Skip to main content

Serratus anterior plane block for cardiothoracic surgeries: a meta-analysis of randomized trials

Abstract

Background

Comparison of serratus anterior plane block to different analgesic methods for anterolateral thoracic wall incisions. Meta-analysis was used to address this concern. Authors systemically searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane databases to identify all published randomized and prospective clinical trials, comparing the SAPB with other methods that used for analgesia in different thoracic surgical procedures and trauma.

Results

Ten studies were identified for inclusion in this study, involving a total of 735 patients. Meta-analysis showed that, compared with thoracic wall analgesia and PCA methods, the SAPB group resulted in a significant decrease in pain scores, significant decrease in consumption of analgesic drugs, and a significant decrease in the incidence of nausea and vomiting with no difference in the rate of hypotension.

Conclusions

The use of SAPB in cardiothoracic surgery and trauma is a safe and effective option for thoracic analgesia.

Background

Acute postoperative pain leads to delayed postoperative discharge, increases risk of ileus, impairs pulmonary and immune functions, thromboembolism, myocardial infarction, and may lead to increased length of hospital stay. It is also an essential factor leading to the development of chronic persistent postoperative pain (Garg et al., 2018).

Hence, effective perioperative pain management of patients undergoing thoracic surgery is mandatory. Regional nerve blocks have been considered as one of the modalities for effective perioperative analgesia. They have an opioid-sparing impact and allow early mobilization and early discharge from the hospital. With the advent of ultrasound (U.S.), newer interventions such as fascial plane blocks have been reported for perioperative analgesia in thoracic surgeries (Piccioni et al., 2018).

Before ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia, the range of thoracic wall blocks was mainly confined to three techniques: thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA), thoracic para-vertebral blockade (TPVB), and intercostal nerve blocks (Abd El-Hamid & Azab, 2016). Ultrasound revolutionized regional anesthesia by allowing real-time visualization of anatomical structures, needle advancement, and L.A. spread (Chin, 2019).

The use of the U.S. led to the refinement of existing techniques and the introduction of new ones. Ultrasound has been critical in the development of fascial plane blocks, in which a L.A. is injected directly into a tissue plane rather than directly around nerves. These blocks are believed to work by the passive spread of L.A. to nerves travelling within that tissue plane or adjacent tissue compartments containing nerves (van Geffen & Bruhn, 2017).

The SAPB, Pecs I, and Pecs II were first introduced as safer alternatives to TPVB for breast surgery. It is important to note that the Pecs I and SAP blocks are distinct techniques that target two different fascial planes. In contrast, the Pecs II involves the injection into both of these fascial planes and is, therefore, a combination of both Pecs I block and SAPB block (Williams et al., 2019).

The objective of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the SAPB in the setting of analgesia for antero-lateral thoracic wall incisions of thoracic wall trauma and cardiothoracic surgeries, including open thoracotomy and video-assisted thoracoscope, in comparison to different analgesic modes including intravenous analgesia and different regional methods even as single-shot or continuous infusion of intravenous analgesia or local anesthetic drugs.

Methods

Search strategy and selection criteria

This meta-analysis was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane to identify all published randomized and prospective clinical trials, comparing the SAPB with other methods that used for analgesia in different thoracic surgical procedures. Relevant articles were distinguished using the following search terms: ‘serratus blocks’ and ‘surgery of thoracic or thoraco’. Studies were limited to the human and English language with no date restrictions. The authors also reviewed reference lists of related articles. This article required no approval from the Institutional Review Board.

Exclusion criteria

Studies were excluded if their data were absent or deficient, or the study authors were inaccessible or did not reply if extra data from their trials were required.

Mechanism of serratus anterior plane (SAP) block

The basic SAP block involves LA injection into a fascial plane that may be either superficial to or deep into the serratus anterior muscle the fascial planes between serratus anterior muscle and pectoralis minor or latissimus dorsi muscles, or between serratus anterior muscle and intercostal muscles and ribs are the target area of the block. The boundaries of SAP block are the anterior axillary line and posterior axillary line, and the second to seventh ribs. The lateral cutaneous branches of intercostal nerves are the target nerves of SAP block, with the actual nerves involved being determined largely by the exact point of injection and the volume of injectate. However, the efficacy of the SAP block in thoracotomy and rib fractures suggests that it may also anesthetize deeper structures (Chin, 2019).

