Postoperative analgesia

术后镇痛
  • 文章类型: Letter
    暂无摘要。
    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
    背景:在PACU中评估疼痛的方式可能会影响术后疼痛和镇痛剂消耗。然而,目前没有证据支持这一猜测。作者假设,与标准数字评分量表(NRS)相比,使用舒适量表可以减少术后阿片类药物的消耗,以评估PACU的疼痛。
    方法:在这项集群随机试验中,采用舒适量表(舒适组)或疼痛NRS(NRS组)对患者进行评估.主要结果是PACU中的阿片类药物消耗。主要次要结果是术后疼痛,恶心和呕吐,在PACU中的停留时间,和满意度。
    结果:在885名随机患者中,860个被包括在分析中。PACU中的阿片类药物消耗量在舒适组和NRS组中具有可比性(中位数[四分位距[IQR]0(0-5)与0(0-6);P=0.2436),与外科手术的类型无关。大多数患者术后不需要任何阿片类药物(舒适组为59%,NRS组为56%,P=0.2260)。术后疼痛没有差异,恶心和呕吐,拔管后达到Aldrete评分≥9的时间,全球满意度。
    结论:与使用标准NRS相比,使用舒适量表评估PACU的疼痛并没有减少任何阿片类药物。有必要对有术后阿片类药物消耗增加风险的患者进行进一步研究。
    背景:NCT05234216。
    BACKGROUND: The way that pain is assessed in the PACU could impact on postoperative pain and analgesic consumption. However, there is currently no evidence to support this speculation. The authors hypothesised that using a comfort scale reduces postoperative opioid consumption when compared with a standard numerical rating scale (NRS) to evaluate pain in the PACU.
    METHODS: In this cluster-randomised trial, patients were assessed using either a comfort scale (comfort group) or a pain NRS (NRS group). The primary outcome was the opioid consumption in the PACU. The main secondary outcomes were postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting, length of stay in the PACU, and satisfaction.
    RESULTS: Of 885 randomised patients, 860 were included in the analysis. Opioid consumption in the PACU was comparable in the comfort and NRS groups (median [interquartile range [IQR] 0 (0-5) vs 0 (0-6); P=0.2436), irrespective of the type of surgical procedure. The majority of patients did not need any postoperative opioid (59% in the comfort group and 56% in the NRS group, P=0.2260). There was no difference in postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting, time to reach an Aldrete score ≥9 after extubation, and global satisfaction.
    CONCLUSIONS: Using a comfort scale to assess pain in the PACU did not spare any opioid compared with use of a standard NRS. Further studies focusing on patients at risk of increased postoperative opioid consumption are necessary.
    BACKGROUND: NCT05234216.
    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
    背景:胸腔镜引导下胸椎旁神经阻滞(TG-TPVB)和胸腔镜引导下肋间神经阻滞(TG-INB)是两种用于胸外科手术的术后镇痛技术。本研究旨在比较单行胸外科手术(UniVATS)后TG-TPVB和TG-INB的镇痛效果。
    方法:58例患者随机分为TG-TPVB组和TG-INB组。神经阻滞的手术时间,视觉模拟量表(VAS)分数,术后24h内舒芬太尼的消耗量和患者自控静脉镇痛药(PCIA)的数量,比较两组患者的不良反应发生率。
    结果:在2、6、12、24h休息和咳嗽时,TG-TPVB组的VAS评分明显低于TG-INB组(P<0.05)。TG-TPVB组术后24h内的舒芬太尼消耗量和PCIA按压次数均显著低于TG-INB组(P<0.001)。TG-TPVB组神经阻滞手术时间明显短于TG-INB组(P<0.001)。TG-TPVB组穿刺点出血发生率低于TG-INB组(P<0.05)。
    结论:TG-TPVB表现出优异的急性疼痛缓解效果,与TG-INB相比,手术时间更短,不良反应也不差。
    BACKGROUND: Thoracoscopic-guided thoracic paravertebral nerve block (TG-TPVB) and thoracoscopic-guided intercostal nerve block (TG-INB) are two postoperative analgesia technology for thoracic surgery. This study aims to compared the analgesic effect of TG-TPVB and TG-INB after uniportal video-asssited thoracic surgery (UniVATS).
    METHODS: Fifty-eight patients were randomly allocated to the TG-TPVB group and the TG-INB group. The surgical time of nerve block, the visual analog scale (VAS) scores, the consumption of sufentanil and the number of patient-controlled intravenous analgesic (PCIA) presses within 24 h after surgery, the incidence of adverse reactions were compared between the two groups.
