patient-controlled analgesia

患者自控镇痛
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    多模式镇痛在增强术后恢复中起着关键作用。在这里,我们描述了一项研究羟考酮与羟考酮的作用的试验方案。基于舒芬太尼的患者自控镇痛联合腰方肌阻滞(QLB)与腹横肌平面阻滞(TAPB)对腹腔镜胃肠大手术后恢复质量的影响。
    和分析:这是一个前瞻性的,随机化,2×2阶乘设计的对照临床试验。共有120名接受腹腔镜胃肠大手术的成人患者将被随机分配,以1:1:1:1的比例,接受两种患者自控镇痛方案之一(基于羟考酮或舒芬太尼)和两种区域阻滞方案之一(QLB或TAPB)。该试验的主要结果指标是手术后24小时的恢复质量,使用15项恢复质量(QoR-15)量表进行评估。次要结局包括术后48小时和72小时的QoR-15评分;术后1、6、24和48小时休息和咳嗽时的内脏和切口疼痛;术后0-24小时和24-48小时内的镇痛剂消耗;需要抢救镇痛;术后肛门排气时间;术后不良事件(镇静,恶心和呕吐,使用止吐药,呼吸抑制,和头晕);以及术后住院时间。
    该试验的结果将为最佳的多模式镇痛策略提供证据,以提高接受腹腔镜胃肠大手术的患者的恢复质量。
    该试验已在中国临床试验注册中心注册(www。chictr.org.cn,标识符:ChiCTR2400080766)。
    UNASSIGNED: Multimodal analgesia plays a key role in enhanced recovery after surgery. Herein, we describe a trial protocol investigating the effects of oxycodone-vs. sufentanil-based patient-controlled analgesia in combination with quadratus lumborum block (QLB) vs. transverse abdominis plane block (TAPB) on quality of recovery following major laparoscopic gastrointestinal surgery.
    UNASSIGNED: and analysis: This is a prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial with a 2 × 2 factorial design. A total of 120 adult patients undergoing laparoscopic major gastrointestinal surgery will be randomized, in a 1:1:1:1 ratio, to receive one of two patient-controlled analgesia regimens (based on oxycodone or sufentanil) and one of two regional blocks (QLB or TAPB). The primary outcome measure of this trial is the quality of recovery at 24 h after surgery, assessed using the 15-item quality of recovery (QoR-15) scale. The secondary outcomes include QoR-15 scores at 48 and 72 h after surgery; visceral and incisional pain at rest and while coughing at 1, 6, 24 and 48 h postoperatively; analgesic consumption within 0-24 h and 24-48 h postoperatively; need for rescue analgesia; postoperative flatus time; postoperative adverse events (sedation, nausea and vomiting, use of antiemetics, respiratory depression, and dizziness); and length of postoperative hospital stay.
    UNASSIGNED: The results of this trial will provide evidence for the optimal multimodal analgesic strategy to improve the quality of recovery for patients undergoing laparoscopic major gastrointestinal surgery.
    UNASSIGNED: This trial was registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (www.chictr.org.cn, identifier: ChiCTR2400080766).
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:尽管疼痛是患者前往急诊科(ED)的最常见原因,传统的疼痛管理方法往往不足。患者自控镇痛(PCA),这允许患者自我静脉镇痛,在许多医院病房中广泛使用,然而,不常规用于ED。我们旨在确定临床医生对ED设置中PCA使用的看法。
    方法:采用定性描述性方法,对来自西澳大利亚州两家医院的ED临床医生进行了半结构化个体访谈。访谈被记录和转录。使用定性内容分析对数据进行分析。
    结果:在20名参与者访谈后,数据达到饱和。访谈数据中出现了五个主题:可持续性和选择合适的患者;时间;安全问题和副作用;预测患者的观点(员工感知);促进PCA在ED中的使用。
    结论:大多数参与者认为在ED中使用PCA会给患者带来一些好处。还确定了几个感知到的障碍和促进者。为了便于PCA在ED中的使用,有必要对员工进行PCA使用教育,患者选择指南和有效的变更管理策略。需要进一步研究与常规方法相比,通过PCA进行镇痛所需的时间。
    BACKGROUND: Despite pain being the most common reason for patients to visit the emergency department (ED), conventional pain management methods are often inadequate. Patient controlled analgesia (PCA), which allows patients to self-administer intravenous analgesia, is widely used across many hospital wards, however, is not routinely used in ED. We aimed to identify clinicians\' perceptions of PCA use in the ED setting.
