Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Randomized trial examines the effect of continuous serratus plane analgesia on recovery in adults undergoing thoracic surgery, suggesting further investigation is needed.
BACKGROUND: Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) offers numerous advantages over open surgery; nevertheless, it remains associated with significant postoperative pain. Multiple regional anesthesia techniques have been explored, and the serratus anterior plane block (SAPB) has emerged as a promising option; however, evidence on the use of continuous SAPB infusion for quality of recovery (QoR-40) remains limited. We hypothesized that continuous SAPB infusion, combined with multimodal analgesia, could improve QoR-40 after VATS. METHODS: In this prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial, adults undergoing elective VATS received an infusion of either 0.2% ropivacaine or saline via a SAPB catheter, in addition to standardized multimodal analgesia. The primary outcome was the QoR-40 score on postoperative day (POD) 1. Secondary outcomes included QoR-40 scores on POD 2-4, pain scores, opioid consumption in intravenous morphine milligram equivalents (IV MME), length of hospital stay (LOS), complications, and 30-day readmission. RESULTS: A total of 173 patients were analyzed (SAPB: n=88; control: n=85). Median QoR-40 scores on POD 1 were higher in the SAPB group (176 (166-184) vs 172 (159-183); p=0.1036), and remained higher across POD 2 to 4, although not statistically significant. SAPB significantly reduced opioid consumption in recovery (8.0±7.4 vs 10.6±9.3 IV MME; p=0.0388) and on POD 1 (12.73±10.75 vs 16.45±12.17 IV MME; p=0.0349). LOS was also lower but not statistically significant by 0.8 days (2.69±1.76 vs 3.50±4.01; p=0.0872). Pain scores, complications, and 30-day readmissions were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, continuous SAPB catheter infusion did not improve the primary outcome (QoR-40), and the observed differences in secondary outcomes should be interpreted as exploratory. Larger studies are needed to confirm effects on patient-reported recovery.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Biswas et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: