Background <p>Pain caused by chest tube placed after uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (UVATS) is often neglected. Ropivacaine can be used to alleviate pain related to the chest tube, but the current lowest effective concentration of ropivacaine remains unclear.</p> Methods <p>To investigate the analgesic effect of administering two different concentrations of ropivacaine into the pleural cavity via pleural drainage tube bypass after UVATS. Ninety patients were randomly divided into three groups: Control group (PCIA only), Low-dose group (PCIA combined with intrathoracic infusion of 200&#xa0;ml 0.25% ropivacaine), Medium-dose group (PCIA combined with intrathoracic infusion of 200&#xa0;ml 0.5% ropivacaine). The analysis included Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores for chest tube-related pain and surgical incision pain at 6&#xa0;h, 12&#xa0;h, 24&#xa0;h, and 48&#xa0;h post-operation for each group. Compare incidence of adverse reactions (respiratory depression, hypotension, nausea/vomiting, arrhythmia, dizziness) within 48&#xa0;h.</p> Results <p>Compared to the control group, both 0.25% and 0.50% ropivacaine effectively reduced chest tube-related pain (<i>P</i> &lt; 0.001) and surgical incision pain (<i>P</i> &lt; 0.001) at 6&#xa0;h, 12&#xa0;h, 24&#xa0;h, and 48&#xa0;h postoperatively. However, no significant differences were observed between the two concentrations of ropivacaine in alleviating rest and cough pain related to the chest tube (<i>P</i> &gt; 0.05) or surgical incision (<i>P</i> &gt; 0.05) within 48&#xa0;h postoperatively. Adverse reaction rates were similar among groups within 48&#xa0;h postoperatively (<i>P</i> = 0.383).</p> Conclusion <p>The analgesic effect of ropivacaine infusion with concentrations of 0.25% and 0.50% administered via intrathoracic pumps for chest tube-related pain after UVATS showed no significant difference, but both were superior to the sole use of PCIA.</p> Registration <p>Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2200065184.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Comparison of the effectiveness of two different concentrations of ropivacaine for intrapleural analgesia in reducing stimulatory pain caused by chest tubes after uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery: a randomised controlled study

  • Wenjing Tang,
  • Yonggang Hao,
  • Gangming Wu,
  • Haixia Wang

摘要

Background

Pain caused by chest tube placed after uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (UVATS) is often neglected. Ropivacaine can be used to alleviate pain related to the chest tube, but the current lowest effective concentration of ropivacaine remains unclear.

Methods

To investigate the analgesic effect of administering two different concentrations of ropivacaine into the pleural cavity via pleural drainage tube bypass after UVATS. Ninety patients were randomly divided into three groups: Control group (PCIA only), Low-dose group (PCIA combined with intrathoracic infusion of 200 ml 0.25% ropivacaine), Medium-dose group (PCIA combined with intrathoracic infusion of 200 ml 0.5% ropivacaine). The analysis included Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores for chest tube-related pain and surgical incision pain at 6 h, 12 h, 24 h, and 48 h post-operation for each group. Compare incidence of adverse reactions (respiratory depression, hypotension, nausea/vomiting, arrhythmia, dizziness) within 48 h.

Results

Compared to the control group, both 0.25% and 0.50% ropivacaine effectively reduced chest tube-related pain (P < 0.001) and surgical incision pain (P < 0.001) at 6 h, 12 h, 24 h, and 48 h postoperatively. However, no significant differences were observed between the two concentrations of ropivacaine in alleviating rest and cough pain related to the chest tube (P > 0.05) or surgical incision (P > 0.05) within 48 h postoperatively. Adverse reaction rates were similar among groups within 48 h postoperatively (P = 0.383).

Conclusion

The analgesic effect of ropivacaine infusion with concentrations of 0.25% and 0.50% administered via intrathoracic pumps for chest tube-related pain after UVATS showed no significant difference, but both were superior to the sole use of PCIA.

Registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2200065184.