Comparison of the Effectiveness of Ultrasound-Guided Proximal, Mid, or Distal Adductor Canal Block after Knee Arthroscopy.

IF 0.6 Q3 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Aylin Tamam, Selin Güven Köse, Halil Cihan Köse, Ömer Taylan Akkaya
{"title":"Comparison of the Effectiveness of Ultrasound-Guided Proximal, Mid, or Distal Adductor Canal Block after Knee Arthroscopy.","authors":"Aylin Tamam,&nbsp;Selin Güven Köse,&nbsp;Halil Cihan Köse,&nbsp;Ömer Taylan Akkaya","doi":"10.5152/TJAR.2023.22225","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Adductor canal block has been used for effective post-operative analgesia; however, the optimal location of adductor canal block placement is still controversial. We aimed to assess the opioid consumption and pain intensity in patients undergoing proximal, mid, and distal adductor canal block after knee arthroscopy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 90 patients who had undergone an arthroscopic knee surgery and proximal, mid, or distal adductor canal block for postoperative analgesia were examined. All groups received 20 mL of bupivacaine (0.375%) to the adductor canal. Post-operative pain scores, tramadol consumption, Bromage scores, additional analgesic need, and other complications were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our results demonstrated that proximal adductor canal block group significantly reduced opioid consumption compared to the midadductor canal block group (P < .001), and mid-adductor canal block group provided significantly decreased opioid consumption than the distal adductor canal block group (P = .004). The visual analog scale values were significantly lower in the proximal adductor canal block group compared to the mid-adductor canal block group at 0, 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 hours, except in resting visual analog scale values at 24 hours. When the proximal and distal groups were compared, visual analog scale values were significantly lower in the proximal adductor canal block group. The Bromage score was 0 in all groups at each follow-up point. Post-operative nausea was observed in only 3 (3.3%) patients, all of these patients were in the distal adductor canal block group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Ultrasound-guided adductor canal block can be applied reliably at proximal, mid, and distal locations. The proximal adductor canal block approach provides significantly lower tramadol consumption and post-operative visual analog scale values than the mid- and distal adductor canal block groups.</p>","PeriodicalId":23353,"journal":{"name":"Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10210929/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5152/TJAR.2023.22225","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Adductor canal block has been used for effective post-operative analgesia; however, the optimal location of adductor canal block placement is still controversial. We aimed to assess the opioid consumption and pain intensity in patients undergoing proximal, mid, and distal adductor canal block after knee arthroscopy.

Methods: A total of 90 patients who had undergone an arthroscopic knee surgery and proximal, mid, or distal adductor canal block for postoperative analgesia were examined. All groups received 20 mL of bupivacaine (0.375%) to the adductor canal. Post-operative pain scores, tramadol consumption, Bromage scores, additional analgesic need, and other complications were recorded.

Results: Our results demonstrated that proximal adductor canal block group significantly reduced opioid consumption compared to the midadductor canal block group (P < .001), and mid-adductor canal block group provided significantly decreased opioid consumption than the distal adductor canal block group (P = .004). The visual analog scale values were significantly lower in the proximal adductor canal block group compared to the mid-adductor canal block group at 0, 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 hours, except in resting visual analog scale values at 24 hours. When the proximal and distal groups were compared, visual analog scale values were significantly lower in the proximal adductor canal block group. The Bromage score was 0 in all groups at each follow-up point. Post-operative nausea was observed in only 3 (3.3%) patients, all of these patients were in the distal adductor canal block group.

Conclusion: Ultrasound-guided adductor canal block can be applied reliably at proximal, mid, and distal locations. The proximal adductor canal block approach provides significantly lower tramadol consumption and post-operative visual analog scale values than the mid- and distal adductor canal block groups.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

超声引导下膝关节镜术后近、中、远内收管阻滞的效果比较。
目的:内收管阻滞已被用于有效的术后镇痛;然而,内收管阻滞放置的最佳位置仍然存在争议。我们的目的是评估膝关节镜术后近端、中端和远端内收管阻滞患者的阿片类药物消耗和疼痛强度。方法:对90例膝关节镜下手术及近端、中端或远端内收管阻滞术后镇痛的患者进行分析。各组均予内收管布比卡因20 mL(0.375%)。记录术后疼痛评分、曲马多用量、Bromage评分、额外镇痛需求及其他并发症。结果:我们的研究结果表明,与中收肌管阻断组相比,近端内收肌管阻断组明显减少了阿片类药物的消耗(P < 0.001),中收肌管阻断组比远端内收肌管阻断组显著减少了阿片类药物的消耗(P = 0.004)。在0、2、4、8、12和24小时,除24小时静息时的视觉模拟量表值外,近端内收管阻滞组的视觉模拟量表值明显低于中收管阻滞组。当近端组和远端组比较时,近端内收管阻滞组的视觉模拟量表值明显较低。各随访点Bromage评分均为0。术后恶心仅3例(3.3%),均为远端内收管阻滞组。结论:超声引导下的内收管阻滞可以可靠地应用于近端、中端和远端。近端内收管阻断入路比中端和远端内收管阻断入路的曲马多消耗量和术后视觉模拟量表值显著降低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信