A randomized-controlled study of intrathecal versus epidural thoracic analgesia in patients undergoing abdominal cancer surgery.

Abstract

Background. We sought to determine the effectiveness of continuous intrathecal thoracic analgesia (ITA) in comparison with continuous epidural thoracic analgesia (ETA) for the management of postoperative pain after abdominal cancer surgery in a randomised controlled study. Materials and methods. Catheters were inserted at T8-10 level for both techniques. Sixty patients were randomized to receive ITA providing levobupivacaine 0.25%, at 0.5–0–7 ml/h, associated with a single bolus of morphine 0.15 mg, or ETA with levobupivacaine 0.25% 4–6 ml/h and a single bolus of epidural morphine 2–3 mg. Data were collected before discharging from recovery room to the surgical ward, 1, 2, 3, 8, 12, 24 h, and 48 h after operation. The primary outcome was pain intensity evaluation. Postoperative morphine consumption, hemodynamics, fluids, and blood losses for the first postoperative 48 h, surgical outcome, hospital stay, and complications were also collected. Results. Pain intensity at rest mean values ranged from 1.12 to 1.44 and from 1.04 to 1.20 in ITA group and ETA group, respectively. Dynamic pain intensity mean values ranged from 1.28 to 1.70 and from 1.16 to 1.80 in ITA group and ETA group, respectively. No significant differences were found between the two groups. Total amount morphine consumption was minimal in both groups, 4.4 mg (±2.9) and 3.1 mg (±2.4), for ITA and ETA groups, respectively. There were no severly sedated patients. Hemodynamic variables, diuresis, amounts of fluids, and red cell transfusion were equivalent between the groups. No important technical complications were reported in both groups and postoperative surgical complications were not related to the examined techniques. Conclusion. ITA and ETA produced the same levels of analgesia, without relevant complications