| Title |
The efficacy of continuous subcostal transversus abdominis plane block for analgesia after living liver donation: a retrospective study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Anesthesia, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00540-015-2085-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Akihiko Maeda, Sho Carl Shibata, Hiroshi Wada, Shigeru Marubashi, Takahiko Kamibayashi, Hidetoshi Eguchi, Yuji Fujino |
| Abstract |
Postoperative pain management for living liver donors has become a major concern as a result of the increasing number of living liver donations. Transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block has been known to provide effective analgesia for abdominal surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of ultrasound-guided continuous subcostal TAP block as a part of a multimodal analgesic regimen in comparison with conventional intravenous (IV) fentanyl-based analgesia in living liver donors. Thirty-two donors were retrospectively classified into either the continuous subcostal TAP block group (TAP group) or the IV fentanyl-based analgesia group (control group). TAP group donors received bilateral continuous subcostal TAP infusion of 0.125 % levobupivacaine at 6 ml/h. Control group donors did not receive any neural blockade. Cumulative fentanyl consumption was significantly lower in the TAP group for 48 h (P < 0.01) as compared to the control group. Further, the donors in the TAP group had significantly lower incidence of nausea and vomiting during 24-48 h postoperatively (P < 0.01) and fewer delays in the initiation of oral intake than those in the control group (P = 0.02). In conclusion, continuous subcostal TAP block provided an effective opioid-sparing analgesia for living liver donors. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 46 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 13% |
| Unknown | 15 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 47% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 16 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 September 2016.
All research outputs
#20,295,099
of 22,831,537 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Anesthesia
#688
of 812 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#238,738
of 284,642 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Anesthesia
#10
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,831,537 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 812 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 284,642 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.