الفهرس | Only 14 pages are availabe for public view |
Abstract The present study was conducted on patients in trauma unit, Assiut University Hospital, Egypt after obtaining local ethics committee approval in the period from December 1, 2019 to February 20, 2021. It included 60 patients suffering unilateral MFRs. (18-60 years old, ASA I-II). After reviewing the inclusion and exclusion criteria, these patients were randomly allocated into two groups; group TPVB and group TESB, which received pain relief by either paravertebral block or erector spinae plan block respectively. Each group included 30 patients. All the patients in the study were given a full and detailed explanation of the study protocol, the benefits and the possible complications and side effects. A written informed consent was taken from those who agreed to participate in the study. An anesthetist, expert in regional anesthesia, performed the procedures under complete aseptic conditions and under ultrasound guidance. Heart rate, non-invasive blood pressure, electrocardiogram, and arterial oxygen saturation were monitored throughout the procedure. A physician, who was blind to the performed block, evaluated the patients and collected the data. The results showed There was no statistically significant difference between the two study groups regarding the age, sex, weight, height, BMI and the trauma characteristic. The commonest cause of blunt chest trauma was traffic road accidents with no intergroup significant difference. Both techniques were effective in reducing pain scores and opioid consumption with no significant difference between the two groups. Time to first analgesic administration was comparable between the two groups. Twenty patients in the group TESB required rescue morphine compared to seventeen patients in the group TPVB (P > 0.05). The median (quartiles) of rescue morphine consumption was comparable between the two groups (6.45 mg [0–25.8 mg]) in group TPVB compared to (7.85 mg [0–25.5 mg] in group TESB (P-value > 0.05). |