Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
To the Editor,
By conducting a randomized controlled trial in patients who underwent thoracoscopic lung cancer radical surgery, Xu et al. [1] compared the postoperative analgesic efficacy of ultrasound-guided and thoracoscopy-guided thoracic paravertebral block (TPB) and showed that the thoracoscopy-guided technique needed a shorter procedure time, achieved a higher success rate on the first puncture, and provided more block segments and a longer block duration compared with the ultrasound-guided method. Other than the limitations described by the authors in the discussion section, we noted several issues in this study which would have made the interpretation of their results questionable.
First, the primary outcomes were the procedure time and the success rate on the first puncture for the TPB. In the methods, the authors did not clearly describe if the experience of the anesthesiologist and surgeon who participated in the study in performing the TPB was comparable. To compare effects of different interventions on primary outcomes by a randomized controlled trial, it is essential that the participants are equally proficient with each studied technique to avoid potential bias. We are concerned that an unbalanced experience of anesthesiologist and surgeon in carrying out the TPB would have biased the primary outcomes in favor of the thoracoscopy-guided technique.
Second, this study applied an opioid-dominated postoperative analgesic strategy, that is, patient-controlled intravenously administered sufentanil analgesia with a continuous background infusion dose. Furthermore, a nonopioid basic analgesic, parecoxib, was intramuscularly administered for rescue analgesia when postoperative pain score was greater than five or pain became intolerable. This design does not meet the requirements of the current enhanced recovery after surgery practices for thoracoscopic surgery, in which minimum use of opioid drugs is one of main goals and a multimodal opioid-sparing analgesic strategy is recommended [2]. Although the optimal analgesic combinations remain to be determined, the cornerstone of a multimodal opioid-sparing analgesic strategy is always a series of nonopioid basic analgesics with different mechanisms, such as acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, cyclooxygenase-2 specific inhibitors, and others. Furthermore, a combination of nonopioid basic analgesics should be administered as scheduled dosing perioperatively, while opioid analgesics should be administered only as rescue on an “as needed” basis when nonopioid basic analgesics are ineffective or contraindicated [3]. Thus, this design issue may have hindered the generalization of their findings to the current enhanced recovery after surgery practices for thoracoscopic surgery. Most importantly, the authors did not report the total opioid consumption and dosages of rescue parecoxib in the two groups. In the absence of comparison of postoperative analgesic dosages, we argue that the secondary outcomes and their subsequent conclusions, such as postoperative pain scores, duration of regional blocks, and occurrence of adverse events, should be interpreted with caution, as they may have been measured by incomplete methodology.
Finally, the procedure time of the TPB was significantly shortened with the thoracoscopy-guided technique, but the mean between-group difference of procedure time only was 3.5 min. This difference may be statistically significant but clinically insignificant. Moreover, unlike other previous works comparing the performance of different regional blocks [4, 5], this study did not assess the ease of performing the two blocks, though it could be rapidly completed by the operators using a 5-point Likert scale: 1, very difficult; 2, difficult; 3, neutral; 4, easy; and 5, very easy. Thus, we do not agree with the authors’ conclusion that the thoracoscopy-guided technique for the TPB is simpler and more convenient than the ultrasound-guided method.
Data Availability
Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.
References
Xu X, Xie YX, Zhang M, Du JH, He JX, Hu LH. Comparison of thoracoscopy-guided thoracic paravertebral block and ultrasound-guided thoracic paravertebral block in postoperative analgesia of thoracoscopic lung cancer radical surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Pain Ther. 2024;13(3):577–88.
Semenkovich TR, Hudson JL, Subramanian M, Kozower BD. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in thoracic surgery. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2018;30(3):342–9.
Joshi GP. Regional analgesia as the core component of multimodal analgesia technique: current controversies and future directions. J Clin Anesth. 2024;92:111227.
Khot PP, Desai SN, Bale SP, Aradhya BN. Comparison of ultrasound-guided paravertebral block versus erector spinae plane block for postoperative analgesia after percutaneous nephrolithotomy—a randomised, double-blind, controlled study. Indian J Anaesth. 2023;67(12):1110–5.
Fouad AZ, Abdel-Aal IRM, Gadelrab MRMA, Mohammed HMES. Ultrasound-guided transversalis fascia plane block versus transmuscular quadratus lumborum block for post-operative analgesia in inguinal hernia repair. Korean J Pain. 2021;34(2):201–9.
Authorship
All named authors meet the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) criteria for authorship for this article, take responsibility for the integrity of the work as a whole, and have given their approval for this version to be published.
Funding
No funding or sponsorship was received for this study or publication of this article.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Conceptualization: Dan-Feng Wang, Fu-Shan Xue, Dao-Yi Lin; Analysis of data: Dan-Feng Wang, Fu-Shan Xue, Dao-Yi Lin; Drafting of paper: Dan-Feng Wang; Review/approval of final paper: all authors.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
Dan-Feng Wang, Fu-Shan Xue and Dao-Yi Lin declare that they have no conflict of interest for this work.
Ethical Approval
This article is based on a previously conducted study and does not contain any study with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Wang, DF., Xue, FS. & Lin, DY. Letter to the Editor Regarding “Comparison of Thoracoscopy-Guided Thoracic Paravertebral Block and Ultrasound-Guided Thoracic Paravertebral Block in Postoperative Analgesia of Thoracoscopic Lung Cancer Radical Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial”. Pain Ther (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40122-024-00637-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40122-024-00637-y