AccScience Publishing / JBM / Online First / DOI: 10.14440/jbm.2024.0070
REVIEW

Analgesic efficacy of parasternal intercostal plane block for midline sternotomy in adult cardiac surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Heitor J. S. Medeiros1* Amanda Cyntia Lima Fonseca Rodrigue2 Ariel Mueller1 Elizabeth Korn1 A. Sassan Sabouri1
Show Less
1 Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital Boston, Boston, Massachusetts, 02114, United States of America
2 Department of Medicine, Positivo University, 81280-330 Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil
Submitted: 21 August 2024 | Revised: 12 September 2024 | Accepted: 20 September 2024 | Published: 14 November 2024
© 2024 by the Journal of Biological Methods published by POL Scientific. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ )
Abstract

Background: Regional anesthesia is widely supported as a part of multimodal analgesia for post-operative pain management following cardiac surgery. A common technique for managing post-sternotomy pain is the parasternal intercostal plane (PIP) block, which involves injecting anesthetics into the fascial planes near the sternum to block the anterior cutaneous branches of the T2 – T6 nerves. Objective: This study aimed to assess the effects of PIP blocks on post-sternotomy pain, narcotic usage, intensive care unit (ICU) stay, and extubation time following adult cardiac surgeries. Methodology: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating PIP blocks in adult cardiac surgery with midline sternotomy. Studies were retrieved from PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase through February 22, 2023. The risk of bias (ROB) in RCTs was assessed using the Cochrane ROB tool, version 2. Twelve RCTs involving 819 adult patients were included. Primary outcomes were pain scores at 12 and 24 h post-surgery and narcotic usage in morphine milligram equivalents (MME). Secondary outcomes included extubation time and ICU stay. Results: The PIP block group had significantly lower pain scores at 12 (mean difference [MD]: −1.21 points, 95% confidence interval [CI]: −2.17, −0.25, p = 0.013) and 24 hours (MD: −0.69 points, 95% CI: −1.35, −0.02, p = 0.042), and reduced MME use (MD: −30.34 MME, 95% CI: −45.80, −14.89, p < 0.001). PIP blocks did not significantly reduce extubation time (MD: −0.77 h, 95% CI: −1.64, 0.09, p = 0.080) but were associated with shorter ICU stay (MD: −0.54 days, 95% CI: −0.94, −0.13, p = 0.009). Conclusion: PIP blocks provided effective analgesia and reduced ICU stay in cardiac surgery patients requiring sternotomy, but due to study heterogeneity, results should be interpreted with caution. Future research is warranted to explore its short- and long-term outcomes.

Keywords
Regional anesthesia
Acute pain
Cardiac surgery
Median sternotomy
Pain management
Ultrasonography
Funding
None.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
References
  1. Zubrzycki M, Liebold A, Skrabal C, et al. Assessment and pathophysiology of pain in cardiac surgery. J Pain Res. 2018;11:1599-1611. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S162067

 

  1. Cogan J. Pain management after cardiac surgery. Semin Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2010;14(3):201-204. doi: 10.1177/1089253210378401

 

  1. Kaplan JA, Augoustides JG, Manecke GR, Maus T, Reich DL, editors. Kaplan’s Cardiac Anesthesia: For Cardiac and Noncardiac Surgery. 7th ed. Netherlands: Elsevier; 2017.

 

  1. Mueller XM, Tinguely F, Tevaearai HT, Revelly JP, Chioléro R, Von Segesser LK. Pain location, distribution, and intensity after cardiac surgery. Chest. 2000;118(2):391-396. doi: 10.1378/chest.118.2.391

 

  1. Liu H, Emelife PI, Prabhakar A, et al. Regional anesthesia considerations for cardiac surgery. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol. 2019;33(4):387-406. doi: 10.1016/j.bpa.2019.07.008

 

  1. Vilvanathan S, Saravanababu M, Sreedhar R, Gadhinglajkar S, Dash P, Sukesan S. Ultrasound-guided modified parasternal intercostal nerve block: Role of preemptive analgesic adjunct for mitigating poststernotomy pain. Anesth Essays Res. 2020;14(2):300. doi: 10.4103/aer.AER_32_20

