Background: Adequate control of acute postoperative pain is crucial in breast surgeries, as it is a significant factor in the development of persistent chronic pain. Inadequate postoperative pain control increases length of hospital stays and risk of severe complications. Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is a novel regional block that has the ability to sufficiently block unilateral multidermatomal sensation from T1 to L3. By reviewing the literature on ESPB, this paper aimed to elucidate its efficacy in breast surgery analgesia and its role in addressing the opioid crisis in North America. Methods: PUBMED, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were systematically searched for relevant articles according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Inclusion criteria included any articles that described ESPB in breast surgery. Exclusion criteria composed of articles that exclusively discussed other kinds of regional blocks. Results: Thirty-two articles including 6 randomized controlled trials were included in this review. ESPB demonstrated superior pain control and less opioid consumption compared with tumescent anesthesia or using no block. However, ESPB showed lower efficacy in pain control compared with pectoral nerve block. Patients experienced less nausea and vomiting and were overall more satisfied with ESPB compared with other pain control modalities. The vast majority of the studies reported the ease of ESPB administration, and only 1 case presented with a complication. Conclusions: ESPB is a promising form of regional anesthesia that can decrease postoperative pain and opioid consumption when used as part of multimodal pain analgesia for patients undergoing breast surgery.

No abstract

Background: Rectus diastasis is a common condition that can result in a protruding abdomen, causing cosmetic and functional disability. Although it is usually repaired during abdominoplasty or herniorrhaphy, there is a lack of consensus with regard to the repair indications and optimal surgical techniques. The goal of this study is to provide an updated review of the surgical techniques used for rectus diastasis repair and their comparative efficacy. Methods: In accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for articles that discussed the surgical management of rectus diastasis and reported on either outcomes, complications, or recurrence rates. Data detailing surgical techniques were extracted, and pooled analyses of complication and recurrence rates were performed, controlling for surgical approach, common variations in technique, and an associated herniorrhaphy. Results: Thirty-seven studies describing 45 techniques were included. An open rectus diastasis repair was performed in 24 of the studies. After controlling for an associated herniorrhaphy, there was no statistically significant difference in surgical complication and recurrence rates between open and laparoscopic approaches (p = 0.165 and p = 0.133, respectively). Although a double-layer suture closure was associated with a significantly lower rate of complications (p = 0.002), no significant difference was found for suture type absorbability. Conclusions: Surgical repair of rectus diastasis is safe and effective through both open and laparoscopic approaches. Although suture type absorbability does not affect complication or recurrence rates, a double-layer suture closure can decrease surgical complications. The pooled analysis of complication and recurrence rates can help improve informed consent and patient education.