig Chadalavada Venkata Rama Mohan 2

1 Interventional Pain and Spine Centre, New Delhi, India

2 Armed Forces Medical College, Pune, India

How to Cite: N Surange P, Venkata Rama Mohan B C. Comparative Evaluation of Continuous Lumbar Paravertebral Versus Continuous Epidural Block for Post-Operative Pain Relief in Hip Surgeries, Anesth Pain Med. Online ahead of Print ; 1(3):178-183. doi: 10.5812/kowsar.22287523.3348.

ARTICLE INFORMATION

Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine: 1 (3); 178-183
Published Online: December 31, 2011
Article Type: Research Article
Received: October 28, 2011
Accepted: November 24, 2011
Crossmark

Crossmark

CHEKING

READ FULL TEXT
Abstract

Background: Effective control of postoperative pain remains one of the most important and pressing issues in the field of surgery and has a significant impact on our health care system. In too many patients, pain is treated inadequately, causing them needless suffering and they can develop complications as an indirect consequence of pain. Analgesic modalities, if properly applied, can prevent or at least minimize this needless suffering and these complications.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of continuous infusions of local anesthetic drugs by paravertebral and epidural routes in controlling postoperative pain in patients undergoing hip surgeries.

Patients and Methods: The study involved 60 patients who were undergoing hip surgery under the subarachnoid block. They were randomly divided into 2 groups of 30 patients. Group I (paravertebral group) received a single dose of spinal anesthesia with 2.5 mL 0.5% bupivacaine (heavy) + a continuous infusion of 0.125% bupivacaine at 5 mL/h in the paravertebral space. Group II (epidural group) received a single dose of spinal anesthesia with 0.5% bupivacaine (heavy) + a continuous infusion of 0.125% bupivacaine at a rate of 5 mL/hr in the epidural space for 48 hours in the postoperative period. Visual analogue scale (VAS) score, vital statistics, rescue analgesia, and procedure time were compared with the corresponding times between the 2 groups by students t-test and repeated measures ANOVA with post hoc Bonferroni. P < 0.05 was considered significant. There were no statistically significant differences between the 2 groups regarding mean pain score in the first 48 hours.

Results: Mean arterial pressure was significantly lower in the epidural group compared with the paravertebral group from 2 hours after start of the infusion until 48 hrs. Regional anesthesia procedure time was significantly longer in the epidural group (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the 2 groups regarding frequency of postoperative complications and catheter-related problems.

Conclusions: The results of our study indicate that for patients who are scheduled for hip surgery, both continuous paravertebral and continuous epidural analgesia are effective in controlling postoperative pain but that the former has several crucial advantages.

Keywords

© 2011, Author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits copy and redistribute the material just in noncommercial usages, provided the original work is properly cited.

Full Text

Full text is available in PDF

COMMENTS

LEAVE A COMMENT HERE: