Search

Purpose: This study investigated whether the divided method of multi-level intercostal nerve block (ML-ICB) could reduce the ropivacaine dose required during thoracoscopic pulmonary resection, while maintaining the resting postoperative pain scores. Methods: This retrospective, single-cohort study enrolled 241 patients who underwent thoracoscopic pulmonary resection for malignant tumors between October 2020 and March 2022 at a cancer hospital in Japan. ML-ICB was performed by surgeons under direct vision. The differences in intraoperative anesthetic use and postoperative pain-related variables at the beginning and end of surgery between group A (single-shot ML-ICB; 0.75% ropivacaine, 20 mL at the end of the surgery) and group B (divided ML-ICB, performed at the beginning and end of surgery; 0.25% ropivacaine, 30 mL total) were assessed. The numerical rating scale (NRS) was used to evaluate pain 1 h and 24 h postoperatively. Results: Intraoperative remifentanil use was significantly lower in group B (14.4 ± 6.4 μg/kg/h) than in group A (16.7 ± 8.4 μg/kg/h) (P = 0.02). The proportion of patients with NRS scores of 0 to 3 at 24 h was significantly higher in group B (85.4%, 106/124) than in group A (73.5%, 86/117) (P = 0.02). The proportion of patients not requiring postoperative intravenous rescue drugs was significantly higher in group B (78.2%, 97/124) than in group A (61.5%, 72/117) (P < 0.01). Conclusion: The divided method of ML-ICB could reduce the intraoperative remifentanil dose, decrease the postoperative pain score at 24 h, and curtail postoperative intravenous rescue drug use, despite using half the total ropivacaine dose intraoperatively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The optimal preemptive analgesia for thoracoscopic surgery remains unclear. We evaluated the utility of intraoperative intravenous analgesia on postoperative pain and the postoperative course in patients who underwent thoracoscopic lobectomy. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 228 consecutive patients who underwent single‐lobe thoracoscopic lobectomy for malignant pulmonary tumors between October 2017 and December 2019. Instead of epidural anesthesia, intercostal nerve blocks were performed from the thoracic cavity. We assessed the differences in the clinical and perioperative parameters including postoperative pain among the following: (1) N group (nonintraoperative intravenous analgesia), (2) A group (1000 mg acetaminophen), and (3) AF group (1000 mg acetaminophen with 50 mg flurbiprofen axetil). The numerical rating scale (NRS) was used to assess pain. Results: Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis revealed that the optimal cutoff pain score for the additional analgesic within 12 h postsurgery was 3.5 (area under the curve = 0.771; sensitivity = 63%; specificity = 19.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.703–0.839; p < 0.01). Less pain scores on the surgical day were related to the AF group (NRS; N, 3 ± 2.6; A, 3 ± 2.4; AF, 2 ± 1.9; p = 0.008, respectively). No pain or mild pain (NRS = 0–2) on the operative day was strongly associated with the AF group (N = 36.4%; A = 46.4%; AF = 70.5%; p = 0.005). None of the patients experienced complications associated with intraoperative intravenous analgesia. Conclusion: The combined use of intravenous analgesics (acetaminophen and flurbiprofen axetil) and intercostal nerve blocks is a safe and feasible preemptive analgesic approach for thoracoscopic lobectomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This document is a correction notice for an article titled "Divided method of intercostal nerve block reduces ropivacaine dose by half in thoracoscopic pulmonary resection while maintaining the postoperative pain score and 4-h mobilization: a retrospective study" published in the Journal of Anesthesia. The correction addresses an error in the statistical analysis section of the original article, where a sentence was published incorrectly. The correct sentence should state that the chi-square test was used to calculate the correlations between categorical variables. The correction notice also includes a statement from the publisher, Springer Nature, emphasizing their neutrality regarding jurisdictional claims and institutional affiliations. The authors of the original article are Aiko Nakai, Jyunya Nakada, Yusuke Takahashi, Noriaki Sakakura, Katuhiro Masago, Sakura Okamoto, and Hiroaki Kuroda. [Extracted from the article]