Retrolaminar Block Versus Paravertebral Block for Pain Relief After Less-Invasive Lung Surgery: A Randomized, Non-Inferiority Controlled Trial

Introduction A retrolaminar block (RLB) is a modified paravertebral technique with a local anesthetic injected at the retrolaminar site. The aim of this non-inferiority, parallel-group, prospective, and randomized study was to compare the analgesic efficacy of the paravertebral block (PVB) and RLB a...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inCureus Vol. 13; no. 2; p. e13597
Main Authors Sugiyama, Takuji, Kataoka, Yuki, Shindo, Kazuo, Hino, Miki, Itoi, Kazumi, Sato, Yukihito, Tanaka, Shiro
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States Springer Science and Business Media LLC 27.02.2021
Cureus
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN2168-8184
2168-8184
DOI10.7759/cureus.13597

Cover

Abstract Introduction A retrolaminar block (RLB) is a modified paravertebral technique with a local anesthetic injected at the retrolaminar site. The aim of this non-inferiority, parallel-group, prospective, and randomized study was to compare the analgesic efficacy of the paravertebral block (PVB) and RLB after lung surgery. Methods Eligible subjects were patients aged more than 20 years, with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status Ⅰ or II, who were scheduled to undergo video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) or limited thoracotomy because of lung disease. Patients were randomly allocated to receive either a PVB or RLB using a computer-generated sequence and sealed opaque envelopes. The PVB and RLB were induced by injecting 20 mL of 0.50% ropivacaine and 40 mL 0.25% ropivacaine, respectively. As the primary outcome variable, we considered the area under the curve (AUC) of the postoperative pain intensity using the trapezoidal method. Pain intensity was assessed using an 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS). We converted the NRS (0-10) into the visual analog scale (VAS) (0-100 mm) proportionally. We compared the AUC of the converted NRS (AUC-cNRS) on coughing between one and two hours after the operation. The non-inferiority margin was set at 25 mm × h in the AUC-cNRS. Patients and nurses were blinded to group assignments. Secondary outcomes included time to perform the block, NRS for pain intensity at rest and on coughing at one, two, four, 24, and 48 hours after the operation, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, time to first morphine use after the operation, and cumulative morphine consumption at 24 and 48 hours after the operation. Results In each group, 25 patients were randomized and analyzed. No significant difference in the AUC-cNRS was noted between the groups (P = 0.117). The mean difference in the AUC-cNRS (group RLB minus group PVB) was 13.42 mm × h, 95% confidence interval, -3.48 to 30.32 mm × h. However, when patients with unexpectedly extended skin incision were excluded from the analysis, the AUC-cNRS of group RLB was significantly higher as compared to group PVB (P = 0.0388). The time to perform the block was longer in PVB as compared to the RLB group (P < 0.0001). No significant differences were noted in the remaining secondary outcomes. Conclusion The non-inferiority of RLB as compared to PVB was not confirmed. Though RLB has the advantage of a shorter time to perform, RLB is not recommended for patients undergoing VATS or limited thoracotomy because of lack of efficacy as compared to PVB.
AbstractList Introduction A retrolaminar block (RLB) is a modified paravertebral technique with a local anesthetic injected at the retrolaminar site. The aim of this non-inferiority, parallel-group, prospective, and randomized study was to compare the analgesic efficacy of the paravertebral block (PVB) and RLB after lung surgery. Methods Eligible subjects were patients aged more than 20 years, with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status Ⅰ or II, who were scheduled to undergo video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) or limited thoracotomy because of lung disease. Patients were randomly allocated to receive either a PVB or RLB using a computer-generated sequence and sealed opaque envelopes. The PVB and RLB were induced by injecting 20 mL of 0.50% ropivacaine and 40 mL 0.25% ropivacaine, respectively. As the primary outcome variable, we considered the area under the curve (AUC) of the postoperative pain intensity using the trapezoidal method. Pain intensity was assessed using an 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS). We converted the NRS (0-10) into the visual analog scale (VAS) (0-100 mm) proportionally. We compared the AUC of the converted NRS (AUC-cNRS) on coughing between one and two hours after the operation. The non-inferiority margin was set at 25 mm × h in the AUC-cNRS. Patients and nurses were blinded to group assignments. Secondary outcomes included time to perform the block, NRS for pain intensity at rest and on coughing at one, two, four, 24, and 48 hours after the operation, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, time to first morphine use after the operation, and cumulative morphine consumption at 24 and 48 hours after the operation. Results In each group, 25 patients were randomized and analyzed. No significant difference in the AUC-cNRS was noted between the groups (P = 0.117). The mean difference in the AUC-cNRS (group RLB minus group PVB) was 13.42 mm × h, 95% confidence interval, -3.48 to 30.32 mm × h. However, when patients with unexpectedly extended skin incision were excluded from the analysis, the AUC-cNRS of group RLB was significantly higher as compared to group PVB (P = 0.0388). The time to perform the block was longer in PVB as compared to the RLB group (P < 0.0001). No significant differences were noted in the remaining secondary outcomes. Conclusion The non-inferiority of RLB as compared to PVB was not confirmed. Though RLB has the advantage of a shorter time to perform, RLB is not recommended for patients undergoing VATS or limited thoracotomy because of lack of efficacy as compared to PVB.