    RESULTS: The VAS scores were significantly lower during rest and coughing at 2, 6, 12, and 24 h in the TG-TPVB group than in the TG-INB group (P < 0.05). The consumption of sufentanil and the number of PCIA presses within 24 h after surgery were significantly lower in the TG-TPVB group than in the TG-INB group (P < 0.001).The surgical time of nerve block was significantly shorter in the TG-TPVB group than in the TG-INB group (P < 0.001). The incidence of bleeding at the puncture point was lower in the TG-TPVB group than that in the TG-INB group (P < 0.05).
    CONCLUSIONS: TG-TPVB demonstrated superior acute pain relieve after uniVATS, shorter surgical time and non-inferior adverse effects than TG-INB.
    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
    目的:这项随机对照双盲研究旨在研究全膝关节置换术后内收肌管阻滞(ACB)联合膝状神经阻滞(GNB)的镇痛效果是否不劣于内收肌管阻滞联合局部浸润镇痛(LIA)。
    方法:共102例全麻下全膝关节置换术患者,随机分为:ACB+GNB和ACB+LIA组;ACB+LIA组接受80mL0.2%罗哌卡因和10µg/mL肾上腺素用于LIA,而ACB+GNB组接受4mL0.2%罗哌卡因阻滞5条膝关节周围神经.主要结果是两组之间在24小时休息时视觉模拟量表评分的中位数差异。次要结局涉及其他时间点疼痛评分的中位数差异。其他结果包括前24小时以吗啡当量计算的阿片类药物的累积剂量以及与膝关节功能恢复相关的指标。
    结果:总计,36例和38例患者被纳入ACB+GNB和ACB+LIA组,分别。我们发现,24小时术后休息疼痛的中位数差异(95%内部置信度)(非劣效性标准,△=1)为-0.5(-1至0,p=0.002)。累积阿片类药物消耗的中位数差异为1mg(-1至3,p=0.019),符合非劣效性标准,△=7.7mg。
    结论:在全膝关节置换术后第1天,ACB联合GNB的镇痛效果与ACB联合LIA的镇痛效果不同,同时显著减少了局部麻醉药的使用。
    背景:注册中心名称:中国临床试验注册中心;试验注册编号:ChiCTR2300074274;注册日期。2023年8月2日。
    OBJECTIVE: This randomized controlled and double-blind study aimed to investigate whether the analgesic effect of the adductor canal block (ACB) combined with the genicular nerve block (GNB) after total knee arthroplasty is noninferior to that of the adductor canal block combined with local infiltration analgesia (LIA).
    METHODS: A total of 102 patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty under general anesthesia were included and randomly divided into: ACB + GNB and ACB + LIA groups; the ACB + LIA group received 80 mL of 0.2% ropivacaine with adrenaline 10 µg/mL for LIA, whereas the ACB + GNB group received 4 mL of 0.2% ropivacaine for the blockade of five peri-knee nerves. The primary outcome was the median difference in the visual analog scale scores at rest at 24 h between the two groups. Secondary outcomes involved the median differences in the pain scores at other time points. Other outcomes included the cumulative dosage of opioids calculated in morphine equivalents in the first 24 h and indicators related to knee joint functional recovery.
    RESULTS: In total, 36 and 38 patients were included in the ACB + GNB and ACB + LIA groups, respectively. We found that the median difference (95% confidence internal) in postoperative rest pain at 24 h (noninferiority criteria, △ = 1) was - 0.5 (- 1 to 0, p = 0.002). The median difference in cumulative opioid consumption was 1 mg (- 1 to 3, p = 0.019), meeting the noninferiority criteria, △ = 7.7 mg.
    CONCLUSIONS: ACB combined with GNB provides noninferior analgesia compared to ACB with LIA on the first day after total knee arthroplasty while significantly reducing local anesthetic use.
