Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorSørenstua, Marie
dc.contributor.authorRæder, Johan
dc.contributor.authorVamnes, Jan Sverre
dc.contributor.authorLeonardsen, Ann-Chatrin Linqvist
dc.date.accessioned2023-03-01T13:45:28Z
dc.date.available2023-03-01T13:45:28Z
dc.date.created2022-10-14T15:16:01Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.identifier.citationActa Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica. 2023, 67 (2), 221-229.en_US
dc.identifier.issn0001-5172
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/3055052
dc.description.abstractBackground Both the transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block and the anterior quadratus lumborum block (QLB) have been shown effective in reducing postoperative pain after laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. Our hypothesis was that there is no difference in analgesic effect between the two blocks for this procedure. Methods In this prospective, double-blind, randomised controlled study, 60 adult patients undergoing laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair were equally randomly assigned to either a preoperative TAP block or an anterior QLB. The primary outcome was oral morphine equivalent (OME) consumption at 4 h postoperatively. Secondary outcomes were OME consumption at 24, 48 h and 7 days, pain scores at rest and when coughing, nausea, and level of sedation measured at 1, 2, 3, 24, and 48 h and 7 days postoperatively. Results Fifty-three patients completed the study. There was no significant difference in OME consumption at 4 h postoperatively, TAP group (10.3 ± 7.85 mg) (mean ± SD) versus the anterior QLB group (10.9 ± 10.85 mg) (p = .713). The pain scores were similar at rest and when coughing during the 7 day observation period, as were the level of sedation and incidence of nausea. There were no cases of serious side-effects or muscle weakness of the thigh on the same side as the block. Conclusion There is no difference in OME consumption, pain, nausea or sedation between the TAP and the anterior QLB. Thus, the choice between the two blocks in a clinical setting of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair should be based on other aspects, such as skills, practicalities, and potential risks.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherWileyen_US
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.no*
dc.subjectanterior QLBen_US
dc.subjectfascial blocksen_US
dc.subjectinguinal herniaen_US
dc.subjectregional anaesthesiaen_US
dc.subjectTAP blocken_US
dc.titleEfficacy of a TAP block versus an anterior QLB for laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: A randomised controlled trialen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.subject.nsiVDP::Medisinske Fag: 700::Klinisk medisinske fag: 750::Anestesiologi: 765en_US
dc.source.pagenumber221-229en_US
dc.source.volume67en_US
dc.source.journalActa Anaesthesiologica Scandinavicaen_US
dc.source.issue2en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/aas.14160
dc.identifier.cristin2061537
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internasjonal