See the published version of this preprint at BMC Anesthesiology.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
Research article
Min Suk Chae
Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1426-4651
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background: We explored the analgesic outcomes on postoperative day (POD) 1 of males undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) who received intravenous (IV) patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), a rectus sheath bupivacaine block (RSB), or an intrathecal morphine with bupivacaine (ITMB) block.
Methods: This was a prospective, observational parallel-cohort trial. Patients were divided into three groups: IV-PCA (n = 30), RSB (n = 30), and ITMB block (n = 30). Peak pain scores at rest and when coughing, cumulative IV-PCA drug consumption, the need for IV rescue opioids, and Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) questionnaire scores collected on POD 1 were compared among the groups.
Results: The preoperative and intraoperative findings were comparable among the groups; the ITMB block group required the least remifentanil of all groups. During POD 1, the ITMB block group reported lower levels of pain at rest and when coughing than did the other two groups. After adjustment for age, body mass index, comorbidities, and intraoperative remifentanil infusion, severe pain at rest was 0.167-fold less common in the ITMB block than in the IV-PCA group, and pain when coughing was 0.1-fold lower in the ITMB block group and 0.306-fold lower in the RSB group compared to the IV-PCA group. The ITMB block group required lower cumulative IV-PCA drug infusions and less IV rescue opioids, and exhibited a better QoR-15 global score than did the other two groups.
Conclusion: An ITMB block seems to provide appropriate analgesia with tolerable complications and enhances early patient recovery after RALP.
Trial registration: Clinical Research Information Service, Republic of Korea, (approval number: KCT0005040) on May 20, 2020
https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/search/search_result_st01_kren.jsp?seq=15943&sLeft=2<ype=my&rtype=my
Keywords
Rectus sheath bupivacaine, intrathecal morphine with bupivacaine, robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at BMC Anesthesiology.
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Accept
On 15 Nov, 2020
Editor assigned
On 09 Nov, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 09 Nov, 2020
Editor invited
On 09 Nov, 2020
No comments provided
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 27 Oct, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 24 Oct, 2020
Editor assigned
On 23 Oct, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 22 Oct, 2020
Editor invited
On 22 Oct, 2020
Version 1
Posted 14 Sep, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 08 Oct, 2020
Review #3 received
Received 02 Oct, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 02 Oct, 2020
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 16 Sep, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 16 Sep, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 15 Sep, 2020
Editor assigned
On 11 Sep, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 11 Sep, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 11 Sep, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 10 Sep, 2020
Editor invited
On 10 Sep, 2020
First submitted
On 25 Aug, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Anesthesiology & Pain Medicine
Learn more about our company.
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
See the published version of this preprint at BMC Anesthesiology.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research article
Min Suk Chae
Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1426-4651
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at BMC Anesthesiology.
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Accept
On 15 Nov, 2020
Editor assigned
On 09 Nov, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 09 Nov, 2020
Editor invited
On 09 Nov, 2020
No comments provided
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 27 Oct, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 24 Oct, 2020
Editor assigned
On 23 Oct, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 22 Oct, 2020
Editor invited
On 22 Oct, 2020
Version 1
Posted 14 Sep, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 08 Oct, 2020
Review #3 received
Received 02 Oct, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 02 Oct, 2020
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 16 Sep, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 16 Sep, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 15 Sep, 2020
Editor assigned
On 11 Sep, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 11 Sep, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 11 Sep, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 10 Sep, 2020
Editor invited
On 10 Sep, 2020
First submitted
On 25 Aug, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Anesthesiology & Pain Medicine
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
View the published article at BMC Anesthesiology.
Background: We explored the analgesic outcomes on postoperative day (POD) 1 of males undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) who received intravenous (IV) patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), a rectus sheath bupivacaine block (RSB), or an intrathecal morphine with bupivacaine (ITMB) block.
Methods: This was a prospective, observational parallel-cohort trial. Patients were divided into three groups: IV-PCA (n = 30), RSB (n = 30), and ITMB block (n = 30). Peak pain scores at rest and when coughing, cumulative IV-PCA drug consumption, the need for IV rescue opioids, and Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) questionnaire scores collected on POD 1 were compared among the groups.
Results: The preoperative and intraoperative findings were comparable among the groups; the ITMB block group required the least remifentanil of all groups. During POD 1, the ITMB block group reported lower levels of pain at rest and when coughing than did the other two groups. After adjustment for age, body mass index, comorbidities, and intraoperative remifentanil infusion, severe pain at rest was 0.167-fold less common in the ITMB block than in the IV-PCA group, and pain when coughing was 0.1-fold lower in the ITMB block group and 0.306-fold lower in the RSB group compared to the IV-PCA group. The ITMB block group required lower cumulative IV-PCA drug infusions and less IV rescue opioids, and exhibited a better QoR-15 global score than did the other two groups.
Conclusion: An ITMB block seems to provide appropriate analgesia with tolerable complications and enhances early patient recovery after RALP.
Trial registration: Clinical Research Information Service, Republic of Korea, (approval number: KCT0005040) on May 20, 2020
https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/search/search_result_st01_kren.jsp?seq=15943&sLeft=2<ype=my&rtype=my
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...