    METHODS: A qualitative descriptive approach was employed using semi-structured individual interviews conducted with ED clinicians from two hospitals in Western Australia. Interviews were recorded and transcribed. Data was analysed using qualitative content analysis.
    RESULTS: Data saturation was achieved after 20 participant interviews. Five themes emerged from the interview data: sustainability and choosing the right patient; time; safety concerns and side effects; anticipating the patient\'s perspective (staff perception); facilitating PCA use in ED.
    CONCLUSIONS: Most participants perceived that patients would experience several benefits from PCA use in ED. Several perceived barriers and facilitators were also identified. To facilitate the use of PCA in ED, there is a need for staff education on PCA use, patient selection guidelines and effective change management strategies. Further research about the time it takes to administer analgesia via PCA compared with conventional methods is needed.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    鞘内注射吗啡(ITM)或竖脊肌平面(ESP)阻滞可减少接受肾移植手术的患者的术后疼痛。我们旨在比较两种方式在术后镇痛的持续时间和质量以及术后芬太尼消耗方面的有效性。
    我们进行了一项随机研究,分析了60名接受择期活体相关肾移植手术的患者。他们被随机分为两组。M组患者接受ITM,而E组患者接受ESP阻滞.我们使用基于芬太尼的静脉患者自控镇痛对两组的术后镇痛进行了标准化。主要结果是使用数字评定量表评分比较两组之间的镇痛质量。次要结果是观察两种方式对镇痛持续时间的影响,术后芬太尼消耗,抢救镇痛药的要求,导管相关的膀胱不适和任何并发症。
    我们发现M组在所有时间间隔休息和咳嗽时的疼痛评分明显降低,除了咳嗽时的24小时。M组首次镇痛的平均时间明显长于E组(P=0.002)。两组患者术后总芬太尼用量(P=0.065)和抢救镇痛差异无统计学意义。在M组中,有明显更多的恶心,呕吐和瘙痒(P=0.001)。
    ITM以比ESP阻滞更高的副作用为代价提供了持久的术后镇痛。
    UNASSIGNED: Intrathecal morphine (ITM) or erector spinae plane (ESP) block reduces postsurgical pain in patients who underwent kidney transplantation surgeries. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of both modalities in terms of duration and quality of postoperative analgesia along with postoperative fentanyl consumption.
    UNASSIGNED: We conducted a randomised study and analysed 60 patients posted for elective live-related kidney transplantation surgery. They were randomised into two groups. Group M patients received ITM, whereas Group E patients received ESP block. We standardised the postoperative analgesia for both groups with intravenous fentanyl-based patient-controlled analgesia. The primary outcome was to compare the quality of analgesia using the numerical rating scale score between the groups. The secondary outcome was to observe the effect of both modalities on the duration of analgesia, postoperative fentanyl consumption, rescue analgesics requirement, catheter-related bladder discomfort and any complications.
    UNASSIGNED: We found significantly lower pain scores at rest and while coughing in Group M at all time intervals, except at 24 h while coughing. The mean time to first analgesia requirement was significantly longer in Group M than in Group E (P = 0.002). No significant difference was found in postoperative consumption of total fentanyl (P = 0.065) and rescue analgesia in both groups. In Group M, there was significantly more nausea, vomiting and pruritus (P = 0.001).
    UNASSIGNED: ITM provides long-lasting postoperative analgesia at the cost of higher side effects than ESP block.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    羟考酮是一种有效的μ-和κ-阿片受体激动剂,可以缓解躯体和内脏疼痛。我们评估了基于羟考酮和舒芬太尼的多模式镇痛对腹腔镜胃肠大手术后疼痛的影响。
    在这项随机双盲对照试验中,40例成人患者随机(1:1,按手术类型分层)接受基于羟考酮或舒芬太尼的多模式镇痛,包括双侧横腹平面阻滞,术中输注右美托咪定,氟比洛芬酯,和羟考酮或舒芬太尼为基础的患者自控镇痛。共同主要结局是术后0-24小时休息和咳嗽时内脏疼痛(定义为腹内深痛和钝痛)的时间加权平均值(TWA),使用数字评定量表(0-10)进行评估,最小的临床重要差异为1。
    所有患者均完成研究(中位年龄,64岁;65%为男性),术后疼痛得到了充分控制。羟考酮组内脏痛24小时平均TWA为1.40(0.77),舒芬太尼组为2.00(0.98)(平均差异=-0.60,95%CI,-1.16至-0.03;P=0.039)。羟考酮组患者咳嗽时内脏疼痛的24小时TWA显著降低(2.00[0.83]vs2.98[1.26];平均差=-0.98,95%CI,-1.66至-0.30;P=0.006)。在亚组分析中,羟考酮与舒芬太尼对共同主要结局的治疗效果在年龄(18-65岁或>65岁)方面没有差异,性别(女性或男性),或手术类型(结直肠或胃)。次要结果(切口和肩痛的24小时TWA,术后镇痛药的使用,抢救镇痛,不良事件,和患者满意度)组间具有可比性。
    对于接受腹腔镜胃肠大手术的患者,以羟考酮为基础的多模式镇痛可显著降低术后内脏痛,但在临床上无重要意义.