Introduction A retrolaminar block (RLB) is a modified paravertebral technique with a local anesthetic injected at the retrolaminar site. The aim of this non-inferiority, parallel-group, prospective, and randomized study was to compare the analgesic efficacy of the paravertebral block (PVB) and RLB after lung surgery. Methods Eligible subjects were patients aged more than 20 years, with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status Ⅰ or II, who were scheduled to undergo video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) or limited thoracotomy because of lung disease. Patients were randomly allocated to receive either a PVB or RLB using a computer-generated sequence and sealed opaque envelopes. The PVB and RLB were induced by injecting 20 mL of 0.50% ropivacaine and 40 mL 0.25% ropivacaine, respectively. As the primary outcome variable, we considered the area under the curve (AUC) of the postoperative pain intensity using the trapezoidal method. Pain intensity was assessed using an 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS). We converted the NRS (0-10) into the visual analog scale (VAS) (0-100 mm) proportionally. We compared the AUC of the converted NRS (AUC-cNRS) on coughing between one and two hours after the operation. The non-inferiority margin was set at 25 mm × h in the AUC-cNRS. Patients and nurses were blinded to group assignments. Secondary outcomes included time to perform the block, NRS for pain intensity at rest and on coughing at one, two, four, 24, and 48 hours after the operation, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, time to first morphine use after the operation, and cumulative morphine consumption at 24 and 48 hours after the operation. Results In each group, 25 patients were randomized and analyzed. No significant difference in the AUC-cNRS was noted between the groups (P = 0.117). The mean difference in the AUC-cNRS (group RLB minus group PVB) was 13.42 mm × h, 95% confidence interval, −3.48 to 30.32 mm × h. However, when patients with unexpectedly extended skin incision were excluded from the analysis, the AUC-cNRS of group RLB was significantly higher as compared to group PVB (P = 0.0388). The time to perform the block was longer in PVB as compared to the RLB group (P < 0.0001). No significant differences were noted in the remaining secondary outcomes. Conclusion The non-inferiority of RLB as compared to PVB was not confirmed. Though RLB has the advantage of a shorter time to perform, RLB is not recommended for patients undergoing VATS or limited thoracotomy because of lack of efficacy as compared to PVB.
Introduction A retrolaminar block (RLB) is a modified paravertebral technique with a local anesthetic injected at the retrolaminar site. The aim of this non-inferiority, parallel-group, prospective, and randomized study was to compare the analgesic efficacy of the paravertebral block (PVB) and RLB after lung surgery. Methods Eligible subjects were patients aged more than 20 years, with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status Ⅰ or II, who were scheduled to undergo video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) or limited thoracotomy because of lung disease. Patients were randomly allocated to receive either a PVB or RLB using a computer-generated sequence and sealed opaque envelopes. The PVB and RLB were induced by injecting 20 mL of 0.50% ropivacaine and 40 mL 0.25% ropivacaine, respectively. As the primary outcome variable, we considered the area under the curve (AUC) of the postoperative pain intensity using the trapezoidal method. Pain intensity was assessed using an 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS). We converted the NRS (0-10) into the visual analog scale (VAS) (0-100 mm) proportionally. We compared the AUC of the converted NRS (AUC-cNRS) on coughing between one and two hours after the operation. The non-inferiority margin was set at 25 mm × h in the AUC-cNRS. Patients and nurses were blinded to group assignments. Secondary outcomes included time to perform the block, NRS for pain intensity at rest and on coughing at one, two, four, 24, and 48 hours after the operation, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, time