Annals of Cardiac Anaesthesia Annals of Cardiac Anaesthesia Annals of Cardiac Anaesthesia
Home | About us | Editorial Board | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Archives | Submission | Subscribe | Advertise | Contact | Login 
Users online: 2692 Small font size Default font size Increase font size Print this article Email this article Bookmark this page


    Advanced search

    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  


 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded181    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal


Table of Contents
Year : 2015  |  Volume : 18  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 21-22
The analgesic efficacy of continuous presternal bupivacaine infusion through a single catheter after cardiac surgery: A commentary

Director of Anesthesia, Fortis Hospitals, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India

Click here for correspondence address and email

Date of Web Publication1-Jan-2015

How to cite this article:
Chakravarthy M. The analgesic efficacy of continuous presternal bupivacaine infusion through a single catheter after cardiac surgery: A commentary. Ann Card Anaesth 2015;18:21-2

How to cite this URL:
Chakravarthy M. The analgesic efficacy of continuous presternal bupivacaine infusion through a single catheter after cardiac surgery: A commentary. Ann Card Anaesth [serial online] 2015 [cited 2023 Feb 2];18:21-2. Available from:

Pain relief after cardiothoracic surgery is important, several choices of providing it are available. Either opioid agents (intravenous bolus or infusion or intrathecal), or oral supplements, or neuraxial blocks (paravertebral block, thoracic epidural anesthesia) or intra-pleural local anesthetic are commonly used to achieve this. [1] Sometimes combinations of more than one technique could also be used to augment the action of each other. Side-effects mitigate the free use of one or combinations of techniques. The side-effects may be related to the technique: Epidural hematoma as a result of thoracic epidural anesthesia, [2] accidental intrathecal deposition during paravertebral block [3] or the agents used in providing the pain relief. [4] The use of opioids are associated with side-effects; some serious such as respiratory depression and others less serious, such as nausea, vomiting, itching, and constipation. Despite the potential side-effects, opioids seem to enjoy popularity, due to the ease of their administration; good pain relief and sedation are to be expected from its use. With a view to avoid the side effects and to enhance patient safety, one must look at opioid sparing techniques as well. The opioid sparing techniques are regional anesthetic blocks, intra-pleural local anesthetic deposition and presternal bupivacaine infusion through a catheter in surgical incision. It makes logical sense to use the last of the above mentioned techniques, because the others might cause neuraxial complications. Continuous presternal local anesthetic infusion appears to be an ideal technique at the outset, because it is devoid of complications that occur with the other alternatives-opioids and neuraxial blocks. It is surprising that a technique that looks so perfect has not been studied widely and applied in routine clinical practice. There only a few studies in cardiac surgical population-pediatric cardiac surgery, [5] minimally invasive cardiac surgery [6] and median sternotomy. [7] Surprisingly, the study by Chiu et al. [6] appears to be one of the few studies other than the current study. [8]

The authors of the current manuscript rightly point out that a few aspects of infiltration of local anesthetic in the surgical wound are still debatable. Although many authors showed benefits, [9],[10] Agarwal et al. stopped their study on subcutaneous infiltration of ropivacaine because of unfavorable results. [11] The authors of this work have indicated that subcutaneous infiltration of bupivacaine (for that matter any other local anesthetic) alone might not produce the desired analgesic effect. [8] Infiltration of the anterior cutaneous branch of the intercostal nerves may play an important role in a producing a perfect block. Clinicians desirous of practicing this technique must look at the additional block requirement, before wanting to assess the efficacy of the block. Other adjuvants such as intravenous paracetamol, small doses of opioids and oral anti-inflammatory and analgesic agents should also be considered to produce good postoperative pain relief.

Infiltration of a large quantity of bupivacaine might produce clinically unacceptable levels of bupivacaine in the serum. The authors and similarly Chiu et al. [6] have demonstrated a lack of abnormal serum value of bupivacaine despite continuous infusion of bupivacaine in the presternal areas. Chiu et al. showed serum bupivacaine levels varying from 0.5 ± 0.2 to 0.5 ± 0.5 μg/ml in their study while the authors of this work [8] showed 1.2 ± 0.3-1.7 ± 0.3 μg/ml. Both these studies showed that bupivacaine level were well below the neurologic toxic dose of 4 μg/ml. Adverse cardiac effect due to subcutaneous infiltration does not appear to be common.

