We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparison of Tumescent Anesthesia Versus Pectoral Nerve Block in Bilateral Reduction Mammaplasty.
Annals of Plastic Surgery 2023 June 2
INTRODUCTION: With an increasing focus on multimodal pain control to reduce opioid requirements, regional and local anesthesia techniques have been investigated in bilateral reduction mammaplasty with variable results. The purpose of this study is to compare tumescent anesthesia with pectoral nerve block II (PECS II) in patients undergoing bilateral reduction mammaplasty with respect to postoperative pain and nausea, opioid consumption, length of stay, and cost.
METHODS: A retrospective review of patients undergoing bilateral reduction mammaplasty for macromastia between November 2020 and December 2021 was performed. Demographic information, operative and anesthesia times, antiemetic and morphine equivalent requirements, postoperative numeric pain rating scales, and time until hospital discharge were compared between groups. χ2 and Fisher exact tests examined subgroup differences in categorical variables. Two-sample t test and Wilcoxon rank-sum test evaluated differences in continuous parametric and nonparametric variables, respectively.
RESULTS: Fifty-three patients underwent bilateral reduction mammaplasty by 3 surgeons, 71.7% (n = 38) with tumescent anesthesia infiltrated by the operating surgeon before the start of the procedure and 28.3% (n = 15) with bilateral PECS II blocks performed by anesthesia before the start of the procedure. There was no difference in age, body mass index, weight resected, intraoperative medication, or immediate postoperative complications. Postoperative pain scores and opioid requirements were similar between the 2 groups. Twenty-one percent (n = 8) of tumescent patients compared with 66.7% (n = 10) of block patients required 1 or more doses of postoperative antiemetics ( P = 0.002). Patients who received blocks spent longer in the postoperative recovery area (5.3 vs 7.1 hours, P < 0.01). However, this did not translate to a significant increase in overnight stays. The block group had significantly higher hospitalization cost by an average of $4000, driven by pharmacy and procedural cost ( P < 0.01).
CONCLUSION: In this cohort of multimodal perioperative pain-controlled reduction mammaplasty patients, tumescent anesthesia was associated with decreased antiemetic requirements, less time in recovery before discharge, and lower cost compared with PECS II blocks. Therefore, tumescent anesthesia may be favored over PECS II blocks when considering multimodal pain control strategies in reduction mammaplasty patients.
METHODS: A retrospective review of patients undergoing bilateral reduction mammaplasty for macromastia between November 2020 and December 2021 was performed. Demographic information, operative and anesthesia times, antiemetic and morphine equivalent requirements, postoperative numeric pain rating scales, and time until hospital discharge were compared between groups. χ2 and Fisher exact tests examined subgroup differences in categorical variables. Two-sample t test and Wilcoxon rank-sum test evaluated differences in continuous parametric and nonparametric variables, respectively.
RESULTS: Fifty-three patients underwent bilateral reduction mammaplasty by 3 surgeons, 71.7% (n = 38) with tumescent anesthesia infiltrated by the operating surgeon before the start of the procedure and 28.3% (n = 15) with bilateral PECS II blocks performed by anesthesia before the start of the procedure. There was no difference in age, body mass index, weight resected, intraoperative medication, or immediate postoperative complications. Postoperative pain scores and opioid requirements were similar between the 2 groups. Twenty-one percent (n = 8) of tumescent patients compared with 66.7% (n = 10) of block patients required 1 or more doses of postoperative antiemetics ( P = 0.002). Patients who received blocks spent longer in the postoperative recovery area (5.3 vs 7.1 hours, P < 0.01). However, this did not translate to a significant increase in overnight stays. The block group had significantly higher hospitalization cost by an average of $4000, driven by pharmacy and procedural cost ( P < 0.01).
CONCLUSION: In this cohort of multimodal perioperative pain-controlled reduction mammaplasty patients, tumescent anesthesia was associated with decreased antiemetic requirements, less time in recovery before discharge, and lower cost compared with PECS II blocks. Therefore, tumescent anesthesia may be favored over PECS II blocks when considering multimodal pain control strategies in reduction mammaplasty patients.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System: From History to Practice of a Secular Topic.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 5
Albumin: a comprehensive review and practical guideline for clinical use.European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 2024 April 13
Revascularization Strategy in Myocardial Infarction with Multivessel Disease.Journal of Clinical Medicine 2024 March 27
Clinical practice guidelines on the management of status epilepticus in adults: A systematic review.Epilepsia 2024 April 13
Interstitial Lung Disease: A Review.JAMA 2024 April 23
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app