Adductor canal

内收气管
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    由于膝骨关节炎(KOA),隐神经(SN)的脉冲射频(PRF)在膝关节疼痛中显示出有效的疼痛缓解。内收肌管(AC)包含除SN外的其他感觉神经支配膝关节的内侧部分。我们比较了AC内外SN的PRF,以了解它们在内侧室膝骨关节炎(KOA-MC)中疼痛缓解的质量和持续时间。
    我们在60例因KOA-MC引起的膝前内侧疼痛患者中进行了一项随机前瞻性研究。A组患者接受PRF-SN,B组接受PRF-AC治疗。主要目标是通过视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分比较疼痛,并通过西安大略省和麦克马斯特大学骨关节炎指数(WOMAC)和OXFORD膝关节评分比较日常生活质量的变化。次要目标是使用医学量化量表(MQS)评分和与阻滞相关的并发症比较镇痛需求。组间比较采用方差分析。组间正态分布数据采用学生t检验进行评估,非正态分布和序数数据采用Mann-WhitneyU检验进行评估,分类数据采用卡方检验。<0.05的P值被认为是显著的。
    12周时Gr-B的VAS评分显著降低。与Gr-A相比,Gr-B在第4、8、12和24周的WOMAC得分和OXFORD得分显着降低。
    PRF-AC比PRF-SN提供更好的疼痛缓解和功能效果;然而,疼痛缓解的持续时间没有显著差异.
    UNASSIGNED: Pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) of the saphenous nerve (SN) has shown effective pain relief in knee pain because of knee osteoarthritis (KOA). The adductor canal (AC) contains other sensory nerves innervating the medial part of the knee joint apart from SN. We compared the PRF of SN within and outside the AC for their quality and duration of pain relief in knee osteoarthritis of the medial compartment (KOA-MC).
    UNASSIGNED: We conducted a randomized prospective study in 60 patients with anteromedial knee pain because of KOA-MC. Patients in group A received PRF-SN, and those in group B received PRF-AC. The primary objectives were comparison of pain by Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores and changes in quality of daily living by Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and OXFORD knee scores. The secondary objectives were comparison of analgesic requirements using Medicine Quantification Scale (MQS) scores and block-related complications. Intra-group comparison was performed by analysis of variance. Inter-group normally distributed data were assessed by Student\'s t-test, non-normally distributed and ordinal data were assessed by Mann-Whitney U-test, and categorical data were assessed by Chi-square test. A P value of <0.05 was considered significant.
    UNASSIGNED: VAS scores were significantly lower in Gr-B at 12 weeks. The WOMAC scores and OXFORD scores at 4, 8, 12, and 24 weeks were significantly lower in Gr-B compared to Gr-A.
    UNASSIGNED: The PRF-AC provides better pain relief and functional outcome than PRF-SN; however, duration of pain relief was not significantly different.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Case Reports
    暂无摘要。
    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
    未经授权:全膝关节置换(TKR)手术与术后明显疼痛相关。超声引导内收肌管阻滞与更好的疼痛评分相关。在局部麻醉药中加入可乐定和右美托咪定作为添加剂是最近关注的焦点。然而,很少有研究比较罗哌卡因添加剂在超声引导下TKRs内收肌管阻滞中镇痛的持续时间。
    未经批准:预期,随机化,遵循双盲设计。研究中包括了一百零二名美国麻醉医师协会I至III接受单侧TKR手术的患者,并将其随机分为两组。C组接受可乐定150mcg,D组接受右美托咪定100mcg作为30mL0.2%罗哌卡因用于内收肌管阻滞。术后,镇痛持续时间,镇静评分,抢救镇痛需求,血流动力学,并监测任何其他不良反应.
    未经证实:D组镇痛的总持续时间(16.01h[标准偏差[S.D]-0.5])显著高于C组(13.02h[S.D-0.5])(P<0.0001)。在多个术后时间线,D组的数值评分(NRS)明显低于C组(P<0.05)。D组(2.25(S.D-0.44))的镇静评分优于C组(2[S.D-0])(P=0.001)。
    UNASSIGNED:右美托咪定持续时间较长,降低疼痛,与可乐定相比,内收肌管阻滞的镇静评分更好,可缓解TKR手术的术后疼痛。
    UNASSIGNED: Total knee replacement (TKR) surgeries are associated with significant postoperative pain. Ultrasound-guided adductor canal block is associated with better pain scores. The addition of Clonidine and Dexmedetomidine as additives to local anesthetics was the recent focus of interest. However, there are minimal studies comparing the duration of analgesia as additives to Ropivacaine in ultrasound-guided adductor canal block for TKRs.