 

  1. Zhang J, Luo F, Zhang X, Xue Y. Ultrasound-guided continuous parasternal intercostal block relieves postoperative pain after open cardiac surgery: A case series. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2022;36(7):2051-2054. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2021.05.028

 

  1. Chen H, Song W, Wang W, et al. Ultrasound-guided parasternal intercostal nerve block for postoperative analgesia in mediastinal mass resection by median sternotomy: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. BMC Anesthesiol. 2021;21(1):98. doi: 10.1186/s12871-021-01291-z

 

  1. El-Boghdadly K, Wolmarans M, Stengel AD, et al. Standardizing nomenclature in regional anesthesia: An ASRA-ESRA Delphi consensus study of abdominal wall, paraspinal, and chest wall blocks. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2021;46(7):571-580. doi: 10.1136/rapm-2020-102451

 

  1. Lapisatepun P, Samerchua A, Leurchusmee P, et al. B87 A cadaveric study determining optimal techniques for ultrasound-guided parasternal intercostal plane block. In: Peripheral Nerve Blocks. London: BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.; 2022. p. A127 doi: 10.1136/rapm-2022-ESRA.162

 

  1. Samerchua A, Leurcharusmee P, Supphapipat K, et al. Optimal techniques of ultrasound-guided superficial and deep parasternal intercostal plane blocks: A cadaveric study. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2023;49:320-325. doi: 10.1136/rapm-2023-104595

 

  1. Amir-Behghadami M, Janati A. Population, intervention, comparison, outcomes and study (PICOS) design as a framework to formulate eligibility criteria in systematic reviews. Emerg Med J. 2020;37(6):387-387. doi: 10.1136/emermed-2020-209567

 

  1. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, for the PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. BMJ. 2009;339:b2535. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b2535

 

  1. Kane SP. Opioid (Opiate) Equianalgesia Conversion Calculator. ClinCalc; 2017. Available from: https://clincalc. com/opioids [Last accessed on 2023 Apr 09].

 

  1. Sterne JA, Savović J, Page MJ, et al. RoB 2: A revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2019;366:l4898. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l4898

 

  1. Balduzzi S, Rücker G, Schwarzer G. How to perform a meta-analysis with R: A practical tutorial. Evid Based Ment Health. 2019;22(4):153-160. doi: 10.1136/ebmental-2019-300117

 

  1. Lortie CJ. A Contrast of Meta and Metafor Packages for Meta- Analyses in R. PeerJ Preprints; 2019. Available from: https:// peerj.com/preprints/27608v1 [Last accessed on 2023 May 02]

 

  1. Aydin ME, Ahiskalioglu A, Ates I, et al. Efficacy of ultrasound-guided transversus thoracic muscle plane block on postoperative opioid consumption after cardiac surgery: A prospective, randomized, double-blind study. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2020;34(11):2996-3003. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2020.06.044

 

  1. Doğan Bakı E, Kavrut Ozturk N, Ayoğlu RU, Emmiler M, Karslı B, Uzel H. Effects of parasternal block on acute and chronic pain in patients Undergoing coronary artery surgery. Semin Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2016;20(3):205-212. doi: 10.1177/1089253215576756

 

  1. Barr AM, Tutungi E, Almeida AA. Parasternal intercostal block with ropivacaine for pain management after cardiac surgery: A double-blind, randomized, controlled trial. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2007;21(4):547-553. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2006.09.003

 

  1. Bloc S, Perot BP, Gibert H, et al. Efficacy of parasternal block to decrease intraoperative opioid use in coronary artery bypass surgery via sternotomy: A randomized controlled trial. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2021;46(8):671-678. doi: 10.1136/rapm-2020-102207

 

  1. Hamed MA, Abdelhady MA, Hassan AASM, Boules ML. The analgesic effect of ultrasound-guided bilateral pectointercostal fascial plane block on sternal wound pain after open heart surgeries: A randomized controlled study. Clin J Pain. 2022;38(4):279-284. doi: 10.1097/AJP.0000000000001022

 