Data extraction

Data extraction was undertaken from included randomized trial on the first author, year of publication, study design, sample size, setting, and all outcomes of interest. The primary endpoints of this analysis were pain score at 6, 12, and 24 h. Secondary outcomes included analgesia consumption, the incidence of hypotension, and adverse effects (nausea and vomiting).

Quality assessment and risk of bias

Authors assessed the quality of trials using the risk of bias tool recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration (Higgins et al., 2019). We assigned a high, unclear, or low value to the following items: Random sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding, incomplete outcome data, selective reporting, and other bias. Any disparities were identified and resolved through discussion.

Statistical analysis

We conducted this meta-analysis to pool the results of trials comparing SAPB only with other methods used for thoracic wall block and patient-controlled analgesia using Review Manager (RevMan), Version 5.3. Copenhagen (The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014). The primary outcome was pain score at 6, 12, and 24 h postoperative. Secondary outcomes included analgesia consumption, the incidence of hypotension and adverse effects. We considered that the mean and median were equal for studies reporting only the interquartile range (IQR) for continuous measure outcomes. We calculated the standard deviation (S.D.) from IQR by dividing the IQR by 1.35 (Wan et al., 2014). Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. We used random-effects models to pool results. We calculated risk ratios (R.R.s) for dichotomous outcomes. The mean difference (M.D.) was calculated for continuous outcomes, with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (C.I.s). Statistical significance was defined using a two-sided α of 0.05, and interpretations of clinical significance emphasized C.I.s.

Results

Study selection

The search initially identified 287 articles through database searching and 3 articles through other sources; 210 articles remained after duplicates were removed. After articles screening, 89 articles were excluded, and 121 articles remain. After a full article assessment for eligibility, 13 studies remain. Then, by full-text assessment of the remaining articles, further 3 studies were excluded, as 1 study was a review, and 2 studies have insufficient data. We finally identified 10 eligible randomized trials (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1
figure 1

The overall process of study selection and identification

Characteristics and quality of clinical studies included in the meta-analysis

The studies included in the analysis are detailed in Table 1. Ten studies were identified for inclusion in this study, involving a total of 735 patients. Of which eight were RCTs (Khalil et al., 2017; Ökmen & Ökmen, 2018; Park et al., 2018; Saad et al., 2018; Kim et al., 2018; Semyonov et al., 2019; Lee & Kim, 2019; Reyad et al., 2019). Five trials evaluated the SAPB in the setting of thoracoscopic surgery (Ökmen & Ökmen, 2018; Park et al., 2018; Kim et al., 2018; Lee & Kim, 2019; Hanley et al., 2020), and four trial evaluated the SAPB in thoracotomy (Khalil et al., 2017; Saad et al., 2018; Semyonov et al., 2019; Reyad et al., 2019). One trial evaluated the SAPB in pediatric cardiac surgery (Kaushal et al., 2019). Five of these compared SAPB with IV analgesia alone (Ökmen & Ökmen, 2018; Kim et al., 2018; Semyonov et al., 2019; Lee & Kim, 2019; Reyad et al., 2019); two compared it with TPVB (Saad et al., 2018; Hanley et al., 2020); one compared it with PECS 2 blocks and with intercostal nerve blocks (Kaushal et al., 2019) and one compared it with surgically-placed continuous TPVB (Hanley et al., 2020). Only one study compared it with TEA (Khalil et al., 2017). The risk of bias in the 10 trials was generally low, according to the authors’ assessment (Figs. 2 and 3).

Table 1 Characteristics of included studies
Fig. 2
figure 2

Risk of bias summary

Fig. 3
figure 3

Risk of bias graph

Pain score at 6, 12, and 24 h

The forest plot diagrams (Figs. 4, 5, and 6) showed that compared with methods for thoracic wall analgesia and PCA, the SAPB group result in a significant decrease in pain scores (mean difference = − 1.39 [− 2.24, − 0.54]; 95% CI; I2 = 92%; P = 0.001) (Fig. 4), (mean difference = − 0.59 [− 1.15, − 0.04]; 95% CI; I2 = 88%; P = 0.02) (Fig. 5), and (mean difference = − 0.61 [− 1.14, − 0.07]; 95% CI; I2 = 84%; P = 0.03) (Fig. 6).

Fig. 4
figure 4

Pain score at 6 h

Fig. 5
figure 5

Pain score at 12 h

Fig. 6
figure 6

Pain score at 24 h

Analgesia consumption

The forest plot demonstrates the significant decrease in consumption of analgesic drugs in SAPB group ((mean difference = − 15.3788 − 20.1931, − 10.5645]; 95% CI; I2 = 98%; P = 0.00001) (Fig. 7).