    UNASSIGNED: Prospective, randomized, double-blind design was followed. One hundred and two American Society of Anesthesiologists I to III patients undergoing unilateral TKR surgeries were included in the study and randomized into two groups. Group C received Clonidine 150 mcg and Group D received Dexmedetomidine 100 mcg as an add on to 30 mL of 0.2% ropivacaine for adductor canal block. Postoperatively, duration of analgesia, sedation score, rescue analgesic requirement, hemodynamics, and any other adverse effects were monitored.
    UNASSIGNED: The total duration of analgesia in Group D (16.01 h [standard deviation [S. D]-0.5]) was significantly higher as compared to Group C (13.02 h [S. D-0.5]) (P < 0.0001). The numerical rating score (NRS) was significantly lower in Group D compared to Group C (P < 0.05) at multiple postoperative timelines. Group D (2.25(S. D-0.44)) had better sedation scores as compared to Group C (2 [S. D-0]) (P = 0.001).
    UNASSIGNED: Dexmedetomidine has longer duration, lower pain, and better sedation scores as compared to clonidine in adductor canal blocks for postoperative pain relief in TKR surgeries.
    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
    区域麻醉是成功的骨科手术不可或缺的组成部分。神经轴麻醉通常用于手术麻醉,而周围神经阻滞通常用于术后镇痛。患者对区域麻醉的评估应包括神经系统,肺,心血管,和血液学评估。神经轴块包括脊柱,硬膜外,联合脊髓硬膜外。上肢外周神经阻滞包括肌间沟,锁骨上,锁骨下,和腋窝。下肢周围神经阻滞包括股神经阻滞,隐神经阻滞,坐骨神经阻滞,iPACK块,踝关节阻滞和腰丛阻滞。区域麻醉的选择是外科医生的一致决定,麻醉师,和病人的风险收益评估。区域区块的选择取决于患者的合作,病人姿势,手术结构,手术操作,止血带的使用和术后运动阻滞对物理治疗开始的影响。区域麻醉是安全的,但具有固有的失败风险和相对较低的并发症发生率,如局部麻醉全身毒性(LAST)。神经损伤,falls,血肿,感染和过敏反应。超声应用于区域麻醉程序,以提高疗效并最大程度地减少并发症。在区域麻醉管理期间,应随时提供LAST治疗指南和抢救药物(intralipal)。
    Regional anesthesia is an integral component of successful orthopedic surgery. Neuraxial anesthesia is commonly used for surgical anesthesia while peripheral nerve blocks are often used for postoperative analgesia. Patient evaluation for regional anesthesia should include neurological, pulmonary, cardiovascular, and hematological assessments. Neuraxial blocks include spinal, epidural, and combined spinal epidural. Upper extremity peripheral nerve blocks include interscalene, supraclavicular, infraclavicular, and axillary. Lower extremity peripheral nerve blocks include femoral nerve block, saphenous nerve block, sciatic nerve block, iPACK block, ankle block and lumbar plexus block. The choice of regional anesthesia is a unanimous decision made by the surgeon, the anesthesiologist, and the patient based on a risk-benefit assessment. The choice of the regional block depends on patient cooperation, patient positing, operative structures, operative manipulation, tourniquet use and the impact of post-operative motor blockade on initiation of physical therapy. Regional anesthesia is safe but has an inherent risk of failure and a relatively low incidence of complications such as local anesthetic systemic toxicity (LAST), nerve injury, falls, hematoma, infection and allergic reactions. Ultrasound should be used for regional anesthesia procedures to improve the efficacy and minimize complications. LAST treatment guidelines and rescue medications (intralipid) should be readily available during the regional anesthesia administration.
    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
    股神经阻滞(FNB)和内收肌管阻滞(ACB)已越来越多地用于青少年患者前交叉韧带(ACL)重建过程中的疼痛控制。然而,最近的证据表明,使用FNB可能会影响四头肌术后6个月的力量恢复。
    为了比较接受FNB的青少年术后等速肌力,ACB,或在ACL重建期间未阻断围手术期镇痛。与ACB相比,我们预计接受FNB的青少年术后股四头肌和腿筋等速肌缺陷较低。
    队列研究;证据水平,3.