    中国临床试验注册中心(ChiCTR2100052085)。
    UNASSIGNED: Oxycodone is a potent μ- and κ-opioid receptor agonist that can relieve both somatic and visceral pain. We assessed oxycodone- vs sufentanil-based multimodal analgesia on postoperative pain following major laparoscopic gastrointestinal surgery.
    UNASSIGNED: In this randomised double-blind controlled trial, 40 adult patients were randomised (1:1, stratified by type of surgery) to receive oxycodone- or sufentanil-based multimodal analgesia, comprising bilateral transverse abdominis plane blocks, intraoperative dexmedetomidine infusion, flurbiprofen axetil, and oxycodone- or sufentanil-based patient-controlled analgesia. The co-primary outcomes were time-weighted average (TWA) of visceral pain (defined as intra-abdominal deep and dull pain) at rest and on coughing during 0-24 h postoperatively, assessed using the numerical rating scale (0-10) with a minimal clinically important difference of 1.
    UNASSIGNED: All patients completed the study (median age, 64 years; 65% male) and had adequate postoperative pain control. The mean (SD) 24-h TWA of visceral pain at rest was 1.40 (0.77) in the oxycodone group vs 2.00 (0.98) in the sufentanil group (mean difference=-0.60, 95% CI, -1.16 to -0.03; P=0.039). Patients in the oxycodone group had a significantly lower 24-h TWA of visceral pain on coughing (2.00 [0.83] vs 2.98 [1.26]; mean difference=-0.98, 95% CI, -1.66 to -0.30; P=0.006). In the subgroup analyses, the treatment effect of oxycodone vs sufentanil on the co-primary outcomes did not differ in terms of age (18-65 years or >65 years), sex (female or male), or type of surgery (colorectal or gastric). Secondary outcomes (24-h TWA of incisional and shoulder pain, postoperative analgesic usage, rescue analgesia, adverse events, and patient satisfaction) were comparable between groups.
    UNASSIGNED: For patients undergoing major laparoscopic gastrointestinal surgery, oxycodone-based multimodal analgesia reduced postoperative visceral pain in a statistically significant but not clinically important manner.
    UNASSIGNED: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2100052085).