to first morphine use after the operation, and cumulative morphine consumption at 24 and 48 hours after the operation. Results In each group, 25 patients were randomized and analyzed. No significant difference in the AUC-cNRS was noted between the groups (P = 0.117). The mean difference in the AUC-cNRS (group RLB minus group PVB) was 13.42 mm × h, 95% confidence interval, -3.48 to 30.32 mm × h. However, when patients with unexpectedly extended skin incision were excluded from the analysis, the AUC-cNRS of group RLB was significantly higher as compared to group PVB (P = 0.0388). The time to perform the block was longer in PVB as compared to the RLB group (P < 0.0001). No significant differences were noted in the remaining secondary outcomes. Conclusion The non-inferiority of RLB as compared to PVB was not confirmed. Though RLB has the advantage of a shorter time to perform, RLB is not recommended for patients undergoing VATS or limited thoracotomy because of lack of efficacy as compared to PVB.Introduction A retrolaminar block (RLB) is a modified paravertebral technique with a local anesthetic injected at the retrolaminar site. The aim of this non-inferiority, parallel-group, prospective, and randomized study was to compare the analgesic efficacy of the paravertebral block (PVB) and RLB after lung surgery. Methods Eligible subjects were patients aged more than 20 years, with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status Ⅰ or II, who were scheduled to undergo video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) or limited thoracotomy because of lung disease. Patients were randomly allocated to receive either a PVB or RLB using a computer-generated sequence and sealed opaque envelopes. The PVB and RLB were induced by injecting 20 mL of 0.50% ropivacaine and 40 mL 0.25% ropivacaine, respectively. As the primary outcome variable, we considered the area under the curve (AUC) of the postoperative pain intensity using the trapezoidal method. Pain intensity was assessed using an 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS). We converted the NRS (0-10) into the visual analog scale (VAS) (0-100 mm) proportionally. We compared the AUC of the converted NRS (AUC-cNRS) on coughing between one and two hours after the operation. The non-inferiority margin was set at 25 mm × h in the AUC-cNRS. Patients and nurses were blinded to group assignments. Secondary outcomes included time to perform the block, NRS for pain intensity at rest and on coughing at one, two, four, 24, and 48 hours after the operation, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, time to first morphine use after the operation, and cumulative morphine consumption at 24 and 48 hours after the operation. Results In each group, 25 patients were randomized and analyzed. No significant difference in the AUC-cNRS was noted between the groups (P = 0.117). The mean difference in the AUC-cNRS (group RLB minus group PVB) was 13.42 mm × h, 95% confidence interval, -3.48 to 30.32 mm × h. However, when patients with unexpectedly extended skin incision were excluded from the analysis, the AUC-cNRS of group RLB was significantly higher as compared to group PVB (P = 0.0388). The time to perform the block was longer in PVB as compared to the RLB group (P < 0.0001). No significant differences were noted in the remaining secondary outcomes. Conclusion The non-inferiority of RLB as compared to PVB was not confirmed. Though RLB has the advantage of a shorter time to perform, RLB is not recommended for patients undergoing VATS or limited thoracotomy because of lack of efficacy as compared to PVB.
Author Yukihito Sato
Shiro Tanaka
Takuji Sugiyama
Miki Hino
Yuki Kataoka
Kazuo Shindo
Kazumi Itoi
AuthorAffiliation 5 Department of Clinical Biostatistics, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, JPN
2 Hospital Care Research Unit, Hyogo Prefectural Amagasaki General Medical Center, Amagasaki, JPN
1 Department of Anesthesia, Hyogo Prefectural Amagasaki General Medical Center, Amagasaki, JPN
3 Department of Respiratory Surgery, Hyogo Prefectural Amagasaki General Medical Center, Amagasaki, JPN