    如果患者在2008年7月至2018年1月期间由一名外科医生进行了绳肌腱自体ACL重建,并且在术后4至8个月进行了等速肌测试,则将其纳入研究。参与者被分为3组(没有阻塞,FNB,和ACB),我们比较了在60和180°/s时通过等速股四头肌和腿筋强度测试计算的受影响肢体和未受影响肢体之间的百分比。组间分析采用方差分析,阿尔法为0.05。
    总共98名参与者被纳入分析(31个无区块,36FNB,和31ACB)。患者的平均±SD年龄分别为15.26±1.15、15.50±1.42和15.71±1.44,FNB,ACB,分别。术后5.61个月,3组的等速四头肌缺陷无显著差异(P≥.99),在180°/s的屈曲峰值时,观察到等速腿筋缺损的唯一显着差异,其中ACB组的峰值扭矩低于FNB组(-9.80%±3.48%vs2.37%±3.23%;P=0.035)。赤字超过15%的参与者的比例在3组中没有显着差异。
    与以往的研究相反,我们的研究结果表明,在ACL重建后约6个月的青少年围手术期镇痛中,3种类型的股四头肌强度差异极小.与接受FNB的患者相比,在最大屈曲时接受ACB的患者的腿筋中唯一明显的力量不足。
    UNASSIGNED: Femoral nerve block (FNB) and adductor canal block (ACB) have been used increasingly for pain control during anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction in adolescent patients. However, recent evidence suggests that the use of FNB may affect quadriceps strength recovery 6 months after surgery.
    UNASSIGNED: To compare postoperative isokinetic strength in adolescents who received FNB, ACB, or no block for perioperative analgesia during ACL reconstruction. We anticipated lower postoperative quadriceps and hamstring isokinetic deficits in adolescents who received FNB as compared with ACB.
    UNASSIGNED: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.
    UNASSIGNED: Patients were included in the study if they had undergone hamstring tendon autograft ACL reconstruction by a single surgeon from July 2008 to January 2018 and if they underwent isokinetic muscle testing at 4 to 8 months postoperatively. The participants were divided into 3 groups (no block, FNB, and ACB), and we compared the deficit in percentages between the affected and unaffected limbs as calculated from the isokinetic quadriceps and hamstring strength testing at 60 and 180 deg/s. Between-group analysis was performed using analysis of variance, with an alpha of .05.
    UNASSIGNED: A total of 98 participants were included in the analysis (31 no block, 36 FNB, and 31 ACB). The mean ± SD age of the patients was 15.26 ± 1.15, 15.50 ± 1.42, and 15.71 ± 1.44, for no block, FNB, and ACB, respectively. At 5.61 months postoperatively, there was no significant difference across the 3 groups in isokinetic quadriceps deficits (P ≥ .99), and the only significant difference in isokinetic hamstring deficit was observed for peak flexion at 180 deg/s, in which the ACB group had lower peak torque than the FNB group (-9.80% ± 3.48% vs 2.37% ± 3.23%; P = .035). The ratio of participants with a deficit exceeding 15% did not differ significantly among the 3 groups.
    UNASSIGNED: Contrary to previous research, our findings indicate only minimal difference in quadriceps strength among the 3 types of perioperative analgesia in adolescents approximately 6 months after ACL reconstruction. The only significant strength deficit was seen in the hamstrings of patients receiving ACB at peak flexion as compared with those receiving FNB.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    股神经阻滞(FNB)是减轻前交叉韧带重建术(ACLR)患者术后疼痛的常用技术,但它也与许多不利影响有关,比如股四头肌无力,止痛剂行走,跌倒风险增加。肌管阻滞(ACB)已被提供作为FNB的运动神经保护替代品。
    评估现有文献,比较ACB和FNB对关节镜ACLR术后功能结局的影响。
    系统评价。
    遵循2009年PRISMA(系统审查和荟萃分析的首选报告项目)指南,搜索PubMed(Ovid),CINAHL,Scopus,科克伦,和谷歌学者数据库进行。搜索词旨在捕获比较ACB和FNB在接受关节镜ACLR的患者中的效果的研究。评估了有关研究和患者特征的数据,功能措施,阿片类药物的消费,疼痛评分,和并发症。
    纳入8项随机对照试验(N=655例患者),比较ACB与FNB在关节镜ACLR中的疗效。结果测量的异质性排除了荟萃分析。七项研究报告了功能措施,包括等速力量,直腿抬高,和其他各种措施。随访时间在1小时至6个月之间变化。在3次试验中,在手术后的前12至24小时内,发现ACB可以保持股四头肌力量,使用直腿抬高进行测量。而其他3项试验发现组间没有差异。在6个月时,等速运动强度没有差异。在其他功能措施中,ACB优于FNB或等同于FNB。大多数报告阿片类药物消费的研究,疼痛评分,和并发症没有发现块之间的差异。
    本系统综述表明,与FNB相比,ACB在ACLR术后早期保留股四头肌功能,同时提供相似的镇痛水平。这项研究的局限性包括使用各种功能措施和有限的长期随访。需要更多的研究用标准化措施评估长期功能结果,以得出关于ACB和FNB对ACLR后功能影响的充分结论。
    Femoral nerve block (FNB) is a popular technique for reducing postoperative pain in patients with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), but it is also linked to a number of adverse effects, such as quadriceps weakness, antalgic ambulation, and increased fall risk. Adductor canal block (ACB) has been offered as a motor nerve-sparing alternative to FNB.