    BACKGROUND: Name of the Registry: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry; Trial Registration Number: ChiCTR2300074274; Date of Registration. August 2, 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
    背景:腹腔镜胆囊切除术以其微创性质而闻名,但术后疼痛管理仍具有挑战性.尽管增强了手术后恢复(ERAS)方案,局部镇痛技术,如改良的胸腹神经阻滞(M-TAPA)显示出希望。我们的回顾性研究评估了M-TAPA在中等收入国家腹腔镜胆囊切除术后疼痛控制中的疗效。
    方法:这是墨西哥总医院腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者的回顾性病例对照研究,患者被分配到M-TAPA或对照组。数据包括人口统计信息,术中变量,和术后疼痛评分。手术前给予M-TAPA阻滞。
    结果:阿片类药物消费量,疼痛强度,不利影响,和时间来挽救镇痛。方差分析(ANOVA)比较了组间阿片类药物的总消费量,而Student\'st检验比较疼痛强度和直到第一次要求抢救镇痛的时间。
    结果:在56例患者中,M-TAPA组的手术和麻醉时间更长(p<0.001),更高的ASA3分数(25%与3.12%,p=0.010),和减少阿片类药物的消耗(p<0.001)。M-TAPA组术后疼痛评分较低(p<0.001),对抢救镇痛的需求较低(p=0.010),恶心/呕吐的发生率较低(p=0.010)。
    结论:双侧M-TAPA可有效控制腹腔镜胆囊切除术后的疼痛,尤其是在中等收入国家,通过减少阿片类药物的使用和提高恢复。
    BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is known for its minimally invasive nature, but postoperative pain management remains challenging. Despite the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol, regional analgesic techniques like modified perichondral approach to thoracoabdominal nerve block (M-TAPA) show promise. Our retrospective study evaluates M-TAPA\'s efficacy in postoperative pain control for laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a middle-income country.
    METHODS: This was a retrospective case-control study of laparoscopic cholecystectomy patients at Hospital General de Mexico in which patients were allocated to the M-TAPA or control group. The data included demographic information, intraoperative variables, and postoperative pain scores. M-TAPA blocks were administered presurgery.
    RESULTS: opioid consumption, pain intensity, adverse effects, and time to rescue analgesia. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) compared total opioid consumption between groups, while Student\'s t test compared pain intensity and time until the first request for rescue analgesia.
    RESULTS: Among the 56 patients, those in the M-TAPA group had longer surgical and anesthetic times (p < 0.001), higher ASA 3 scores (25% vs. 3.12%, p = 0.010), and reduced opioid consumption (p < 0.001). The M-TAPA group exhibited lower postoperative pain scores (p < 0.001), a lower need for rescue analgesia (p = 0.010), and a lower incidence of nausea/vomiting (p = 0.010).
    CONCLUSIONS: Bilateral M-TAPA offers effective postoperative pain control after laparoscopic cholecystectomy, especially in middle-income countries, by reducing opioid use and enhancing recovery.
    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
    目的:本研究旨在将标准护理监测的急性护理术后患者与疼痛小组通过虚拟病房技术监测的患者进行比较,以实时评估状态。
    方法:回顾性队列研究。
    方法:我们分别纳入了72,240和68,424例术后患者,他们在2021年1月至2022年4月期间接受了急性疼痛服务模式,并在2022年5月至2023年9月期间接受了“基于云的虚拟病房”管理模式。患者术后均给予患者自控静脉镇痛,我们收集了关于一般情况的围手术期数据,操作类型,术后中度至重度疼痛,恶心和呕吐,头晕,声音嘶哑,和病人的嗜睡。
    结果:中度至重度术后疼痛的发生率,术后恶心呕吐,头晕,困倦,声音嘶哑,静息疼痛,与急性疼痛服务模式相比,“基于云的虚拟病房”管理模式中的活动疼痛显着降低。
    结论:与急性疼痛服务模型相比,“基于云的虚拟病房”管理模式可以提高疼痛管理满意度,降低中重度术后疼痛和不良反应的发生频率。
    结论:本研究提出的“基于云的虚拟病房”管理模式可以改善急性术后疼痛患者的护理。通过回顾两种术后患者疼痛管理模式,我们能够比较术后不良反应的发生率,并使用一体化医疗护理“基于云的虚拟病房”管理模式的标准流程来优化术后患者的管理并促进其健康结局。
    OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare acute care postoperative patients monitored by standard care to those monitored through virtual ward technology by pain team to evaluate status in real-time.
    METHODS: Retrospective cohort study.
    METHODS: We included 72,240 and 68,424 postoperative patients who underwent the acute pain service model between January 2021 and April 2022 and the \"cloud-based virtual ward\" management model between May 2022 and September 2023, respectively. Patients were administered patient-controlled intravenous analgesia after surgery, and we collected perioperative data regarding the general condition, operation type, postoperative moderate-to-severe pain, nausea and vomiting, dizziness, hoarseness, and drowsiness of the patients.