4 Department of Cardiology, Hyogo Prefectural Amagasaki General Medical Center, Amagasaki, JPN
AuthorAffiliation_xml – name: 2 Hospital Care Research Unit, Hyogo Prefectural Amagasaki General Medical Center, Amagasaki, JPN
– name: 1 Department of Anesthesia, Hyogo Prefectural Amagasaki General Medical Center, Amagasaki, JPN
– name: 5 Department of Clinical Biostatistics, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, JPN
– name: 3 Department of Respiratory Surgery, Hyogo Prefectural Amagasaki General Medical Center, Amagasaki, JPN
– name: 4 Department of Cardiology, Hyogo Prefectural Amagasaki General Medical Center, Amagasaki, JPN
Author_xml – sequence: 1
  givenname: Takuji
  surname: Sugiyama
  fullname: Sugiyama, Takuji
– sequence: 2
  givenname: Yuki
  surname: Kataoka
  fullname: Kataoka, Yuki
– sequence: 3
  givenname: Kazuo
  surname: Shindo
  fullname: Shindo, Kazuo
– sequence: 4
  givenname: Miki
  surname: Hino
  fullname: Hino, Miki
– sequence: 5
  givenname: Kazumi
  surname: Itoi
  fullname: Itoi, Kazumi
– sequence: 6
  givenname: Yukihito
  surname: Sato
  fullname: Sato, Yukihito
– sequence: 7
  givenname: Shiro
  surname: Tanaka
  fullname: Tanaka, Shiro
BackLink https://cir.nii.ac.jp/crid/1872835442735553792$$DView record in CiNii
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33815997$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed
BookMark eNqFUcFu1DAUtFARLaU3zsgHDhya4thxHHNAWlYFKq0ALYVr5DjPi4XXXuxk0fYj-Ga8ZIGChLj4PfnNm_GM76MjHzwg9LAkF0Jw-VSPEcZ0UTIuxR10Qsu6KZqyqY5u9cfoLCXbkaquSy65uIeOGWtyK8UJ-raEIQan1tariF-4oD_jjxDTmPA7FdUW4gBdVO4wMiHme-vxEpwFg2dmgIgXkFJx5bcq2S3gxehX-P0YVxB3z_AML5Xvw9reQH-O3wSfgQaiDdEOOzwPfi_voMfX0Sr3AN01yiU4O9RT9OHl5fX8dbF4--pqPlsUuiJyKHgFneHEaMpZz3teMs0qWdHsFhhwDpT0RgkjWJ8r72ujNIOq66XpjOw6doqKiXf0G7X7qpxrN9GuVdy1JWn30bZTtO2PaDP--YTfjN0aeg352er3TlC2_XPi7ad2FbZtQ4hgjGaCJweCGL6MkIZ2bZMG55SHkGUoJ00jCZF1hj66rfVL5OenZQCdADqGlCKYVttBDXafpbLuXw7O_1r6j-HHE9xbm-n3Z9kI2jBeVVQwzjkTkrLvuM_LFQ
CitedBy_id crossref_primary_10_7759_cureus_15283
crossref_primary_10_1007_s00586_024_08219_4
crossref_primary_10_1186_s12885_021_08938_7
crossref_primary_10_18663_tjcl_1004686
crossref_primary_10_32322_jhsm_1148292
crossref_primary_10_1001_jamasurg_2023_5228
crossref_primary_10_23736_S0375_9393_23_17466_9
crossref_primary_10_7759_cureus_15614
Cites_doi 10.1093/bja/82.2.221
10.1007/s00101-005-0969-0
10.1007/s12630-013-9983-x
10.1016/s0039-6109(05)70388-1
10.1093/bja/aei250
10.1111/anae.12296
10.1097/00000542-199409000-00028
10.1213/ANE.0b013e3181c35906
10.1093/bja/87.4.564
10.1002/14651858.CD009121.pub2
10.1097/00002508-199603000-00009
10.1016/j.jclinane.2010.12.015
10.1093/bja/ael020
10.1093/bja/aep272
10.1016/S0003-4975(98)00448-2
10.1053/j.jvca.2011.04.010
10.1213/01.ane.0000333274.63501.ff
10.1053/j.jvca.2011.09.008
10.1016/j.athoracsur.2004.11.051
10.1111/j.1365-2044.2004.03705.x
10.1097/ALN.0000436117.52143.bc
ContentType Journal Article
Copyright Copyright © 2021, Sugiyama et al.
Copyright © 2021, Sugiyama et al. 2021 Sugiyama et al.
Copyright_xml – notice: Copyright © 2021, Sugiyama et al.
– notice: Copyright © 2021, Sugiyama et al. 2021 Sugiyama et al.
DBID RYH
AAYXX
CITATION
NPM
7X8
5PM
ADTOC
UNPAY
DOI 10.7759/cureus.13597
DatabaseName CiNii Complete
CrossRef
PubMed
MEDLINE - Academic
PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)
Unpaywall for CDI: Periodical Content
Unpaywall
DatabaseTitle CrossRef
PubMed
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitleList PubMed

MEDLINE - Academic
Database_xml – sequence: 1
  dbid: NPM
  name: PubMed
  url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed
  sourceTypes: Index Database
– sequence: 2
  dbid: UNPAY
  name: Unpaywall
  url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=https://unpaywall.org/
  sourceTypes: Open Access Repository
DeliveryMethod fulltext_linktorsrc
Discipline Medicine
EISSN 2168-8184
ExternalDocumentID 10.7759/cureus.13597
PMC8007332
33815997
10_7759_cureus_13597
Genre Journal Article
GroupedDBID 53G
5VS
7X7
8FI
8FJ
ABUWG
ADBBV
AFKRA
ALIPV
ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS
AOIJS
BCNDV
BENPR
BPHCQ
BVXVI
CCPQU
FYUFA
HMCUK
HYE
KQ8
M48
PGMZT
PHGZM
PHGZT
PIMPY
PQQKQ
PROAC
RPM
RYH
UKHRP
AAYXX
CITATION
PUEGO
3V.