    To evaluate available literature that compares the effects of ACB and FNB on functional outcomes after arthroscopic ACLR.
    Systematic review.
    Following the 2009 PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, a search of PubMed (Ovid), CINAHL, Scopus, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases was conducted. Search terms were designed to capture studies comparing the effects of ACB and FNB in patients undergoing arthroscopic ACLR. Data were evaluated regarding study and patient characteristics, functional measures, opioid consumption, pain scores, and complications.
    Eight randomized controlled trials (N = 655 patients) comparing the efficacy of ACB versus FNB in arthroscopic ACLR were included. The heterogeneity of outcome measures precluded meta-analysis. Seven studies reported functional measures, which included isokinetic strength, straight-leg raise, and other various measures. Follow-up periods varied between 1 hour and 6 months. In 3 trials, ACB was found to preserve quadriceps strength as measured using straight-leg raise for the first 12 to 24 hours after surgery, while 3 other trials found no difference between the groups. No differences were reported in isokinetic strength at 6 months. In other functional measures, ACB either outperformed or was equivalent to FNB. The majority of studies reporting opioid consumption, pain scores, and complications found no differences between the blocks.
    This systematic review suggests that when compared with FNB, ACB preserves quadriceps function in the early postoperative period after ACLR while providing a similar level of analgesia. Limitations of this study include the use of various functional measures and limited long-term follow-up. More research evaluating long-term functional outcomes with standardized measures is needed to draw adequate conclusions regarding the effects of ACB and FNB on function after ACLR.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    UNASSIGNED: Central neuraxial block and general anaesthesia in patients with significant comorbidities are associated with considerable peri-operative morbidity and mortality. This study aims to delineate peripheral nerve block as a suitable alternative technique in high-risk patients posted for below-knee surgery.
    UNASSIGNED: Twenty patients with the American Society of Anesthesiologist\'s (ASA) physical status grade III and IV, aged 30-80 years, scheduled for below-knee surgery from May 2018 to February 2019 were enrolled in this prospective study. All patients received ultrasound-guided popliteal sciatic block with 20 ml 0.5% ropivacaine and adductor canal block with 10 ml 0.375% ropivacaine. The peripheral nerve block success rate, sensory and motor block onset time, haemodynamic parameters, duration of post-operative analgesia and patient\'s satisfaction were recorded. Descriptive statistics of the study were calculated and the data was analysed using an SPSS statistics 21.0 program.
    UNASSIGNED: Surgery was performed successfully with no additional analgesic requirement in all patients. The mean duration for sensory and motor block onset time was 3.35 ± 0.49 (mean ± standard deviation) and 4.65 ± 0.48 (mean ± standard deviation) minutes respectively. Haemodynamic parameters were maintained stable throughout the procedure. The average duration of postoperative analgesia was 7.5 ± 0.8 (mean ± standard deviation) hours. Patient overall satisfaction as assessed, by three-point Lickert\'s scale, was satisfactory.
