scholarly journals Correction: Comparison of Transversus Abdominis Plane Infiltration with Liposomal Bupivacaine versus Continuous Epidural Analgesia versus Intravenous Opioid Analgesia

PLoS ONE ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. e0163687
Author(s):  
Sabry Ayad ◽  
Rovnat Babazade ◽  
Hesham Elsharkawy ◽  
Vinayak Nadar ◽  
Chetan Lokhande ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (6) ◽  
pp. 030006052092269
Author(s):  
Xiangbo Liu ◽  
Cehua Ou ◽  
Fei Peng ◽  
Guo Mu

Background A novel technique of continuous transversus abdominis plane block (TAPB) has been reported to be beneficial to patients undergoing abdominal surgery because it can significantly relieve postoperative pain. The aim of our study is to compare this novel technique with a traditional technique of continuous epidural analgesia (EA). Methods We conducted our meta-analysis in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the efficacy of continuous TAPB and continuous EA to relieve postoperative pain were included. Patients were classified by nationality (Chinese, non-Chinese) for the subgroup analysis. Results Nine RCTs with 598 patients were included in our study. Pain levels measured by visual analog scale (VAS) scores at rest on postoperative day 1 were equivalent for continuous TAPB groups and continuous EA groups in non-Chinese and Chinese patients. The TAPB groups experienced a lower rate of hypotension, sensorimotor disorder, and nausea compared with the continuous EA group within 48 hours after surgery. Conclusion Continuous TAPB and continuous EA are equally effective in relieving postoperative pain at rest 24 hours after surgery, but EA was associated with more side effects such as hypotension, nausea, and sensorimotor disorder.


2019 ◽  
Vol 131 (5) ◽  
pp. 1166-1190 ◽  
Author(s):  
De Q. Tran ◽  
Daniela Bravo ◽  
Prangmalee Leurcharusmee ◽  
Joseph M. Neal

Abstract In this narrative review article, the authors discuss the anatomy, nomenclature, history, approaches (posterior vs. lateral vs. subcostal), techniques, pharmacology, indications, and complications of transversus abdominis plane blocks, as well as possible alternative truncal blocks. Despite the scarcity of evidence and contradictory findings, certain clinical suggestions can nonetheless be made. Overall transversus abdominis plane blocks appear most beneficial in the setting of open appendectomy (posterior or lateral approach). Lateral transversus abdominis plane blocks are not suggested for laparoscopic hysterectomy, laparoscopic appendectomy, or open prostatectomy. However, transversus abdominis plane blocks could serve as an analgesic option for Cesarean delivery (posterior or lateral approach) and open colorectal section (subcostal or lateral approach) if there exist contraindications to intrathecal morphine and thoracic epidural analgesia, respectively. Future investigation is required to compare posterior and subcostal transversus abdominis plane blocks in clinical settings. Furthermore, posterior transversus abdominis plane blocks should be investigated for surgical interventions in which their lateral counterparts have proven not to be beneficial (e.g., laparoscopic hysterectomy/appendectomy, open prostatectomy). More importantly, because posterior transversus abdominis plane blocks can purportedly provide sympathetic blockade and visceral analgesia, they should be compared with thoracic epidural analgesia for open colorectal surgery. Finally, transversus abdominis plane blocks should be compared with newer truncal blocks (e.g., erector spinae plane and quadratus lumborum blocks) with well-designed and adequately powered trials.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document