GROUPED_DOAJ
NPM
OK1
7X8
5PM
ADRAZ
ADTOC
UNPAY
ID FETCH-LOGICAL-c409t-54ebf50fc253d5d513c34942184e3e55e20dfa7f73ddfa5d6fac3e4bd9fbf9bb3
IEDL.DBID M48
ISSN 2168-8184
IngestDate Sun Oct 26 04:11:07 EDT 2025
Tue Sep 30 16:56:32 EDT 2025
Fri Sep 05 06:29:47 EDT 2025
Thu Jan 02 22:57:14 EST 2025
Thu Apr 24 22:56:37 EDT 2025
Wed Oct 01 03:21:44 EDT 2025
Fri Jun 27 00:16:53 EDT 2025
IsDoiOpenAccess true
IsOpenAccess true
IsPeerReviewed true
IsScholarly true
Issue 2
Keywords paravertebral block
retrolaminar block
lung surgery
postoperative pain
Language English
License Copyright © 2021, Sugiyama et al.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
cc-by
LinkModel DirectLink
MergedId FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c409t-54ebf50fc253d5d513c34942184e3e55e20dfa7f73ddfa5d6fac3e4bd9fbf9bb3
Notes ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ORCID 0000-0001-7982-5213
OpenAccessLink http://journals.scholarsportal.info/openUrl.xqy?doi=10.7759/cureus.13597
PMID 33815997
PQID 2508890096
PQPubID 23479
ParticipantIDs unpaywall_primary_10_7759_cureus_13597
pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8007332
proquest_miscellaneous_2508890096
pubmed_primary_33815997
crossref_citationtrail_10_7759_cureus_13597
crossref_primary_10_7759_cureus_13597
nii_cinii_1872835442735553792
ProviderPackageCode CITATION
AAYXX
PublicationCentury 2000
PublicationDate 2021-02-27
2021-2-27
2021-Feb-27
20210227
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD 2021-02-27
PublicationDate_xml – month: 02
  year: 2021
  text: 2021-02-27
  day: 27
PublicationDecade 2020
PublicationPlace United States
PublicationPlace_xml – name: United States
– name: Palo Alto (CA)
PublicationTitle Cureus
PublicationTitleAlternate Cureus
PublicationYear 2021
Publisher Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Cureus
Publisher_xml – name: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
– name: Cureus
References Kruger M (ref20) 1999; 79
Naja MZ (ref19) 2004; 59
Abdallah FW (ref14) 2014; 120
Perttunen K (ref2) 1999; 82
O Riain SC (ref13) 2010; 110
Yeung JHY (ref8) 2016; 2
Davies RG (ref3) 2006; 96
Voscopoulos C (ref10) 2013; 60
Katz J (ref21) 1996; 12
Kaya FN (ref15) 2012; 26
Kaiser AM (ref17) 1998; 66
Joshi G (ref6) 2008; 107
Vogt A (ref16) 2005; 95
Zeballos JL (ref12) 2013; 68
Kotzé A (ref4) 2009; 103
Pfeiffer G (ref9) 2006; 55
Detterbeck FC (ref7) 2005; 80
Jüttner T (ref11) 2011; 23
Kaplowitz J (ref5) 2012; 26
Boisseau N (ref18) 2001; 87
Kavanagh BP (ref1) 1994; 81
References_xml – volume: 82
  year: 1999
  ident: ref2
  article-title: I.v. diclofenac and ketorolac for pain after thoracoscopic surgery
  publication-title: Br J Anaesth
  doi: 10.1093/bja/82.2.221
– volume: 55
  year: 2006
  ident: ref9
  article-title: Analgesia of the axilla using a paravertebral catheter in the lamina technique
  publication-title: Anaesthesist
  doi: 10.1007/s00101-005-0969-0
– volume: 60
  year: 2013
  ident: ref10
  article-title: The ultrasound-guided retrolaminar block
  publication-title: Can J Anesth
  doi: 10.1007/s12630-013-9983-x
– volume: 79
  year: 1999
  ident: ref20
  article-title: Pain management in cardiothoracic practice
  publication-title: Surg Clin North Am
  doi: 10.1016/s0039-6109(05)70388-1
– volume: 95
  year: 2005
  ident: ref16
  article-title: Single-injection thoracic paravertebral block for postoperative pain treatment after thoracoscopic surgery
  publication-title: Br J Anaesth
  doi: 10.1093/bja/aei250
– volume: 68
  year: 2013
  ident: ref12
  article-title: Ultrasound-guided retrolaminar paravertebral block
  publication-title: Anaesthesia
  doi: 10.1111/anae.12296
– volume: 81
  year: 1994
  ident: ref1
  article-title: Pain control after thoracic surgery. A review of current techniques
  publication-title: Anesthesiology
  doi: 10.1097/00000542-199409000-00028
