Paravertebral Block for Inguinal Herniorrhaphy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Repository Usage Stats
BACKGROUND: Paravertebral block (PVB) is a safe and effective anesthetic technique for thoracotomy and mastectomy. However, no systematic review or meta-analysis has focused on PVB for inguinal herniorrhaphy. Our study compares PVB with general anesthesia/systemic analgesia, neuraxial blocks, and other peripheral nerve blocks. METHODS: We analyzed 14 randomized controlled trials from PubMed, MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, and CINAHL up to February 2015, without language restriction, comparing PVB under sedation with general anesthesia/systematic analgesia (135 vs 133 patients), neuraxial blocks (191 vs 186 patients), and other peripheral nerve blocks (119 vs 117 patients). We investigated pain scores, consumption of postoperative analgesia, incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), length of hospital stay, postanesthesia care unit bypassing rate, time to perform blocks, intraoperative hemodynamics, and incidence of urinary retention. Joint hypothesis testing was adopted for pain and analgesics, PONV, and hemodynamic variables. All analyses were performed with RevMan 5.2.11 (Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen). Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method was used for post hoc testing. RESULTS: PVB reduced PONV (nausea: risk ratio [RR] = 0.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.05-0.93; numbers needed to treat [NNT] = 4.5; I = 15% and vomiting: RR = 0.15; 95% CI, 0.03-0.76; NNT = 8.3; I = 0%) compared with general anesthesia/systematic analgesia (quality of evidence [QoE]: high). Compared with neuraxial blocks, PVB resulted in less postoperative nausea (RR = 0.34 [95% CI, 0.13-0.91], NNT = 8.3, I = 0%) and urinary retention (RR = 0.14 [95% CI, 0.05-0.42], NNT = 7.4, I = 0%) than neuraxial blocks (QoE: high). More time was needed to perform PVB than neuraxial blocks (standardized mean difference = 1.90 [95% CI, 0.02-3.77], I = 92%; mean difference = 5.33 minutes; QoE: moderate). However, the available data could not reject the null hypothesis of noninferiority on all pain scores and analgesic requirements for both PVB versus general anesthesia/systematic analgesia and PVB versus neuraxial blocks (QoE: low), as well as on hemodynamic outcomes for PVB versus neuraxial blocks (QoE: moderate). Our systematic review showed that PVB decreased postoperative pain scores and analgesic requirement as compared with ilioinguinal block and transversus abdominis plane block. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis shows that PVB provides an anesthesia with fewer undesirable effects for inguinal herniorrhaphy. The choice between general anesthesia/systematic analgesia, neuraxial blocks, PVB, and other peripheral nerve blocks should be based on time available to perform the block and a complete coverage over the relevant structures by the blocks.
Length of Stay
Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Published Version (Please cite this version)10.1213/ANE.0000000000000835
Publication InfoLaw, LS-C; Tan, M; Bai, Y; Miller, Timothy Ellis; Li, Y-J; & Gan, Tong Joo (2015). Paravertebral Block for Inguinal Herniorrhaphy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Anesth Analg, 121(2). pp. 556-569. 10.1213/ANE.0000000000000835. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/13954.
This is constructed from limited available data and may be imprecise. To cite this article, please review & use the official citation provided by the journal.
More InfoShow full item record
Consulting Professor in the Department of Anesthesiology
My current research interests include postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), acute postoperative pain, clinical pharmacology of anesthetic drugs and resuscitation fluids as well as database research in postoperative outcomes. Improving Outcome in Surgical Patients: Nausea and vomiting is regarded as one of the most unpleasant experiences in postoperative recovery. To date, there is no single antiemetic which can satisfactorily control PONV. My interests concentrate o
This author no longer has a Scholars@Duke profile, so the information shown here reflects their Duke status at the time this item was deposited.
Associate Professor of Anesthesiology
Clinical and research interests are Enhanced Recovery and Perioperative Medicine; with particular interests in fluid management, and perioperative optimization of the high-risk non-cardiac surgery patient.
Alphabetical list of authors with Scholars@Duke profiles.