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    经皮穴位电刺激(TEAS)治疗为癌症引起的骨痛(CIBP)患者提供了家庭治疗的可能性,患者控制的疼痛管理方法。这项研究的目的是评估患者控制的TEAS(PC-TEAS)在非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)患者中缓解CIBP的疗效。
    这是一个前瞻性的研究方案,三盲,随机对照试验。我们预计从4个中国医疗中心招募188名NSCLC骨转移患者,他们也在使用有效的阿片类镇痛药。这些参与者将以1:1的比例随机分配到真正的PC-TEAS或假PC-TEAS组。所有参与者将接受标准的肿瘤辅助治疗。真正的小组将根据需要接受患者控制的TEAS干预,而假手术组将遵循相同的治疗方案,但使用非导电凝胶贴片。每个疗程将持续7天,共管理4个课程。将有4个评估时间点:基线,第4、8和12周的结论。该研究的主要结果是治疗后第4周的简短疼痛量表(BPI)量表的平均疼痛缓解率。次要结果包括疼痛相关指标,生活质量量表,情绪量表,以及评估日的血常规.如果发生任何不良事件,将及时处理和报告。我们将使用EDC平台管理试验数据,与数据监测委员会提供定期的质量监督。
    PC-TEAS干预提供了实现家庭针灸治疗的尝试,以及在针灸研究中实现三重致盲的可行性。本研究旨在为针灸辅助治疗癌症相关性疼痛提供更严格的试验证据,并探索一种安全有效的CIBP中西医结合方案。
    ClinicalTrials.govNCT05730972,注册于2023年2月16日。
    UNASSIGNED: Transcutaneous Electrical Acupoint Stimulation (TEAS) therapy opens up the possibility for individuals with Cancer-induced bone pain (CIBP) to receive a home-based, patient-controlled approach to pain management. The aim of this study is designed to evaluate the efficacy of patient-controlled TEAS (PC-TEAS) for relieving CIBP in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
    UNASSIGNED: This is a study protocol for a prospective, triple-blind, randomized controlled trial. We anticipate enrolling 188 participants with NSCLC bone metastases who are also using potent opioid analgesics from 4 Chinese medical centers. These participants will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either the true PC-TEAS or the sham PC-TEAS group. All participants will receive standard adjuvant oncology therapy. The true group will undergo patient-controlled TEAS intervention as needed, while the sham group will follow the same treatment schedule but with non-conductive gel patches. Each treatment course will span 7 days, with a total of 4 courses administered. There will be 4 assessment time points: baseline, the conclusion of weeks 4, 8, and 12. The primary outcome of this investigation is the response rate of the average pain on the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) scale at week 4 after treatment. Secondary outcomes include pain related indicators, quality of life scale, mood scales, and routine blood counts on the assessment days. Any adverse events will be promptly addressed and reported if they occur. We will manage trial data using the EDC platform, with a data monitoring committee providing regular quality oversight.
    UNASSIGNED: PC-TEAS interventions offer an attempt to achieve home-based acupuncture treatment and the feasibility of achieving triple blinding in acupuncture research. This study is designed to provide more rigorous trial evidence for the adjuvant treatment of cancer-related pain by acupuncture and to explore a safe and effective integrative medicine scheme for CIBP.
    UNASSIGNED: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05730972, registered February 16, 2023.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    这项研究旨在比较选择性剖宫产(CS)后程序性间歇性硬膜外推注(PIEB)和连续硬膜外输注(CEI)的镇痛效果。
    74名接受选择性CS的女性被随机分配接受PIEB或CEI。PIEB组以120ml/h的速率每小时接受4ml间歇性的0.11%罗哌卡因推注。CEI组接受恒定速率4ml/h的0.11%罗哌卡因。主要结果是CS后36小时休息时的疼痛评分。次要结果包括动员期间的疼痛评分,时间加权疼痛评分,运动阻滞的发生率,以及CS后36h内与硬膜外镇痛相关的并发症。
    与CEI组相比,PIEB组CS后36h静息时的疼痛评分显着降低(3.0vs.0.0;中位数差异,2;95%CI:1,2;P<0.001)。PIEB组的静息和动员期间的平均时间加权疼痛评分也显着低于CEI组(静息疼痛:平均差异,37.5;95%CI,[24.6,50.4];P<0.001;活动期间疼痛:平均差异,56.6;95%CI,[39.8,73.5];P<0.001)。与CEI组相比,PIEB组的运动阻滞发生率明显降低(P<0.001)。
    在CS后的产后妇女中,PIEB比CEI提供了更好的镇痛效果,运动阻滞更少,没有任何明显的不良事件。
    This study aimed to compare the analgesic effects of programmed intermittent epidural boluses (PIEB) and continuous epidural infusion (CEI) for postoperative analgesia after elective cesarean section (CS).
    Seventy-four women who underwent elective CS were randomized to receive either PIEB or CEI. The PIEB group received 4 ml-intermittent boluses of 0.11% ropivacaine every hour at a rate of 120 ml/h. The CEI group received a constant rate of 4 ml/h of 0.11% ropivacaine. The primary outcome was the pain score at rest at 36 h after CS. Secondary outcomes included the pain scores during mobilization, time-weighted pain scores, the incidence of motor blockade, and complications-related epidural analgesia during 36 h after CS.
    The pain score at rest at 36 h after CS was significantly lower in the PIEB group compared with that in the CEI group (3.0 vs. 0.0; median difference: 2, 95% CI [1, 2], P < 0.001). The mean time-weighted pain scores at rest and during mobilizations were also significantly lower in the PIEB group than in the CEI group (pain at rest; mean difference [MD]: 37.5, 95% CI [24.6, 50.4], P < 0.001/pain during mobilization; MD: 56.6, 95% CI [39.8, 73.5], P < 0.001). The incidence of motor blockade was significantly reduced in the PIEB group compared with that in the CEI group (P < 0.001).