– volume: 110
  year: 2010
  ident: ref13
  article-title: Thoracic paravertebral block using real-time ultrasound guidance
  publication-title: Anesth Analg
  doi: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e3181c35906
– volume: 87
  year: 2001
  ident: ref18
  article-title: Improvement of ‘dynamic analgesia’ does not decrease atelectasis after thoracotomy
  publication-title: Br J Anaesth
  doi: 10.1093/bja/87.4.564
– volume: 2
  year: 2016
  ident: ref8
  article-title: Paravertebral block versus thoracic epidural for patients undergoing thoracotomy
  publication-title: Cochrane Database Syst Rev
  doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009121.pub2
– volume: 12
  year: 1996
  ident: ref21
  article-title: Acute pain after thoracic surgery predicts long-term post-thoracotomy pain
  publication-title: Clin J Pain
  doi: 10.1097/00002508-199603000-00009
– volume: 23
  year: 2011
  ident: ref11
  article-title: The paravertebral lamina technique: a new regional anesthesia approach for breast surgery
  publication-title: J Clin Anesth
  doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2010.12.015
– volume: 96
  year: 2006
  ident: ref3
  article-title: A comparison of the analgesic efficacy and side-effects of paravertebral vs epidural blockade for thoracotomy - a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials
  publication-title: Br J Anaesth
  doi: 10.1093/bja/ael020
– volume: 103
  year: 2009
  ident: ref4
  article-title: Efficacy and safety of different techniques of paravertebral block for analgesia after thoracotomy: a systematic review and metaregression
  publication-title: Br J Anaesth
  doi: 10.1093/bja/aep272
– volume: 66
  year: 1998
  ident: ref17
  article-title: Prospective, randomized comparison of extrapleural versus epidural analgesia for postthoracotomy pain
  publication-title: Ann Thorac Surg
  doi: 10.1016/S0003-4975(98)00448-2
– volume: 26
  year: 2012
  ident: ref5
  article-title: Acute pain management for video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery: an update
  publication-title: J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth
  doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2011.04.010
– volume: 107
  year: 2008
  ident: ref6
  article-title: A systematic review of randomized trials evaluating regional techniques for postthoracotomy analgesia
  publication-title: Anesth Analg
  doi: 10.1213/01.ane.0000333274.63501.ff
– volume: 26
  year: 2012
  ident: ref15
  article-title: Thoracic paravertebral block for video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery: single injection versus multiple injections
  publication-title: J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth
  doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2011.09.008
– volume: 80
  year: 2005
  ident: ref7
  article-title: Efficacy of methods of intercostal nerve blockade for pain relief after thoracotomy
  publication-title: Ann Thorac Surg
  doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2004.11.051
– volume: 59
  year: 2004
  ident: ref19
  article-title: Varying anatomical injection points within the thoracic paravertebral space: effect on spread of solution and nerve blockade
  publication-title: Anaesthesia
  doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2004.03705.x
– volume: 120
  year: 2014
  ident: ref14
  article-title: Ultrasound-guided multilevel paravertebral blocks and total intravenous anesthesia improve the quality of recovery after ambulatory breast tumor resection
  publication-title: Anesthesiology
  doi: 10.1097/ALN.0000436117.52143.bc
SSID ssib046615957
ssj0001072070
Score 2.2475705
Snippet Introduction A retrolaminar block (RLB) is a modified paravertebral technique with a local anesthetic injected at the retrolaminar site. The aim of this...