    RESULTS: The incidences of moderate-to-severe postoperative pain, postoperative nausea and vomiting, dizziness, drowsiness, hoarseness, resting pain, and activity pain were significantly reduced in the \"cloud-based virtual ward\" management model when compared with the acute pain service model.
    CONCLUSIONS: Compared to the acute pain service model, the \"cloud-based virtual ward\" management model can enhance pain management satisfaction and lower the frequency of moderate-to-severe postoperative pain and adverse effects.
    CONCLUSIONS: The \"cloud-based virtual ward\" management model proposed in this study may improve the care of patients with acute postoperative pain. By reviewing the two pain management models for postoperative patients, we were able to compare the incidence of postoperative adverse reactions and use the standard process of the integrated medical care \"cloud-based virtual ward\" management model to optimize the management of postoperative patients and promote their health outcomes.
    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
    目的:脊柱大手术会导致剧烈疼痛。我们检查了小儿脊柱侧凸患者后路脊柱融合术(PSF)后勃起脊髓平面阻滞(ESPB)减轻疼痛的能力。
    方法:72例接受PSF的患者被随机分为术前超声引导下的ESPB组或无阻滞对照组。复合主要结果是手术后24h的数字评定量表(NRS)评分的曲线下面积(AUC)和手术后24h的父母自控静脉镇痛(PCIA)推注次数。次要结局包括NRS评分,阿片类药物的消费,抢救镇痛,不良事件,和恢复质量。
    结果:ESPB组静息时的AUC-NRS为62(13),对照组为89(13)(P<0.001)。ESPB组有15(5)个24小时PCIA推注,对照组有30(7)个(P<0.001)。与对照组相比,ESPB组在术后0、3、6和9h休息时的NRS评分较低,术后0、3、6、9和12h,ESPB组运动时的NRS评分较低。术后0-6、6-12、12-18和1-24h,ESPB组对PCIA的需求低于对照组。在ESPB组中,更少的患者需要抢救镇痛药,患者表现出更高的恢复质量。
    结论:术前ESPB可改善接受PSF的小儿脊柱侧凸患者的术后镇痛效果。
    背景:ChiCTR2300074505。
    2023年8月8日。
    OBJECTIVE: Major spinal surgery causes severe pain. We examined the ability of erector spinae plane block (ESPB) to alleviate pain after posterior spinal fusion (PSF) in paediatric scoliosis patients.
    METHODS: Seventy-two patients who underwent PSF were randomized into a preoperative ultrasound-guided ESPB group or a no-block control group. The composite primary outcome was the area under the curve (AUC) of the numerical rating scale (NRS) score in the first 24 h after surgery and the number of parent-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) boluses administered 24 h after surgery. The secondary outcomes included the NRS score, opioid consumption, rescue analgesia, adverse events, and quality of recovery.
    RESULTS: The AUC-NRS at rest was 62 (13) in the ESPB group and 89 (13) in the control group (P < 0.001). There were 15 (5) 24-h PCIA boluses administered in the ESPB group and 30 (7) in the control group (P < 0.001). Compared with those in the control group, the NRS scores at rest were lower in the ESPB group at 0, 3, 6, and 9 h postoperatively, and the NRS scores during movement were lower in the ESPB group at 0, 3, 6, 9 and 12 h postoperatively. The ESPB group showed a lower need for PCIA than did the control group at 0-6, 6-12, 12-18 and 1-24 h postoperatively. In the ESPB group, fewer patients required rescue analgesics, and patients exhibited a higher quality of recovery.
    CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative ESPB improves postoperative analgesia in paediatric scoliosis patients who underwent PSF.
    BACKGROUND: ChiCTR2300074505.
    UNASSIGNED: August 8, 2023.
