Search PubMedSearch

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Search Search PubMed

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Impact on analgesia, diaphragmatic function, and recovery between erector spinae plane block versus superior trunk block in arthroscopic shoulder surgery: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Effective analgesia and preservation of diaphragmatic function are key considerations in analgesia for shoulder surgery. The superior trunk block provides analgesia with reduced phrenic nerve involvement, while the erector spinae plane block offers minimal impact on diaphragm motion. This randomized controlled trial compared the analgesic efficacy, impact on diaphragmatic motion, and postoperative recovery between the two blocks. METHODS: Sixty patients undergoing arthroscopic shoulder surgery were randomized to receive either erector spinae plane block or superior trunk block. Primary outcomes were postoperative VAS and changes in diaphragmatic excursion. Secondary outcomes included Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) scores, morphine-equivalent consumption, and the handgrip strength motor blockade. RESULTS: The superior trunk block resulted in significantly lower dynamic VAS at 1-h postoperatively (0.1 [0.0, 0.2] vs. 5.7 [4.0, 7.6]; p&#x2009;<&#x2009;0.001) and reduced 24-h morphine consumption (7.8 [2.5, 15.0] mg vs. 12.7 [7.5, 17.3] mg; p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.038) compared to the erector spinae plane block. However, diaphragmatic excursion was better preserved in the erector spinae plane block group (8.37% &#xb1; 20.7% vs. -20.09% &#xb1; 22.2%; p&#x2009;<&#x2009;0.001), with a lower incidence of partial hemidiaphragm paresis (3.3% vs. 46.7%; p&#x2009;<&#x2009;0.001). At 24&#x2009;h postoperatively, QoR-15 scores were higher in the superior trunk block group (p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.047), and no patient in either group developed handgrip motor blockade. CONCLUSIONS: Superior trunk block offers superior early postoperative analgesia and better overall recovery, while erector spinae plane block minimizes diaphragmatic impairment. However, the erector spinae plane block may represent an option only in carefully selected patients at high respiratory risk, acknowledging its significantly poorer early analgesic profile.

Humans

Comparison of VCV and PCV-VG modes on diaphragmatic function in diabetic patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a prospective randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic patients are prone to induce diaphragmatic weakness, which can lead to postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs). The optimal mechanical ventilation mode may potentially improve postoperative diaphragmatic function. This study evaluates the effects of two ventilation modes under driving pressure-guided ventilation strategy on diaphragmatic function, as assessed by diaphragm thickening fraction (DTF) and diaphragm excursion (DE), in diabetic patients following laparoscopic colorectal surgery. METHODS: Eighty patients diagnosed with Type II diabetes scheduled for elective laparoscopic colorectal surgery, were randomly allocated to either the pressure-controlled volume-guaranteed ventilation (PCV-VG) group (Group P) or the volume-controlled ventilation (VCV) group (Group V) during surgery. The primary outcome was diaphragmatic function assessed during both tidal breathing and maximal inspiratory effort after surgery. Secondary outcomes included intraoperative mechanical power, PPCs, and other complications. RESULTS: A total of eighty patients were included in the final analysis. The averaged area under the curve (AUC) for mechanical power during ventilation was significantly lower in Group P than in Group V (p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.002). PCV-VG significantly improved both DE and DTF within the first two days post-surgery (AUCDEtidal: p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.088, AUCDTFtidal: p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.004, AUCDEmax: p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.029, AUCDTFmax: p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.017). Postoperative diaphragmatic weakness was less frequent in Group P than in Group V (p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.019). However, there was no difference in the incidence of PPCs between the two groups (p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.155). CONCLUSION: PCV-VG mode can reduce intraoperative mechanical power, better preserve postoperative diaphragmatic function. However, these improvements did not translate into clinical benefits, as evidenced by the lack of reduction in the incidence of PPCs.

Humans

Adding Rib Mobilization to Diaphragm Release Techniques in Patients With Non-Specific Neck Pain: Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Non-specific neck pain (NSNP) is a frequent issue that can negatively affect both mobility and function. Recently, there has been growing interest in newer therapeutic approaches, including rib mobilization and diaphragm release techniques, as potential ways to address NSNP and support better outcomes for those affected. PURPOSE: To find out the immediate effects of how (DRT) combined with (RMT) affects the level of pain and the extent to which patients' functional abilities are improved in cases of NSNP. METHODS: For this prospective RCT, 96 participants aged 20 to 45&#xa0;years were randomly assigned to one of three equal groups based on their pain score (VAS). Group B engaged in (DRT) for 40&#xa0;minutes, three times weekly for 8&#xa0;weeks, in contrast to Group A, which got both RMT combined with DRT. Group C (active control) received advice and some exercises. Measurements were collected before and after the intervention; the primary outcomes included pain severity, evaluated using a visual analog scale (VAS); active neck range of motion (ROM), measured with a cervical range of motion (CROM) device; and neck flexion endurance. Additionally, the secondary outcome of neck-related disability was assessed using the Neck Disability Index (NDI). RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was identified among the three groups at baseline; nevertheless, a treatment effect emerged after 8&#xa0;weeks (p&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.001 and f-value&#xa0;=&#xa0;4.15, &#x19e;2&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.306). A statistically significant time-treatment interaction was seen when comparing the pre- and post-treatment periods in groups A and B (p&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.001, f-value&#xa0;=&#xa0;3.16, &#x19e;2&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.251). CONCLUSION: The addition of rib mobilization to diaphragm release techniques in patients with non-specific neck pain resulted in statistically significant improvements in pain intensity, cervical flexion, right lateral rotation, left lateral rotation, right rotation, and neck flexor endurance, with moderate to large effect sizes for pain reduction and cervical motion. However, no statistically significant differences were observed between groups for cervical extension, left rotation, or the Neck Disability Index (NDI), and only a marginal clinical improvement in NDI was noted in Group A. The observed benefits in the combined intervention group may not be attributable solely to rib mobilization. The increased treatment complexity and greater therapist interaction inherent in the combined approach could also have influenced the outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT07133646.

Humans