Fig. 7
figure 7

Analgesia consumption

Nausea and vomiting

Application of SABP resulted in a significant decrease in the incidence of N&V (RR = 0.44 [0.26, 0.76] 95% CI; I2 = 7%; P = 0.003) (Fig. 8).

Fig. 8
figure 8

Nausea and vomiting

Incidence of hypotension

Forest plot demonstrates no difference in the incidence of hypotension (RR = 0.80 [0.56, 1.15] 95% CI; I2 = 53%; P = 0.23) (Fig. 9).

Fig. 9
figure 9

Number of patients developed hypotension

Discussion

Various regional anesthetic techniques such as TEA, TPVB, local wound infiltration, and ultrasound-guided fascial plane blocks have been utilized to provide postoperative analgesia in thoracic surgeries. These techniques not only manage acute postoperative pain but also help prevent chronic post-surgical pain (Garg, 2017).

The basic SAPB involves L.A. injection into a fascial plane that may be either superficial or deep into the serratus anterior muscle (Mayes et al., 2016).

The SAPB may be performed anywhere in an area bounded by the anterior axillary line and posterior axillary line, and the second to seventh ribs. Both superficial and deep SAPB primarily target the lateral cutaneous branches of intercostal nerves. The actual nerves involved being determined mainly by the exact point of injection and the volume of injectate (Durant et al., 2017).

However, the efficacy of the SAPB in thoracotomy and rib fractures suggests that it may also anesthetize deeper structures. The long thoracic nerve and thoracodorsal nerve also run in the superficial serratus anterior muscle plane and maybe inadvertently or deliberately anesthetized by a superficial SAPB (Kunio et al., 2018).

The results of this meta-analysis indicate that investigations into the serratus anterior plane block in cardiothoracic surgery and trauma are still at an early stage.

Ten studies were identified for inclusion in this study, involving a total of 735 patients, of which eight were RCTs. Nine trials evaluated the SAPB in the setting of video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (five studies) and thoracotomy (four studies).

One trial evaluated the SAPB in pediatric cardiac surgery. Five of these compared it with IV analgesia alone, and two compared it with the TPVB. One compared it with PECS two blocks and with intercostal nerve blocks and one compared it with surgically placed continuous TPVB. Only one study compared it with TEA.

One study comparing a serratus anterior catheter with a thoracic epidural catheter with levobupivacaine infusion (Khalil et al., 2017), another study assessed SABP as an adjuvant to PCA analgesia (Reyad et al., 2019).

Nevertheless, the available evidence to date is encouraging for the efficacy of SAPB in cardiothoracic surgery.

Regarding the clinical duration of postoperative analgesia in the different trials included in this study, we found that SAPB appears in the region of the first 6 h, 12 h, up to 24 h as adequate analgesia in comparison to different analgesic methods.

As a result of the analgesic benefit of SAPB over the first postoperative 24 h, the total doses of analgesic consumption over the first postoperative day are lower than the other analgesic methods for anterolateral thoracic wall incisions and trauma.

Less analgesic requirements related to SAPB lead to decreased side effects of analgesic consumption, especially nausea and vomiting. Nausea and vomiting are common side effects related to increased opioids consumption as rescue analgesia or related to pain-producing stress gastritis.

Although SAPB is an interfacial plane block with a lack of sympathetic block, there is no difference in hemodynamic changes compared to different analgesic methods.

There were two recent meta-analyses (Zhang et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2020) discussing the role of SAPB after cardiac surgery. The first one by Zhang et al., assessing analgesic Effectiveness of perioperative ultrasound-Guided SAPB combined with general anesthesia in patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery VATS, included one retrospective study and three randomized controlled with just 262 patients. Zhang et al. confirmed the postoperative analgesic effectiveness of ultrasound-guided perioperative SAPB on patients undergoing VATS at different times in the PACU and the ward. Although it had better patient satisfaction with analgesia, the study found no advantage in side effects, chest tube removal, or hospital length of stay (Zhang et al., 2020).

Liu et al. study included eight randomized controlled studies with 542 discussing the postoperative analgesic efficacy of SAPB for thoracic surgery. Liu et al. concluded the SAPB could provide adequate anesthesia for thoracic surgery and reduce postoperative opioids consumption. Also, the SAPB will decrease the side effects of PONV.

Zhang et al. and Liu et al. both confirmed the results of our study. Still, our study included a large number of studies (10 studies) with 735 patients assessing for postoperative analgesia for thoracotomy, VATS, and thoracic wall trauma.