    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
    目的:本研究旨在评估胸神经(PECS)II阻滞在120例患者中促进心脏植入式电子设备(CIED)插入的可行性和有效性。重点是在没有额外术中局部麻醉的情况下完成的病例百分比。
    方法:在所有120例患者中,使用超声引导在左侧进行PECSII阻滞。通过在不需要额外术中局部麻醉的情况下完成的病例比例来评估可行性。次要结果包括额外使用的局部麻醉剂的量,术中阿片类药物需求,术后疼痛评分,时间到第一次术后镇痛,镇痛消耗,患者满意度,和阻滞相关的并发症。
    结果:在120名患者中,78(65%)需要额外的术中局部麻醉,中位体积为8.2mL(范围3-13mL)。15例患者(12.5%)需要术中补充阿片类药物。9例患者(7.5%)需要术后曲马多缓解疼痛。总的来说,98名患者(81.7%)报告对手术的满意度很高。
    结论:PECSII块,当与补充局部麻醉药联合使用时,为120例接受CIED插入的患者提供至少24小时的有效术后镇痛。虽然它在大多数情况下并没有完全取代手术麻醉,PECSII阻滞显著有助于患者更顺利的术中体验.
    OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of the pectoral nerves (PECS) II block in facilitating cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) insertion in a sample of 120 patients, with a focus on the percentage of cases completed without additional intraoperative local anesthesia.
    METHODS: PECS II blocks were performed on the left side using ultrasound guidance in all 120 patients. Feasibility was assessed by the proportion of cases completed without the need for extra intraoperative local anesthetic. Secondary outcomes included the amount of additional local anesthetic used, intraoperative opioid requirements, postoperative pain scores, time to first postoperative analgesia, analgesic consumption, patient satisfaction, and block-related complications.
    RESULTS: Of the 120 patients, 78 (65%) required additional intraoperative local anesthetic, with a median volume of 8.2 mL (range 3-13 mL). Fifteen patients (12.5%) needed intraoperative opioid supplementation. Nine patients (7.5%) required postoperative tramadol for pain relief. In total, 98 patients (81.7%) reported high satisfaction levels with the procedure.
    CONCLUSIONS: The PECS II block, when combined with supplementary local anesthetic, provided effective postoperative analgesia for at least 24 h in 120 patients undergoing CIED insertion. While it did not completely replace surgical anesthesia in most cases, the PECS II block significantly contributed to a smoother intraoperative experience for 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: Journal Article
    尽管腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)是一种微创手术,它可以引起中度至重度的术后疼痛。在这种情况下,竖脊肌平面(ESP)和腹横肌平面(TAP)阻滞被认为是治疗疼痛的有效手段;然而,关于它们的镇痛效果尚无定论。这项荟萃分析旨在比较ESP阻滞和TAP阻滞对LC疼痛控制的疗效。
    我们系统地搜索了Medline,PubMed,Scopus,Embase,和谷歌学者直到2024年1月26日。所有随机临床试验都比较了直立脊肌平面阻滞(ESPB)和腹横肌平面阻滞(TAPB)对LC术后疼痛缓解的疗效。主要结果是术后1、2、6、12和24小时休息和运动时的疼痛评分。次要结果是阿片类药物的总消费量,第一次镇痛请求时间,术后恶心和呕吐的发生率。我们使用RevMan5.4分析了所有数据。
    总共8个RCT,涉及542名患者(ESPB组271名,TAPB组271名),包括在分析中。在所有时间点,除术后运动的第1和第6小时外,ESP阻滞在休息和运动时的疼痛评分均比TAP阻滞在统计学上显着降低;但是,这些差异被认为无临床意义.此外,接受ESP阻滞的患者需要较少的吗啡,并且在要求首次镇痛前需要较长的时间.两组患者术后恶心呕吐发生率差异无统计学意义。
    在接受LC的患者中,有适度的证据表明,ESP阻滞可有效减轻疼痛严重程度,吗啡等效消耗量,以及与术后早期TAP阻滞相比,首次镇痛请求之前的时间。系统审查注册:PROSPEROCRD42024505635,https://www。crd.约克。AC.uk/prospro/display_record.php?ID=CRD42024505635。
    UNASSIGNED: Although laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is a minimally invasive surgery, it can cause moderate to severe postoperative pain. Erector spinae plane (ESP) and transversus abdominis plane (TAP) blocks are considered effective means for pain management in such cases; however, there is inconclusive evidence regarding their analgesic efficacy. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy of ESP block and TAP block for pain control in LC.
    UNASSIGNED: We systematically searched Medline, PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Google Scholar until 26 January 2024. All randomized clinical trials compared the efficacy of erector spinae plane block (ESPB) and transversus abdominis plane block (TAPB) for postoperative pain relief after LC. The primary outcomes were pain scores at rest and on movement at 1, 2, 6, 12, and 24 h postoperatively. The secondary outcomes were total opioid consumption, first analgesia request time, and rates of postoperative nausea and vomiting. We analyzed all the data using RevMan 5.4.