    PIEB provides superior analgesia with less motor blockade than CEI in postpartum women after CS, without any apparent adverse events.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    单次勃起脊柱平面阻滞(ESPB)在术后即刻可在乳房切除术中提供出色的镇痛效果,但不足以维持长时间。这项研究通过放置导管进行乳房切除术,比较了ESPB后程序间歇推注(PIB)与连续输注(CI)技术的疗效。
    经过伦理批准和患者同意,在50例患者中以T4水平进行ESPB,初始推注20mL0.375%罗哌卡因,并在手术前30分钟放置导管。在术后期间,他们被随机分为I组-每4小时间歇推注20mL0.2%罗哌卡因,持续24小时;C组-以5mL/h连续输注0.2%罗哌卡因,持续24小时。主要结局是患者自控镇痛装置24小时消耗芬太尼.使用Stata14.0分析数据。
    第一组患者术后芬太尼消耗量减少{平均值[标准差(SD)]:166(139.17)µgvs332(247.96)µg,P=0.002}和较低的中位数NRS评分(1小时:3比5),(2小时:3vs5),(4小时:3vs5),(6h:4vs5),平均(SD)恢复质量-15评分{134.4(8.53)vs127(12.89),与C组相比,P=0.020},分别。与C组相比,I组的24小时皮肤组织感觉覆盖更全面。
    ESPB后的PIB技术可减少术后阿片类药物的消耗,在接受乳房切除术的患者中,与CI技术相比,术后镇痛效果更好,恢复质量更好。
    UNASSIGNED: Single-shot erector spinae plane block (ESPB) provides excellent analgesia in mastectomy in the immediate post-operative period but is not sufficient to maintain for prolonged duration. This study compares the efficacy of programmed intermittent bolus (PIB) versus continuous infusion (CI) techniques after ESPB by placing a catheter for mastectomy.
    UNASSIGNED: After ethical approval and patient consent, ESPB was performed at the T4 level in 50 patients with an initial bolus of 20 mL 0.375% ropivacaine and a catheter placed 30 min before surgery. In the postoperative period, they were randomised to Group I - intermittent bolus of 20 mL 0.2% ropivacaine every 4 h for 24 h and Group C - continuous infusion of 0.2% ropivacaine at 5 mL/h for 24 h. The primary outcome was the 24-h fentanyl consumption by patient-controlled analgesia device. Data was analysed using Stata 14.0.
    UNASSIGNED: Group I patients had reduced post-operative fentanyl consumption {mean [standard deviation (SD)]: 166 (139.17) µg vs 332 (247.96) µg, P = 0.002} and lower median NRS scores (1 h: 3 vs 5), (2 h: 3 vs 5), (4 h: 3 vs 5), (6 h: 4 vs 5) with a higher mean (SD) Quality of Recovery-15 score {134.4 (8.53) vs 127 (12.89), P = 0.020} compared to Group C, respectively. The 24-h dermatomal sensory coverage was more comprehensive in Group I compared to Group C.
    UNASSIGNED: The PIB technique after ESPB provides decreased postoperative opioid consumption, better post-operative analgesia and quality of recovery compared to the CI technique in patients undergoing mastectomy.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    锯齿形后上肋间平面阻滞(SPSIPB)是一种新颖的技术,可在半胸部提供镇痛,肩膀,和脖子后面。本研究旨在评估SPSIPB在电视胸腔镜手术(VATS)患者中的术后镇痛效果。
    这是双盲,随机对照试验。通过单通道技术接受VATS的24名成年患者被随机分为两组:SPSIPB组(n=12)接受SPSIPB以及曲马多静脉患者自控镇痛(PCA),而对照组(n=12)仅接受曲马多PCA。手术结束时,SPSIPB组患者在超声引导下接受单侧SPSIPB,并使用30mL布比卡因0.25%.主要结果是患者的数字评定量表(NRS)评分。次要结果包括患者消耗的曲马多和抢救镇痛药(扑热息痛)的量,术后24小时随访。使用卡方检验比较分类变量。Mann-WhitneyU检验用于比较非正态分布的变量组。
    SPSIPB组术后24小时NRS值较低(P<0.001)。SPSIPB组曲马多的平均总消耗量(标准偏差)为58.33(26.23)mg,对照组为144.17(13.11)mg(P<0.001)。术后前18小时,SPSIP组的抢救镇痛需求较低(P<0.05)。
    在电视胸腔镜手术后的胸椎上肋间后平面阻滞可提供良好的镇痛效果。
    UNASSIGNED: Serratus posterior superior intercostal plane block (SPSIPB) is a novel technique that can provide analgesia in the hemithorax, shoulder, and back of the neck. This study aimed to evaluate the post-operative analgesic effect of SPSIPB in patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS).