Subcutaneous infiltration of local anesthetic in and around the surgical wound has attracted adverse attention, for the possibility of wound infection caused by it. Very little is known about the effects of local anesthetic agents on cutaneous wound healing. If an inhibitory effect is demonstrated, then the balance between the benefits of postoperative local anesthesia and the negatives of impaired cutaneous wound healing may affect the decision to use local anesthesia or not. Nonhealing of corneal ulcers treated with local anesthetics initially kicked off the controversies. [12] A detergent-like an effect on plasma membranes accounts for its epithelial toxicity when used frequently. Animal studies [13] have shown that in clinically relevant dose, both lignocaine and bupivacaine do not alter wound healing. However, in contrast, Al-Attar et al. have severely criticized the use of local anesthetic in the median sternotomy wound. [14] This criticism has been countered by Nuttall and Johnson et al. [15] The to and fro arguments only indicate a lack of clarity even among clinicians.

Although the choice of administering local anesthetic in the subcutaneous plane with the supplementation of block of anterior cutaneous nerve branch of intercostal nerve appear to produce adequate analgesia. The authors of this work have shown significant 48 h morphine sparing effect (18.83 ± 3.4 mg in the control group in contrast to 8.6 ± 0.94 mg in the test group) after administering anterior cutaneous branch intercostal nerve block and subcutaneous continuous infiltration of bupivacaine. However, wound infection and lack of reproducible pain relief are two issues that have to be settled before embracing this technique.

   References Top

Cogan J. Pain management after cardiac surgery. Semin Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2010;14:201-4.  Back to cited text no. 1
Ziyaeifard M, Azarfarin R, Golzari SE. A review of current analgesic techniques in cardiac surgery. Is epidural worth it? J Cardiovasc Thorac Res 2014;6:133-40.  Back to cited text no. 2
Naja Z, Lönnqvist PA. Somatic paravertebral nerve blockade. Incidence of failed block and complications. Anaesthesia 2001;56:1184-8.  Back to cited text no. 3
Lynn AM, Nespeca MK, Opheim KE, Slattery JT. Respiratory effects of intravenous morphine infusions in neonates, infants, and children after cardiac surgery. Anesth Analg 1993;77:695-701.  Back to cited text no. 4
Tirotta CF, Munro HM, Salvaggio J, Madril D, Felix DE, Rusinowski L, et al. Continuous incisional infusion of local anesthetic in pediatric patients following open heart surgery. Paediatr Anaesth 2009;19:571-6.  Back to cited text no. 5
Chiu KM, Wu CC, Wang MJ, Lu CW, Shieh JS, Lin TY, et al. Local infusion of bupivacaine combined with intravenous patient-controlled analgesia provides better pain relief than intravenous patient-controlled analgesia alone in patients undergoing minimally invasive cardiac surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2008;135:1348-52.  Back to cited text no. 6
White PF, Rawal S, Latham P, Markowitz S, Issioui T, Chi L, et al. Use of a continuous local anesthetic infusion for pain management after median sternotomy. Anesthesiology 2003;99:918-23.  Back to cited text no. 7
Nasr DA, Abdelhamid HM, Mohsen M, Aly AH, The analgesic efficacy of continuous presternal bupivacaine infusion through a single catheter after cardiac surgery. Ann Card Anaesth 2015;18:15-20.  Back to cited text no. 8
Dowling R, Thielmeier K, Ghaly A, Barber D, Boice T, Dine A. Improved pain control after cardiac surgery: Results of a randomized, double-blind, clinical trial. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2003;126:1271-8.  Back to cited text no. 9
Koukis I, Argiriou M, Dimakopoulou A, Panagiotakopoulos V, Theakos N, Charitos C. Use of continuous subcutaneous anesthetic infusion in cardiac surgical patients after median sternotomy. J Cardiothorac Surg 2008;3:2.  Back to cited text no. 10
Agarwal S, Nuttall GA, Johnson ME, Hanson AC, Oliver WC Jr. A prospective, randomized, blinded study of continuous ropivacaine infusion in the median sternotomy incision following cardiac surgery. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2013;38:145-50.  Back to cited text no. 11
Burstein NL. Corneal cytotoxicity of topically applied drugs, vehicles and preservatives. Surv Ophthalmol 1980;25:15-30.  Back to cited text no. 12
Waite A, Gilliver SC, Masterson GR, Hardman MJ, Ashcroft GS. Clinically relevant doses of lidocaine and bupivacaine do not impair cutaneous wound healing in mice. Br J Anaesth 2010;104:768-73.  Back to cited text no. 13
Al-Attar N, Morcos K, Mahmood Z. High infection rates after ropivacaine infusion in the median sternotomy incision following cardiac surgery. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2013;38:371-2.  Back to cited text no. 14
Nuttall GA, Johnson ME. Reply to Drs Al-Attar, Morcos, and Mahmood. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2013;38:372-3.  Back to cited text no. 15

Correspondence Address:
Murali Chakravarthy
Director of Anesthesia, Fortis Hospitals, Bengaluru, Karnataka
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/0971-9784.148315

Rights and Permissions