    UNASSIGNED: A total of 8 RCTs, involving 542 patients (271 in the ESPB group and 271 in the TAPB group), were included in the analysis. The ESP block demonstrated statistically significant lower pain scores at rest and on movement than the TAP block at all-time points except at the 1st and 6th h on movement postoperatively; however, these differences were not considered clinically significant. Additionally, patients who received the ESP block required less morphine and had a longer time before requesting their first dose of analgesia. There were no significant differences in postoperative nausea and vomiting incidence between the two groups.
    UNASSIGNED: In patients undergoing LC, there is moderate evidence to suggest that the ESP block is effective in reducing pain severity, morphine equivalent consumption, and the time before the first analgesia request when compared to the TAP block during the early postoperative period.Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42024505635, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42024505635.
    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:本研究的目的是比较全膝关节置换术(TKA)在股神经阻滞中添加胫神经阻滞后的镇痛效果。方法:将60例患者以1:1的比例随机分为实验组(EG)或对照组(CG)。形成CG的30例患者接受了超声引导下的股神经阻滞以及神经轴麻醉,并通过静脉弹性泵给予阿片类药物和NSAIDs,以治疗术后疼痛;其他30例,谁组成了EG,接受了神经轴麻醉以及股骨和胫骨神经阻滞。根据疼痛数字评定量表(NPRS)和术后48h内不同时间间隔是否需要镇痛抢救,评价镇痛效果。结果:在24小时,静息时EG和CG的平均NPRS评分为1.50±1.19和1.63±1.60[U=443.5,p=0.113],分别。随着关节运动,平均NPRS评分为2.80±1.49和3.57±1.79[U=345,p=0.113],分别。EG中的10例[33.3%]和CG中的24例[80%]需要抢救镇痛[Phi=0.471,p<0.001]。在48小时,静息时EG和CG的平均NPRS评分为0.33±0.60和0.43±0.72[U=428,p=0.681],分别。随着运动,EG和CG的平均NPRS评分分别为1.03±0.99和1.60±1.07[U=315,p=0.038].EG组无患者需要抢救镇痛,而CG中的3例患者[10%]有[Phi=0.229,p=0.076]。CG中阿片类药物的平均剂量为300毫克,而EG为40mg±62.14[U<0.05,p<0.001]。结论:TKA中股神经阻滞加胫神经阻滞可在术后48h内达到相同的镇痛效果,减少阿片类药物的系统性使用。
    Background: The aim of this study was to compare the postoperative analgesic efficacy when a tibial nerve block was added to the femoral nerve block for total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Methods: A total of 60 patients were randomly assigned to the experimental group (EG) or the control group (CG) in a 1:1 ratio. The thirty patients who formed the CG underwent an ultrasound-guided femoral nerve block together with neuraxial anaesthesia and the administration of opioids and NSAIDs through an intravenous elastomeric pump for the management of the postoperative pain; the other thirty, who formed the EG, underwent neuraxial anaesthesia together with femoral and tibial nerve blocks. The efficacy of the analgesic effect was evaluated based on the numerical pain rating scale (NPRS) and on the need for analgesic rescue at different time intervals within 48 h after surgery. Results: At 24 h, the mean NPRS score in the EG and CG at rest was 1.50 ± 1.19 and 1.63 ± 1.60 [U = 443.5, p = 0.113], respectively. With joint movement, the mean NPRS score was 2.80 ± 1.49 and 3.57 ± 1.79 [U = 345, p = 0.113], respectively. Ten patients in the EG [33.3%] and 24 in the CG [80%] required rescue analgesia [Phi = 0.471, p < 0.001]. At 48 h, the mean NPRS score in the EG and CG at rest was 0.33 ± 0.60 and 0.43 ± 0.72 [U = 428, p = 0.681], respectively. With movement, the mean NPRS score was 1.03 ± 0.99 in the EG and 1.60 ± 1.07 in the CG [U = 315, p = 0.038]. No patient in the EG group required rescue analgesia, while three patients in the CG [10%] did [Phi = 0.229, p = 0.076]. The mean opioid dosage in the CG was 300 mg, whereas in the EG it was 40 mg ± 62.14 [U < 0.05, p < 0.001]. Conclusions: Adding a tibial nerve block to the femoral nerve block in TKA may achieve the same analgesic efficacy within 48 h after surgery and would reduce the systematic use of opioids.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号