    UNASSIGNED: Ultrasound-guided combined popliteal sciatic and adductor canal block is an effective alternative anaesthetic technique for below-knee surgeries with stability of haemodynamic parameters and pain management in high-risk patients.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Comparative Study
    背景:在全膝关节置换术(TKA)手术后,肌管(AC)导管被用于提供连续的术后镇痛。有解剖学观点认为,大多数AC导管被插入大腿的股骨三角(FT)室而不是AC室。这与运动无力的临床相关性尚不清楚,镇痛质量,和阿片类药物的消费。我们假设AC导管在TKA术后第1天提供了优异的功能动员,如使用定时上升和前进(TUG)测试所测量的。
    方法:在这家跨国公司中,多中心,双盲RCT,在超声引导下将导管插入解剖AC和FT隔室。标准化的方案包括没有鞘内吗啡的脊髓麻醉,固定导管输注速率,和口腔镇痛。
    结果:在招募的151名受试者中,AC组75例,FT组76例。术后第1天,AC(38[29-55]s)和FT受试者(44[32-64]s)之间的TUG没有统计学上的显着差异(中位数[四分位数间];P=0.11)。TUG第2天AC(38[27-53]s)与FT(42[31-59]s)无差异;P=0.66。疼痛水平的次要终点没有统计学上的显着差异,疼痛缓解的有效性,疼痛对功能活动和人际关系的干扰,和群体之间的阿片类药物消费。
    结论:术后即刻功能活动度无差异,镇痛,以及TKA手术中插入AC和FT位置的导管提供的阿片类药物消耗。
    背景:ANZCTR12617001421325。
    BACKGROUND: Adductor canal (AC) catheters are being used to provide continuous postoperative analgesia after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) surgery. There are anatomical arguments that most AC catheters are being inserted into the femoral triangle (FT) compartment of the thigh rather than the AC compartment. The clinical relevance of this is unknown with respect to motor weakness, quality of analgesia, and opioid consumption. We hypothesised that AC catheters provide superior functional mobilisation on postoperative Day 1 after TKA as measured using the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test.
    METHODS: In this multinational, multicentre, double-blinded RCT, catheters were inserted under ultrasound guidance into the anatomical AC and FT compartments. The standardised protocol included spinal anaesthesia without intrathecal morphine, fixed catheter infusion rates, and oral analgesia.
    RESULTS: Of 151 subjects recruited, 75 were in the AC group and 76 in the FT group. There was no statistically significant difference in TUG on postoperative Day 1 between AC (38 [29-55] s) and FT subjects (44 [32-64] s) (median [inter-quartile range]); P=0.11). There was no difference in TUG Day 2, AC (38 [27-53] s) vs FT (42 [31-59] s); P=0.66. There were no statistically significant differences for secondary endpoints of pain level, effectiveness of pain relief, interference of functional activities and interpersonal relationships by pain, and opioid consumption between groups.
    CONCLUSIONS: There were no differences in immediate postoperative functional mobility, analgesia, and opioid consumption provided by catheters inserted into the AC vs FT locations for TKA surgery.
    BACKGROUND: ANZCTR12617001421325.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

  • 文章类型: Comparative Study
    BACKGROUND: There is a growing interest in avoiding discharging patients to rehab to maximize outcome and minimize complications after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). In addition, use of postoperative pain pathways that minimize opioid use is critical amidst the current opioid epidemic. However, the ideal pain regimen after TKA has yet to be determined.
    METHODS: From July 1, 2013 to October 1, 2014 two perioperative pathways were used to address surgical pain. These included either a single shot femoral nerve block plus liposomal bupivacaine pericapsular injection (FNB + LB-PAI) or adductor canal catheter plus posterior capsule single shot block (ACC + iPACK), each with an oral analgesic protocol. Little modification occurred with regard to surgical technique, postoperative medications, or postoperative physical therapy (PT).
    RESULTS: Overall, 264 unilateral, primary TKA patients (146 FNB + LB-PAI, 118 ACC + iPACK) were included. ACC + iPACK patients had a shorter median length of stay (LOS, 2.0 vs 3.0, p < 0.001), more discharges home (79.7% vs 67.8%, p = 0.002), and less median opioid consumption (IV morphine equivalents, IVME, 20.0 vs 44.1, p < 0.001) than the FNB + LB-PAI group. In multivariable analysis, use of ACC + iPACK remained independently associated with shorter LOS, increased discharge home, and less IVME consumed when controlling for confounding variables. ACC + iPACK patients also had fewer opioid related adverse events (0.8 vs 5.5, p = 0.045) and a lower rate of MUA (0.8% vs 6.2%, p = 0.026).
    CONCLUSIONS: We recommend ACC + iPACK with a multimodal oral analgesic protocol as the primary postoperative analgesia in enhanced recovery TKA protocols. This resulted in an easier recovery with fewer complications.