SourceID unpaywall
pubmedcentral
proquest
pubmed
crossref
nii
SourceType Open Access Repository
Aggregation Database
Index Database
Enrichment Source
Publisher
StartPage e13597
SubjectTerms Anesthesiology
Cardiac/Thoracic/Vascular Surgery
SummonAdditionalLinks – databaseName: Unpaywall
  dbid: UNPAY
  link: http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMw1V1bb9MwFLa2ToIn7owihowEvIC7Jo5z4a1MTBvaqqmsaDxVji8iWkirtAGxH8HP4a_wdzgncULHTbzykkix43yxju3zyZ_PIeQx8LNY2EQyXwkfCApXLNVgy9KGdsilin2LO7rH4_BgGrw-E2cb5Gt7FgZllaoqTdVM0606bFd4sDKz0qB6W6JIpGQpzPbnDMUL1ZJhoGxMYIy7rbkrAq8PnmcFvAb-nGV11m0GrS1ZVnyUKA9nOQwptmxOIDPJYH3Q8w_ZhdEM2DdDQVSZzTGNHHPS8RyK6oQag4W2m2QrFMABemRrOj4ZvcNMdl4YM1gFg0ZlH0Ui2XU_5HGBsaXW1r_NIst-59r-qtC8WhUL-fmTzPO15W__OvnWdlyjejkfVKt0oC5-iin5__XsDXLNeeR01CC9STZMcYtcOXaag9vky2QNNH2JyOjbGjQ9WQftigA0PM8KOqlB0xGCpkcI-tCBpkcAmr5pQL-gIzrpUD-nY4B9-AM23etg01OEfYdM91-d7h0wl8WCKeDOKyYCk1oxtMoXXAstPK4wJBBSa8ONEMYfaisjG3ENd6FDKxU3QaoTm9okTfld0oMeM_cI9RKlIxg-sQaSG2gfj0kDZbbDBLO-Kd0nz1rbmikX4h0zjeQzoHpoibPGAGa1JfbJk672oglt8od6O2Cm0CBevTjCCH1BAG6vEIJHid8nj1oDnsHchBtOsjBzeN1H7z9Bltwn241Bd1_i4CqKBFuPLpl6VwHjnl8uKbL3dfzzuM40Ct992g2Kv_7A_X-t-ID0VmVldsDNXKUP3Zj-Drv4lgg
  priority: 102
  providerName: Unpaywall
Title Retrolaminar Block Versus Paravertebral Block for Pain Relief After Less-Invasive Lung Surgery: A Randomized, Non-Inferiority Controlled Trial
URI https://cir.nii.ac.jp/crid/1872835442735553792
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33815997
https://www.proquest.com/docview/2508890096
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC8007332
https://www.cureus.com/articles/51600-retrolaminar-block-versus-paravertebral-block-for-pain-relief-after-less-invasive-lung-surgery-a-randomized-non-inferiority-controlled-trial.pdf
UnpaywallVersion publishedVersion
Volume 13
hasFullText 1
inHoldings 1
isFullTextHit
isPrint
journalDatabaseRights – providerCode: PRVAFT
  databaseName: Open Access Digital Library
  customDbUrl:
  eissn: 2168-8184
  dateEnd: 99991231
  omitProxy: true
  ssIdentifier: ssj0001072070
  issn: 2168-8184
  databaseCode: KQ8
  dateStart: 20150101
  isFulltext: true
  titleUrlDefault: http://grweb.coalliance.org/oadl/oadl.html
  providerName: Colorado Alliance of Research Libraries
– providerCode: PRVAFT
  databaseName: Open Access Digital Library
  customDbUrl:
  eissn: 2168-8184
  dateEnd: 99991231
  omitProxy: true
  ssIdentifier: ssj0001072070
  issn: 2168-8184
  databaseCode: KQ8
  dateStart: 20120101
  isFulltext: true
  titleUrlDefault: http://grweb.coalliance.org/oadl/oadl.html
  providerName: Colorado Alliance of Research Libraries
– providerCode: PRVAQN
  databaseName: PubMed Central
  customDbUrl:
  eissn: 2168-8184
  dateEnd: 99991231
  omitProxy: true
  ssIdentifier: ssj0001072070
  issn: 2168-8184
  databaseCode: RPM
  dateStart: 20120101
  isFulltext: true
  titleUrlDefault: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/
  providerName: National Library of Medicine
– providerCode: PRVPQU
  databaseName: ProQuest Central
  customDbUrl: http://www.proquest.com/pqcentral?accountid=15518
  eissn: 2168-8184
  dateEnd: 99991231
  omitProxy: true
  ssIdentifier: ssj0001072070
  issn: 2168-8184
  databaseCode: BENPR
  dateStart: 20120101
  isFulltext: true
  titleUrlDefault: https://www.proquest.com/central
