Which Is More Effective for Minimally Invasive Pectus Repair: Epidural or Paravertebral Block?

Objective

The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of epidural block (EDB) and paravertebral block (PVB) for minimally invasive pectus repair with the conventional method in terms of pain control during and after pectus operations, patient comfort, and length of stay in hospital. Materials and

Methods

A retrospective review was made of patients who underwent minimally invasive pectus repair. The patients were allocated into three groups as follows: PVB group (Pre-emptive ultrasound-guided bilateral thoracic single injection PVB, n = 15); EDB group (Pre-emptive landmark-guided single injection thoracic EDB, n = 8); and Control group (Neither PVB nor EPB, n = 9). The intraoperative analgesic requirement was recorded, and a visual analog scale (VAS) for pain evaluation and the Postoperative Patient Satisfaction Scale were applied to all patients.

Results

The intraoperative analgesic requirement, VAS scores, postoperative satisfaction level, and time to first requirement for postoperative analgesia were different between the control and PVB groups (P < .001) and between the control and EDB groups (P < .001), but not different between the PVB and EDB groups. Although the length of stay in hospital was shorter in the PVB and EDB groups compared to the control group, the difference was not statistically significant (P = .422).

Conclusion

Epidural and bilateral paravertebral blockades performed in conjunction with general anesthesia decrease the intraoperative and postoperative need for analgesics, and might be beneficial for pain management and contribute to a shorter length of hospital stay for patients undergoing minimally invasive pectus repair operations. Both blockades also significantly improved the patient satisfaction.