• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• v.11 no.2
• /
• pp.317-320
• /
• 1998

Since Reiestad and Str$\ddot{o}$mskag reported interpleural installation of local anesthetic solutions as a technique for the management of postoperative pain in the patients undergoing cholecystectomy, renal surgery and breast surgery, many physician applied this technique for upper abdominal pain from various reasons such as technically simple, effective pain relief, less respiratory depression. So we tried interpleural analgesia in two patients who suffered from severe upper abdominal pain. One had upper abdominal pain due to chronic pancreatitis and the other had right upper abdominal pain after PTBD (percutaneous transhepatic bile drainage) for biliary cirrhosis and systemic jaundice. Both were injected 10 ml of 1% lidocaine and infused continuously with 1% lidocaine (2 ml/hr) using 2-Day Baxter$^{(R)}$ infusor. After bolus injection of lidocaine, pain scores (VAS 0~100) were recorded below 25mm and had not exceed that level during continuous infusion. After removing the catheters, two patients were all satisfied with this therapy. Our experiences with this technique showed that continuous infusion of local anesthetics through an interpleural catheter is effective in the control of refractory upper abdominal pain without any complication.

• Annals of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery
• /
• v.26 no.3
• /
• pp.270-276
• /
• 2022

Backgrounds/Aims: Thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) is an established analgesic method in open Kausch-Whipple pancreaticoduodenectomy (KWPD). Although, it can cause hemodynamic instability and neurological complications. Inter pleural analgesia (IPA) is an alternative option. We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of IPA versus TEA after KWPD. Methods: We retrospectively studied the efficacy of IPA against TEA in patients, operated by a single surgeon. The primary outcome was the analgesic efficacy and secondary outcomes were analgesia-related complications, inotrope use, and duration. Results: Forty patients (TEA, 22; IPA, 18) were included. Both groups were well matched for patient characteristics, type, and duration of surgery. TEA was associated with higher analgesia-related complications (n = 8, 36.4% vs. n = 1, 5.6%; p = 0.027). TEA complications included analgesia not working (n = 4), leakage (n = 2), refractory hemodynamic instability (n = 1), and lower limb anaesthesia (n = 1). One patient in the IPA group encountered leakage. TEA was associated with longer inotrope requirement (35 vs. 18 hours; p = 0.047). There was no significant difference in intensive care unit (ITU) admission rate (81.8% vs. 77.8%; p > 0.999), median ITU stay (3 vs. 2 days, p = 0.385), or hospital stay (11 days in both groups). Conclusions: In open KWPD, IPA is not inferior to TEA in its efficacy of pain control. IPA was associated with less analgesia-related complications and shorter inotrope requirements. However, this was a small retrospective study. Larger randomized controlled trials are needed to study the effectiveness of IPA.