First, these are relatively novel techniques, and we were able to discover only a small number of RCTs involving just over 735 patients. Most of the current literature comprises small, randomized studies, a limited number of studies evaluating continuous regional analgesia blocks.

There are several questions that should be evaluated regarding the safety of SAPB as pleural puncture, risk of hematoma formation, especially in anti-coagulated patients with the assessment of ease of performance of SAPB in comparison to different regional techniques for anterolateral thoracic wall incision.

These questions need more analysis to complete the validity of SAPB as the most effective and safe anterolateral wall regional block.

Finally, many clinically relevant questions have yet to be adequately addressed. These include the first time of rescue analgesia, analgesic consumption, side effects as nausea and vomiting and finally, hemodynamic changes as hypotension offered by SAPB.

Conclusions

Research into the use of serratus anterior plane block in cardiothoracic surgery and trauma is still at an early stage. Nevertheless, the current evidence indicates that this block may be a safe and effective option for anterolateral thoracic analgesia, mainly where more invasive techniques such as TEA or TPVA are not feasible. Further, comparative trials are needed to determine which method offers the optimal benefit-to-risk ratio in specific surgical settings.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

IOR:

Interquartile range (IQR)

L.A.:

Local anesthetics

PACU:

Postanesthesia care unit

PCA:

Patient controlled analgesia

Pecs I:

Pectoral block type 1

Pecs II:

Pectoral block type 2

PONV:

Postoperative nausea and vomiting

RCTs:

Randomized controlled trial

SABP:

Serratus anterior plane block

TEA:

Thoracic epidural analgesia

TPVB:

Thoracic paravertebral blockade (TPVB)

U.S.:

Ultrasound

VATS:

Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery

References

  1. Abd El-Hamid AM, Azab AF (2016) Intraoperative haemodynamic stability and stress response to surgery in patients undergoing thoracotomy: comparison between ultrasound-assisted thoracic paravertebral and epidural block. Egypt J Cardiothorac Anesth 10(2):36–41. https://doi.org/10.4103/1687-9090.192249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Chin KJ (2019) Thoracic wall blocks: from paravertebral to retrolaminar to serratus to erector spinae and back again–a review of the evidence. Best Pract Res Clin Anesthesiol. 33(1):67–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpa.2019.02.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Durant E, Dixon B, Luftig J et al (2017) Ultrasound-guided serratus plane block for E.D. rib fracture pain control. Am J Emerg Med 35(1):197.e3–197.e6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Garg R (2017) Regional anaesthesia in breast cancer: benefits beyond pain. Indian J Anaesth 61(5):369–372. https://doi.org/10.4103/ija.IJA_292_17

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Garg R, Bhan S, Vig S (2018 Apr) Newer regional analgesia interventions (fascial plane blocks) for breast surgeries: Review of literature. Indian J Anaesth 62(4):254–262. https://doi.org/10.4103/ija.IJA_46_18

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Hanley C, Wall T, Bukowska I et al (2020) Ultrasound-guided continuous deep serratus anterior plane block versus continuous thoracic paravertebral block for perioperative analgesia in videoscopic-assisted thoracic surgery. Eur J Pain 24(4):828–838. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejp.1533

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Higgins JP, Savović J, Page MJ, Elbers RG, Sterne JA (2019) Assessing risk of bias in a randomized trial. Cochrane Handb Syst Rev Interv. 23:205–228. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119536604.ch8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Kaushal B, Chauhan S, Saini K, Bhoi D, Bisoi AK, Sangdup T, Khan MA (2019) Comparison of the efficacy of ultrasound-guided serratus anterior plane block, pectoral nerves II block, and intercostal nerve block for the management of postoperative thoracotomy pain after pediatric cardiac surgery. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 33(2):418–425. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.jvca.2018.08.209

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Khalil AE, Abdallah NM, Ghada MB, AHK T (2017) Ultrasound-guided serratus anterior plane block versus thoracic epidural analgesia for thoracotomy pain. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 31(1):152–158. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.jvca.2016.08.023

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kim DH, Oh YJ, Lee JG, Ha D, Chang YJ, Kwak HJ (2018) Efficacy of ultrasound-guided serratus plane block on postoperative quality of recovery and analgesia after video-assisted thoracic surgery: a randomized, triple-blind, placebo-controlled study. Anesth Analg 126(4):1353–1361. https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000002779

