Purpose Various analgesic modalities are adopted for perioperative analgesia in breast cancer surgeries. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of intravenous morphine versus serratus anterior plane block (SAPB) and erector spinae plane block (ESPB) in breast cancer surgeries. Patients and Methods Seventy-five breast cancer patients undergoing modified radical mastectomy from January 2020 to June 2020 were randomly allocated into 3 groups; the morphine group received morphine 0.1 mg/kg, the SAPB group received ultrasound-guided SAPB with 25 mL bupivacaine 0.25% and the ESPB group received ultrasound-guided ESPB with 25 mL bupivacaine 0.25%. A visual analogue scale (VAS) 0–10 was used to evaluate pain postoperatively, where 0 denotes no pain and 10 worst pain. If any patient in the 3 studied groups reported breakthrough pain with VAS ≥ 4 then a bolus of 3 mg morphine was given. Results There was no difference in VAS scores between the 3 groups postoperatively. Morphine consumption was higher in the morphine group (9.19 ± 2.32 mg) than the SAPB group (4.00 ± 1.55 mg) and the ESPB group (4.20 ± 1.64 mg), respectively. First time to receive postoperative morphine was significantly longer for the ESPB and SAPB groups than the morphine group (20.40 ± 4.98 hours), (19.00 ± 5.9 hours), (5.00 ± 4.62 hours), respectively. Intraoperative hemodynamics and fentanyl consumption showed no difference between groups, whereas postoperative mean arterial blood pressure values at 2 and 4 hours were higher in the morphine group. Ramsay sedation score and postoperative nausea and vomiting values in the post anesthesia care unit were higher for the morphine group compared to the SAPB and ESPB groups. No complications related to the blocks were reported. Conclusion SAPB and ESPB can be used as an effective and safe alternative to opioids with fewer side effects in breast cancer patients undergoing modified radical mastectomy. Trial Registration This trial was prospectively registered at Clinical Trials.gov on 22 January 2020 with registration number NCT04248608 ( https://register.clinicaltrials.gov/prs/app/action/SelectProtocol?sid=S0009JS5&selectaction=Edit&uid=U0004LIG&ts=7&cx=−81xkwa ).

No abstract

Background: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is highly sensitive to motion, resulting in artifacts and lowering image quality. Laryngeal mask airway (LMA) provides numerous advantages over endotracheal tubes as it reduces laryngospasm, coughing, and the risk of postoperative desaturation. Objectives: We aimed to compare LMA with oral airway for airway management during brain MRI in terms of reducing motion artifacts, which can improve image quality. Methods: This randomized, controlled, double-blind trial was carried out on 40 pediatrics aged 1 - 18 years, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status І and П undergoing brain MRI. Patients were randomized into two equal groups according to the airway method, the control (Guedel oral airway) group and the LMA group. A compatible anesthesia machine was used to provide O2 and sevoflurane 2% - 4%. Results: The mean MRI image quality score was significantly higher in the LMA group than in the control group (26.10 ± 3.97 versus 18.60 ± 5.30, P < 0.001). Mean arterial blood pressure and heart rate were significantly lower in the LMA group than in the control group at all study times except at baseline and immediate post-extubation (P < 0.05). Cough was significantly lower in LMA than in the control group (15% vs. 50%, P = 0.040). Airway complications (sore throat, laryngeal spasm, and bronchospasm), nausea, and vomiting did not have a significantly different between the two groups. Conclusions: Compared to Guedel oral airway, using LMA for airway management in pediatrics undergoing MRI scans improved the image quality with less cough and better hemodynamics.