    METHODS: Level III.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:周围神经阻滞,特别是股神经阻滞(FNBs),通常进行前交叉韧带(ACL)重建。然而,FNB后相关的股四头肌肌无力已得到充分描述,可能会在术后6个月内发生。内收肌管阻滞(ACB)已成为FNB的可行替代方案,从理论上讲,在术后即刻导致股四头肌无力,因为它绕过了股神经的大部分运动纤维,这些纤维分支到内收肌管的近端。
    目的:本研究旨在确定ACB或FNB重建ACL术后即刻是否存在股四头肌力量差异。在术后即刻,我们预计接受ACBs或FNBs进行ACL重建的患者股四头肌力量无差异.
    方法:随机对照试验;证据水平,1.
    方法:在2015年11月至2016年4月期间,共纳入102例使用各种移植物类型进行原发性ACL重建的患者。所有患者在手术前随机接受ACB或FNB,外科医生不知道块的类型。所有患者术后均接受积极康复,无功能支撑。患者报告了第一次直腿抬高的时间。在术后3个月和6个月进行等速运动强度测试。
    结果:分析了73例患者的数据。患者的年龄人口统计学没有显着差异,身体质量指数,性别,FNB(n=35)和ACB(n=38)组之间的止血带时间。第一次直腿抬高的平均时间相似,FNB组13.1±1.0小时,ACB组15.5±1.2小时(P=.134)。术后3至6个月,ACB组(53.7%±3.4%至68.3%±2.9%;P=.008)和FNB组(53.3%±3.3%至68.5%±4.1%;P=.006)在60°/s时的平均伸展扭矩显着增加。在3个月和6个月时,FNB和ACB组之间在60deg/s或180deg/s的平均伸展扭矩也没有显着差异。术后并发症(感染,关节纤维化,重新撕裂)。
    结论:尽管先前的研究表明,与FNBs相比,ACBs的术后直接获益,随着股四头肌力量的更快恢复,在本研究中,接受ACBs或FNBs进行ACL重建的患者术后3个月和6个月股四头肌肌力无统计学或临床显著性差异.
    BACKGROUND: Peripheral nerve blocks, particularly femoral nerve blocks (FNBs), are commonly performed for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. However, associated quadriceps muscle weakness after FNBs is well described and may occur for up to 6 months postoperatively. The adductor canal block (ACB) has emerged as a viable alternative to the FNB, theoretically causing less quadriceps weakness during the immediate postoperative period, as it bypasses the majority of the motor fibers of the femoral nerve that branch off proximal to the adductor canal.
    OBJECTIVE: This study sought to identify if a difference in quadriceps strength exists after an ACB or FNB for ACL reconstruction beyond the immediate postoperative period. Beyond the immediate postoperative period, we anticipated no difference in quadriceps strength between patients who received ACBs or FNBs for ACL reconstruction.
    METHODS: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.
    METHODS: A total of 102 patients undergoing primary ACL reconstruction using a variety of graft types were enrolled between November 2015 and April 2016. All patients were randomized to receive an ACB or FNB before surgery, and the surgeon was blinded to the block type. All patients underwent aggressive rehabilitation without functional bracing postoperatively. The time to the first straight-leg raise was reported by the patient. Isokinetic strength testing was performed at 3 and 6 months postoperatively.
    RESULTS: Data for 73 patients were analyzed. There was no significant difference in patient demographics of age, body mass index, sex, or tourniquet time between the FNB (n = 35) and ACB (n = 38) groups. The mean time to the first straight-leg raise was similar, at 13.1 ± 1.0 hours for the FNB group and 15.5 ± 1.2 hours for the ACB group (P = .134). The mean extension torque at 60 deg/s increased significantly for both the ACB (53.7% ± 3.4% to 68.3% ± 2.9%; P = .008) and the FNB (53.3% ± 3.3% to 68.5% ± 4.1%; P = .006) groups from 3 to 6 months postoperatively. There was also no significant difference in mean extension torque at 60 deg/s or 180 deg/s between the FNB and ACB groups at 3 and 6 months. There were no significant differences in postoperative complications (infection, arthrofibrosis, retear) between groups.
    CONCLUSIONS: Although prior studies have shown immediate postoperative benefits of ACBs compared with FNBs, with a faster return of quadriceps strength, in the current study there was no statistically or clinically significant difference in quadriceps strength at 3 and 6 months postoperatively in patients who received ACBs or FNBs for ACL reconstruction.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号