    UNASSIGNED: It is a double-blind, randomised controlled trial. Twenty-four adult patients who underwent VATS via the uniportal technique were randomised into two groups: the SPSIPB group (n = 12) received SPSIPB along with intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with tramadol, whereas the control group (n = 12) received only PCA with tramadol. At the end of the surgery, patients in the SPSIPB group received a unilateral SPSIPB under ultrasound guidance with the use of 30-mL bupivacaine 0.25%. The primary outcome was the numerical rating scale (NRS) scores of the patients. Secondary outcomes included the amount of tramadol and rescue analgesic (paracetamol) consumed by the patients, followed up for post-operative 24 hours. Categorical variables were compared using the Chi-Square Test. Mann-Whitney U Test was used to compare groups of variables that were not normally distributed.
    UNASSIGNED: The SPSIPB group had lower NRS values during post-operative 24 hours (P < 0.001). Mean (standard deviation) total tramadol consumption was 58.33 (26.23) mg in the SPSIPB group and 144.17 (13.11) mg in the control group (P < 0.001). Rescue analgesic need was lower in the SPSIP group in the first 18 post-operative hours (P < 0.05).
    UNASSIGNED: Serratus posterior superior intercostal plane block provides good analgesia in the thoracic region after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    胸腰椎手术是最痛苦的外科手术之一。这项研究的主要目的是评估在接受胸腰椎脊柱手术的患者中,竖脊肌平面(ESP)阻滞对术后24小时累积吗啡消耗量的影响。
    将70名接受胸腰椎脊柱手术的成年人随机分为对照组[患者人数(n)=35],在没有任何神经阻滞的情况下接受全身麻醉,和干预组(n=35),在标准全身麻醉后,在脊柱手术水平接受双侧超声(US)引导下使用0.25%布比卡因20mL的ESP阻滞。随着静脉病人自控镇痛吗啡,两组的术后镇痛均标准化.吗啡总消费量,视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分评估疼痛,患者总体满意度,并在24小时比较任何副作用。使用社会科学统计软件包进行统计分析(SPSSInc.,芝加哥,IL).
    与对照组相比,干预组术后24h吗啡总消耗量显著降低[5.69(1.549)与9.51(1.634)mg;P<0.001]。干预组在休息时(P<0.001)和运动时(P<0.001),术后VAS评分也显着降低。干预组患者满意度评分更有利[3.8(0.4)对3.2(0.6);P<0.001]。对照组术后恶心和呕吐发生率较高,但无统计学意义(n=14对8;P=0.127)。
    在接受胸腰椎手术的患者中,美国指导的ESP阻滞显着减少了术后吗啡的消耗,并提高了镇痛和患者满意度,而没有不良反应。
    UNASSIGNED: Thoracolumbar spine surgery is one of the most painful surgical procedures. This study\'s primary objective was to evaluate the effect of erector spinae plane (ESP) block on post-operative cumulative morphine consumption at 24 h in patients undergoing thoracolumbar spine surgery.
    UNASSIGNED: Seventy adults posted for thoracolumbar spine surgery were randomised into the control group [Number of patients (n)=35], who received general anaesthesia without any nerve block, and the intervention group (n = 35), who received bilateral ultrasound (US)-guided ESP block at the level of spine surgery with 0.25% bupivacaine 20 mL after standard general anaesthesia. Along with intravenous patient-controlled analgesia morphine, post-operative analgesia was standardised for both groups. Total morphine consumption, visual analogue scale (VAS) score to evaluate pain, overall patient satisfaction, and any side effects were compared at 24 h. The statistical analysis was done using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL).