  providerName: ProQuest
– providerCode: PRVPQU
  databaseName: ProQuest Health & Medical Collection
  customDbUrl:
  eissn: 2168-8184
  dateEnd: 99991231
  omitProxy: true
  ssIdentifier: ssj0001072070
  issn: 2168-8184
  databaseCode: 7X7
  dateStart: 20120101
  isFulltext: true
  titleUrlDefault: https://search.proquest.com/healthcomplete
  providerName: ProQuest
– providerCode: PRVFZP
  databaseName: Scholars Portal Journals: Open Access
  customDbUrl:
  eissn: 2168-8184
  dateEnd: 20250930
  omitProxy: true
  ssIdentifier: ssj0001072070
  issn: 2168-8184
  databaseCode: M48
  dateStart: 20121101
  isFulltext: true
  titleUrlDefault: http://journals.scholarsportal.info
  providerName: Scholars Portal
link http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwjV1Lb9NAEF41rQS9IN4EaLRI0Au4OGtv1uaC0qpVQU0UhUYKJ2u9D2HVrFMnAcqP4DczYzsRUQviYsv2ev2YWc83ntn5CHkJ_lnEbSw9pjgDByVQXqpBl6XtWT-QKmIWI7qDYe90En6c8ukWWeXPNy9wfqNrh3xSkzI_-HF59R4GPODXAyF4_FYtS7OcI4NDLPZnlx5SSmHoteHXaJEdMFsx8joMGuxf_YDxBfMrMjnW7UUeGK6wToy_1ueGyWq5LLsJjV5Pqry9dDN59V3m-R8W6-QuudNATdqvdeMe2TLuPrk1aILpD8ivscEsdYnJMCU9BKt2QfH32XJORxJZicoFRpXz5hCgW9ifOYpZzMbSPrKL0zP4Unof3DeJafD0DD4d9FM90_od7dOxdLr4mv00-g0dFg4aWtD4Agnz6FGdJJ8bTc9xFDwkk5Pj86NTr6Fn8BS8zoXHQ5Na7lvFeKC55t1AYa0b9BlNYDg3zNdWCisCDWuue1aqwISpjm1q4zQNHpFtVzjzhNBurLQAvYg0eG-hZjj_F3xB68dIZ6Z0m7xeSSBRTe1ypNDIE_BhUF5JLa-kklebvFq3ntU1O_7Sbg-ECR3ishsJLD0XhoDnOOeBiFmbvFiJOYFBh5EU6UwBpzOEtTG6f23yuBb7-krg8wNExN7FhkKsG2BB780jLvtSFfaOKgpNuO7-WnX--QBP_-MGn5Fdhmk4OAtfPCfbi3Jp9gBHLdIOaYmp6JCdw-PhaNypRgdsTYaj_uffWxEk9g
linkProvider Scholars Portal
linkToUnpaywall http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMw1V1bb9MwFLa2ToIn7owihowEvIC7Jo5z4a1MTBvaqqmsaDxVji8iWkirtAGxH8HP4a_wdzgncULHTbzykkix43yxju3zyZ_PIeQx8LNY2EQyXwkfCApXLNVgy9KGdsilin2LO7rH4_BgGrw-E2cb5Gt7FgZllaoqTdVM0606bFd4sDKz0qB6W6JIpGQpzPbnDMUL1ZJhoGxMYIy7rbkrAq8PnmcFvAb-nGV11m0GrS1ZVnyUKA9nOQwptmxOIDPJYH3Q8w_ZhdEM2DdDQVSZzTGNHHPS8RyK6oQag4W2m2QrFMABemRrOj4ZvcNMdl4YM1gFg0ZlH0Ui2XU_5HGBsaXW1r_NIst-59r-qtC8WhUL-fmTzPO15W__OvnWdlyjejkfVKt0oC5-iin5__XsDXLNeeR01CC9STZMcYtcOXaag9vky2QNNH2JyOjbGjQ9WQftigA0PM8KOqlB0xGCpkcI-tCBpkcAmr5pQL-gIzrpUD-nY4B9-AM23etg01OEfYdM91-d7h0wl8WCKeDOKyYCk1oxtMoXXAstPK4wJBBSa8ONEMYfaisjG3ENd6FDKxU3QaoTm9okTfld0oMeM_cI9RKlIxg-sQaSG2gfj0kDZbbDBLO-Kd0nz1rbmikX4h0zjeQzoHpoibPGAGa1JfbJk672oglt8od6O2Cm0CBevTjCCH1BAG6vEIJHid8nj1oDnsHchBtOsjBzeN1H7z9Bltwn241Bd1_i4CqKBFuPLpl6VwHjnl8uKbL3dfzzuM40Ct992g2Kv_7A_X-t-ID0VmVldsDNXKUP3Zj-Drv4lgg
openUrl ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Retrolaminar+Block+Versus+Paravertebral+Block+for+Pain+Relief+After+Less-Invasive+Lung+Surgery%3A+A+Randomized%2C+Non-Inferiority+Controlled+Trial&rft.jtitle=Cur%C4%93us+%28Palo+Alto%2C+CA%29&rft.au=Sugiyama%2C+Takuji&rft.au=Kataoka%2C+Yuki&rft.au=Shindo%2C+Kazuo&rft.au=Hino%2C+Miki&rft.date=2021-02-27&rft.issn=2168-8184&rft.eissn=2168-8184&rft.volume=13&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=e13597&rft_id=info:doi/10.7759%2Fcureus.13597&rft.externalDBID=NO_FULL_TEXT
thumbnail_l http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=2168-8184&client=summon
thumbnail_m http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=2168-8184&client=summon
thumbnail_s http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=2168-8184&client=summon