Pectoral Plane Block versus Local Anesthetic Infiltration in Breast Implant Augmentation Surgery: A Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Pectoral plane blocks are routinely used in analgesia for patients undergoing dual-plane breast augmentation with implants. Local anesthetic infiltration is a simple alternative technique with the same aim. The authors evaluated both techniques. METHODS: In this single-center retrospective study, patients received pectoral plane block (ropivacaine 0.2%, 10 ml for pectoral plane I; 20 ml for pectoral plane II) or local anesthetic infiltration. The primary outcome measure was pain, according to the visual analogue scale, at 24 hours after surgery. Secondary outcomes included the measure of pain at 1, 2, 6, and 12 hours after surgery; total opioid consumption at 24 hours; and opioid side effects. RESULTS: Eighty-one patients were finally recruited: 37 in the pectoral plane group and 44 in the local anesthetic infiltration group. Patient characteristics were comparable between the two groups. At 24 hours after surgery, the local anesthetic infiltration group showed a decrease in pain, with a visual analogue scale score of 0.7 versus 1.5 in the pectoral plane group ( p = 0.007). There was no difference in visual analogue scale score between the two groups at 1, 2, 6, or 12 hours after surgery. The duration of anesthesia was increased in the pectoral plane group, with 153 minutes versus 120 minutes in the local anesthetic infiltration group ( p < 0.001). There was no difference in rescue morphine consumption between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The authors found that local anesthetic infiltration had a superior analgesic effect at 24 hours after surgery for dual-plane breast implant augmentation compared with pectoral plane block. These findings are a good indication that the local anesthetic infiltration technique is at least as effective as pectoral plane block while being safe, fast, and easy to use. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

Risk Factors of Long-Term Incisional Hernia after Open Surgery for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: A Bicentric Study.

BACKGROUND: Conventional open surgery is still important beside endovascular surgery in the management of abdominal aortic aneurysms, with less reinterventions in the long-term follow-up. Incisional hernias are the major complication open surgery in the mid- and long term. The occurrence of this late complication could be due to the choice of the incision, median or transverse. The objectives of our retrospective and bicentric study were to characterize the long-term risk factors for incisional hernias after open surgery for abdominal aortic aneurysms, in particular by comparing the 2 types of laparotomy, and to determine the prevalence of the operated and not operated incisional hernias. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 2009 and December 2011, all the patients having elective open surgery for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) by midline laparotomy at the University hospital of Besancon or by transversal laparotomy at the University Hospital of Strasbourg were included retrospectively. The demographic data, the time of diagnosis of the incisional hernia and the parietal reinterventions were collected during a 5-year postoperative follow-up. A univariate and multivariate Cox model was used for the statistical analysis to determine the long-term risk factors for the appearance of an incisional hernia. RESULTS: During the study period, 223 patients presenting with AAA were included, 112 of them were operated by a midline laparotomy and 111 by a transverse laparotomy. The mean age of the patients was 69 ± 8,4years and 208 (93.3%) were men. The 5-year prevalence of incisional hernias was 14.3% (32), and 20 of these hernias (9%) had to be operated. Eighteen hernias (16.1%) occurred after a midline laparotomy and 14 (12.6%) after a transverse incision (P = 0.30). In univariate analysis, obstructive chronic pulmonary disease was the only significant risk factor for incisional hernia (P = 0.01) and an age over 65 years appeared to protect against this risk (P = 0.049). These results were confirmed by multivariate analysis, which showed that obstructive chronic pulmonary disease was an independent risk factor for incisional hernia (HR = 2.35, 95% CI 1.16-4.75), and that an age over 65 years was a protective factor (HR = 0.49 95% IC 0.00-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: The type of laparotomy did not modify the rate of incisional hernias. We showed that only 9% of the patients had to be operated to treat an incisional hernia during the first 5 years after surgery for AAA in our bicentric study. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was the only independent risk factor for the occurrence of an incisional hernia.