    UNASSIGNED: Post-operative total morphine consumption at 24 h was significantly decreased in the intervention group compared to the control group [5.69 (1.549) versus 9.51 (1.634) mg; P < 0.001]. Post-operative VAS scores were also significantly decreased in the intervention group at rest (P < 0.001) and on movement (P < 0.001). Patient satisfaction scores were more favourable in the intervention group [3.8 (0.4) versus 3.2 (0.6); P < 0.001]. Post-operative nausea and vomiting were found more in the control group but were not significant (n = 14 versus 8; P = 0.127).
    UNASSIGNED: US-guided ESP block significantly reduces post-operative morphine consumption and improves analgesia and patient satisfaction without adverse effects in patients undergoing thoracolumbar spine surgery.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    术后镇痛是腹部手术后恢复的重要组成部分。比较硬膜外镇痛与其他镇痛方式在肝脏手术后的有效性的研究报告了不一致的结果。因此,硬膜外镇痛在开腹肝切除术中的应用存在争议.
    本单中心回顾性研究旨在比较患者自控硬膜外镇痛(PCEA)和患者自控静脉镇痛(PCIA)在成人开腹肝切除术中的疗效和安全性。
    2018年1月至2019年12月在中山医院接受开放式肝切除术的患者,对复旦大学进行回顾性分析。使用倾向评分匹配来调整PCEA和PCIA组之间的基线信息。主要结局指标是静息数字评定量表(NRS)的得分,锻炼,术后24h(术后第1天[POD1])和48h(POD2)的夜间疼痛。次要转归指标包括术后恶心呕吐(PONV),低血压,瘙痒,呼吸抑制,功能活动评分(FAS),有效的镇痛泵压缩比,镇痛缓解率,停止镇痛泵,止痛泵停药的原因,患者对术后镇痛的满意度。
    PCEA组在POD1上的NRS评分明显低于PCIA组(P<0.05)。在POD2上,两组之间仅在运动NRS评分方面差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。PCIA组FAS功能分级低于PCEA组(P<0.001)。PCEA组术后2天有效镇痛泵压缩率和镇痛缓解率低于PCIA组(P<0.001)。PCEA组停泵的发生率高于PCIA组(P=0.044)。此外,在POD1和POD2上,PCEA组瘙痒和低血压的发生率高于PCIA组(P<0.001)。两组PONV发生率差异无统计学意义。
    在进行开放式肝切除术的患者中,PCEA在缓解POD1的中度至重度疼痛方面比PCIA更有效。然而,提高PCEA的安全性和有效性仍然是一个挑战。
    UNASSIGNED: Postoperative analgesia is an essential component of enhanced recovery after surgery following abdominal surgery. Studies comparing the effectiveness of epidural analgesia with that of other analgesic modalities after liver surgery have reported inconsistent results. Consequently, the use of epidural analgesia for open hepatectomy is controversial.
    UNASSIGNED: The present single-center retrospective study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) and patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) in adults undergoing open hepatectomy.
    UNASSIGNED: Patients who underwent open hepatectomy between January 2018 to December 2019 at Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University were retrospectively analyzed. Propensity score matching was used to adjust baseline information between the PCEA and PCIA groups. The primary outcome measure was scores of the numeric rating scales (NRSs) for resting, exercise, and nocturnal pain at postoperative 24 h (postoperative day 1 [POD1]) and 48 h (POD2). The secondary outcome indicators included postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), hypotension, pruritus, respiratory depression, functional activity score (FAS), effective analgesic pump compression ratio, analgesic relief rate, discontinuation of the analgesic pump, reasons for discontinuation of the analgesic pump, and patient satisfaction with postoperative analgesia.
    UNASSIGNED: The NRS scores of the PCEA group on POD1 were significantly lower than those of the PCIA group (P < 0.05). On POD2, the difference between the two groups was significant only for motion NRS scores (P < 0.05). The PCIA group had significantly more patients with lower FAS functional class than the PCEA group (P < 0.001). The effective analgesic pump compression ratio and the analgesic relief rate at 2 days after the surgery were lower in the PCEA group than in the PCIA group (P < 0.001). The incidence of pump discontinuation was higher in the PCEA group than in the PCIA group on POD2 (P = 0.044). Moreover, on POD1 and POD2, the PCEA group showed a higher incidence of pruritus and hypotension than the PCIA group (P < 0.001). Both groups showed no significant difference in PONV incidence.
    UNASSIGNED: In patients undergoing open hepatectomy, PCEA was more effective than PCIA in relieving moderate to severe pain on POD1. However, improving the safety and effectiveness of PCEA remains a challenge.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号