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kunio T, Murouchi T, Yamamoto S et al (2018) Spread of injectate in ultrasound-guided serratus plane block: a cadaveric study. JA Clin Rep 4(1):10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40981-018-0147-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Lee J, Kim S (2019) The effects of ultrasound-guided serratus plane block, in combination with general anesthesia, on intraoperative opioid consumption, emergence time, and hemodynamic stability during video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy: a randomized prospective study. Medicine 98(18):e15385. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000015385

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Liu X, Song T, Xu HY, Chen X, Yin P, Zhang J (2020) The serratus anterior plane block for analgesia after thoracic surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trails. Medicine. 99(21):e20286. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000020286

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Mayes J, Davison E, Panahi P, Patten D, Eljelani F, Womack J, Varma M (2016) An anatomical evaluation of the serratus anterior plane block. Anaesthesia 71(9):1064–1069. https://doi.org/10.1111/anae.13549

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Ökmen K, Ökmen BM (2018) Evaluation of the effect of serratus anterior plane block for pain treatment after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery. Anaesth Critic Care Pain Med. 37(4):349–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accpm.2017.09.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Park MH, Kim JA, Ahn HJ, Yang MK, Son HJ, Seong BG (2018) A randomized trial of serratus anterior plane block for analgesia after thoracoscopic surgery. Anaesthesia 73(10):1260–1264. https://doi.org/10.1111/anae.14424

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Piccioni F, Segat M, Falini S, Umari M, Putina O, Cavaliere L, Ragazzi R, Massullo D, Taurchini M, del Naja C, Droghetti A (2018 Mar) Enhanced recovery pathways in thoracic surgery from Italian VATS Group: perioperative analgesia protocols. J Thorac Dis. 10(Suppl 4):S555–S563. https://doi.org/10.21037/jtd.2017.12.86

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Reyad RM, Shaker EH, Ghobrial HZ et al (2019) The impact of ultrasound-guided continuous serratus anterior plane block versus intravenous patient-controlled analgesia on the incidence and severity of post-thoracotomy pain syndrome: a randomized, controlled study. Eur J Pain 24(1):159–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Saad FS, El Baradie SY, Aliem M, Ali MM, Kotb TAM (2018) Ultrasound-guided serratus anterior plane block versus thoracic paravertebral block for perioperative analgesia in thoracotomy. Saudi J Anaesth. 12(4):565–570. https://doi.org/10.4103/sja.SJA_153_18

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Semyonov M, Fedorina E, Grinshpun J, Dubilet M, Refaely Y, Ruderman L, Koyfman L, Friger M, Zlotnik A, Klein M, Brotfain E (2019) Ultrasound-guided serratus anterior plane block for analgesia after thoracic surgery. J Pain Res 12:953–960. https://doi.org/10.2147/JPR.S191263

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. van Geffen GJ, Bruhn J (2017) Continuous peripheral nerve blocks safe practice and management. In: Complications of Regional Anesthesia 2017. Springer, Cham, pp 167–185

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Wan X, Wang W, Liu J, Tong T (2014) Estimating the sample mean and standard deviation from the sample size, median, range and/or interquartile range. BMC Med Res Methodol. 14(1):135. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-14-135

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Williams WH, Heir JS, Sekhon AK (2019) Long-acting local anesthetics for analgesia following thoracic surgery. In: Principles and Practice of Anesthesia for Thoracic Surgery 2019. Springer, Cham, pp 1029–1043

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. Zhang X, Zhang C, Zhou X, Chen W, Li J, Wang H, Liu J (2020) Analgesic effectiveness of perioperative ultrasound-guided serratus anterior plane block combined with general anesthesia in patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Pain Med. 3(10):2412–2422. https://doi.org/10.1093/pm/pnaa125

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Funding

None.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

AM and TA conceived, planned, and designed the study. DH, TA, and BM revised literatures collect the data, and searched for the included clinical trials. AM, BM, and DH assessed the quality, risk of bias of the included trials, and performed the analysis. All authors assessed, wrote, reviewed the manuscript, and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ahmed Mostafa Abd El-Hamid.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

All authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits 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/4.0/.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mostafa, T.A.h., El-Hamid, A.M.A., Abdelgawad, B.M. et al. Serratus anterior plane block for cardiothoracic surgeries: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. Ain-Shams J Anesthesiol 13, 77 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s42077-021-00195-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s42077-021-00195-x

Keywords

  • Serratus anterior plane block
  • Postoperative pain
  • Cardiothoracic surgeries