  1. Hamed MA, Boules ML, Sobhy MM, Abdelhady MA. The analgesic efficacy of ultrasound-guided bilateral transversus thoracic muscle plane block after open-heart surgeries: A randomized controlled study. J Pain Res. 2022;15:675-682. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S355231

 

  1. Khera T, Murugappan KR, Leibowitz A, et al. Ultrasound-guided pecto-intercostal fascial block for postoperative pain management in cardiac surgery: A prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2021;35(3):896-903. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2020.07.058

 

  1. Krishnan S, Desai R, Paik P, et al. Superficial parasternal intercostal plane blocks (SPIB) with buprenorphine, magnesium, and bupivacaine for management of pain in coronary artery bypass grafting. Cureus. 2022;14:e30964. doi: 10.7759/cureus.30964

 

  1. Kumar AK, Chauhan S, Bhoi D, Kaushal B. Pectointercostal fascial block (PIFB) as a novel technique for postoperative pain management in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2021;35(1):116-122. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2020.07.074

 

  1. Shokri H, Ali I, Kasem AA. Evaluation of the analgesic efficacy of bilateral ultrasound-guided transversus thoracic muscle plane block on post-sternotomy pain: A randomized controlled trial. Local Reg Anesth. 2021;14:145-152. doi: 10.2147/LRA.S338685

 

  1. Hu M, Wang Y, Hao B, Gong C, Li Z. Evaluation of different pain-control procedures for post-cardiac surgery: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Surg Innov. 2022;29(2):269-277. doi: 10.1177/15533506211068930

 

  1. Grant MC, Gregory AJ, Ouanes JP. Regional analgesia for cardiac surgery. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2022;35(5):605-612. doi: 10.1097/ACO.0000000000001169

 

  1. Andreae MH, Andreae DA. Regional anaesthesia to prevent chronic pain after surgery: A cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Anaesth. 2013;111(5):711-720. doi: 10.1093/bja/aet213

 

  1. Black ND, Stecco C, Chan VW. Fascial plane blocks: More questions than answers? Anesth Analg. 2021;132(3):899-905. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000005321

 

  1. Chin KJ, Lirk P, Hollmann MW, Schwarz SK. Mechanisms of action of fascial plane blocks: A narrative review. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2021;46(7):618-628. doi: 10.1136/rapm-2020-102305

 

  1. Shao P, Li H, Shi R, Li J, Wang Y. Understanding fascial anatomy and interfascial communication: Implications in regional anesthesia. J Anesth. 2022;36(4):554-563. doi: 10.1007/s00540-022-03082-3

 

  1. Orhun G., Sungur Z, Koltka K, et al. Comparison of epidural analgesia combined with general anesthesia and general anesthesia for postoperative cognitive dysfunction in elderly patients. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2019;26:30-36. doi: 10.14744/tjtes.2019.04135

 

  1. Jipa M, Isac S, Klimko A, et al. Opioid-sparing analgesia impacts the perioperative anesthetic management in major abdominal surgery. Medicina (Kaunas). 2022;58(4):487. doi: 10.3390/medicina58040487

 

  1. Baldea KG, Patel PM, Delos Santos G, et al. Paravertebral block for percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A prospective, randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled study. World J Urol. 2020;38(11):2963-2969. doi: 10.1007/s00345-020-03093-3

 

  1. Li J, Lin L, Peng J, He S, Wen Y, Zhang M. Efficacy of ultrasound-guided parasternal block in adult cardiac surgery: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Minerva Anestesiol. 2022;88(9):719-728. doi: 10.23736/S0375-9393.22.16272-3

 

  1. Higgins JP. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;327(7414):557-560. doi: 10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557

 

  1. Chan JL, Miller JG, Murphy M, Greenberg A, Iraola M, Horvath KA. A multidisciplinary protocol-driven approach to improve extubation times after cardiac surgery. Ann Thorac Surg. 2018;105(6):1684-1690. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.02.008

 

  1. Higgins JP, Green S, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011. Available from: https://www. training.cochrane.org/handbook/archive/v5.1 [Last accessed on 2024 Oct 01].
Share
Back to top
Journal of Biological Methods, Electronic ISSN: 2326-9901 Print ISSN: TBA, Published by POL Scientific