Author Archives: Oliver Franks

Disclaimer

BEFORE VIEWING THE RECOMMENDATIONS PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING:

Prospect provides clinicians with supporting arguments for and against the use of various interventions in postoperative pain based on published evidence and expert opinion. Clinicians must make judgements based upon the clinical circumstances and local regulations. At all times, local prescribing information for the drugs referred to must be consulted.

By selecting ‘I Agree’ you accept the conditions above*

If you select ‘I Disagree’ you will not be able to proceed to the recommendations.

* by agreeing you will not be asked again on the same device unless cookies have been deleted

2008. Joshi GP, Bonnet F, Shah R, Wilkinson RC, Camu F, Fischer B, Neugebauer EAM, Rawal N, Schug SA, Simanski C, Kehlet H. A systematic review of randomized trials evaluating regional techniques for post-thoracotomy analgesia. Anesthesia and Analgesia. 2008; 107: 1026-1040.

Joshi GP,* Bonnet F, Shah R, Wilkinson RC, Camu F, Fischer B, Neugebauer EAM, Rawal N, Schug SA, Simanski C, Kehlet H.

A systematic review of randomized trials evaluating regional techniques for post-thoracotomy analgesia.
Anesthesia and Analgesia 2008; 107: 1026-1040.

BACKGROUND: Thoracotomy induces severe postoperative pain and impairment of pulmonary function, and therefore regional analgesia has been intensively studied in this procedure. Thoracic epidural analgesia is commonly considered the “gold standard” in this setting; however, evaluation of the evidence is needed to assess the comparative benefits of alternative techniques, guide clinical practice and identify areas requiring further research. METHODS: In this systematic review of randomized trials we evaluated thoracic epidural, aravertebral, intrathecal, intercostal, and interpleural analgesic techniques, compared to each other and to systemic opioid analgesia, in adult thoracotomy. Postoperative pain, analgesic use, and complications were analyzed. RESULTS: Continuous paravertebral block was as effective as thoracic epidural analgesia with local anesthetic (LA) but was associated with a reduced incidence of hypotension. Paravertebral block reduced the incidence of pulmonary complications compared with systemic analgesia, whereas thoracic epidural analgesia did not. Thoracic epidural analgesia was superior to intrathecal and intercostal techniques, 2 although these were superior to systemic analgesia; interpleural analgesia was inadequate. CONCLUSIONS: Either thoracic epidural analgesia with LA plus opioid or continuous paravertebral block with LA can be recommended. Where these techniques are not possible, or are contraindicated, intrathecal opioid or intercostal nerve block are recommended despite insufficient duration of analgesia, which requires the use of supplementary systemic analgesia. Quantitative meta-analyses were limited by heterogeneity in study design, and subject numbers were small. Further well designed studies are required to investigate the optimum components of the epidural solution and to rigorously evaluate the risks/benefits of continuous infusion paravertebral and intercostal techniques compared with thoracic epidural analgesia.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18713924.
*Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Management, University of TX Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, USA.

ABSTRACT AND DATA TABLES [PDF]