Randomized trial finds similar Quality of Recovery-15 scores for abdominal wall blocks and epidural analgesia in renal transplantation, suggesting effective alternatives for postoperative recovery.
Background Epidural analgesia can improve early postoperative recovery after renal transplantation. Abdominal wall blocks (transversus abdominis plane (TAP) and rectus sheath (RS)) combined with patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) have also been shown to enhance postoperative recovery. However, it remains unclear whether these techniques are as effective as epidural analgesia (EP). Methods In this single-centre randomized non-inferiority clinical trial, participants undergoing renal transplantation were randomly assigned to receive either a TAP + RS block (combined with PCIA) or EP alone. The primary outcome was Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) scores on postoperative day (POD) 1. Secondary outcomes included haemodynamics, indices of postoperative renal function, time to interventions, and postoperative pain scores. Results Ninety participants were included in the analysis. The TAP + RS group demonstrated non-inferiority to the EP group in terms of the mean(standard deviation) total QoR-15 score on POD1 (90.6(5.0) versus 92.4(6.4); mean difference, −1.8; 95% confidence interval −4.2 to 0.6; P < 0.001 for non-inferiority). QoR-15 scores on POD3 and POD7 and indices of postoperative renal function were comparable between the two groups, with no group–time interactions. The EP group had significantly lower mean arterial pressure and intraoperative opioid consumption, as well as shorter times to eye opening and extubation, than the TAP + RS group. However, the intervention time was longer in the EP group (P < 0.001). Conclusion TAP + RS block combined with PCIA demonstrated non-inferiority to EP for postoperative QoR-15 scores after kidney transplantation. TAP + RS block offers a potentially more convenient and favourable alternative to EP, helping maintain haemodynamic stability, postoperative renal function, and a low complication profile. Registration number ChiCTR2200056455 (https://www.chictr.org.cn).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ning et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: