Impact of the combination of abdominal peripheral nerve block and neuromuscular blockade on the surgical space during robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery: a prospective randomized controlled study.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Journal of Anesthesia Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-15 DOI:10.1007/s00540-024-03309-5
Satoko Noguchi, Junichi Saito, Kishiko Nakai, Masato Kitayama, Kazuyoshi Hirota
{"title":"Impact of the combination of abdominal peripheral nerve block and neuromuscular blockade on the surgical space during robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery: a prospective randomized controlled study.","authors":"Satoko Noguchi, Junichi Saito, Kishiko Nakai, Masato Kitayama, Kazuyoshi Hirota","doi":"10.1007/s00540-024-03309-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The impact of the combination of abdominal peripheral nerve block (PNB) and the depth of neuromuscular blockade on the surgical field were assessed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Thirty-eight patients undergoing elective robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP) were randomized into two groups: a PNB group (moderate neuromuscular block [train-of-four 1-3 twitches] with abdominal PNB) and a non-PNB group (deep neuromuscular block [post-tetanic count 0-2 twitches] without abdominal PNB). The primary outcome was the change in the depth of the abdominal cavity relaxation assessed by the change in the distance (Δdistance) between the umbilicus port and peritoneum upon pneumoperitoneal pressure increase from 8 to 12 mmHg. The secondary outcomes were the CO<sub>2</sub> usage for the pneumoperitoneal pressure increase and the subjective differences in the Surgical Rating Score (SRS) during surgery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Δdistance and the CO<sub>2</sub> usage from 8 to 12 mmHg did not differ significantly between the non-PNB and PNB groups (1.34 ± 0.65 vs. 1.28 ± 0.61 cm, p = 0.763 and 3.64 ± 1.68 vs. 4.34 ± 1.44 L, p = 0.180, respectively). There was also no significant difference in SRS. Comparisons of the Δdistance values for pressure increases from 6 to 8 mmHg, 6 to 10 mmHg and 6 to 12 mmHg between the non-PNB and PNB groups also showed no between-group differences, despite significant intra-group differences (p < 0.001) by pressure increment.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our findings indicate that moderate neuromuscular block with abdominal PNB maintained an adequate surgical space for RARP, with no significant difference from the space achieved by deep neuromuscular block.</p>","PeriodicalId":14997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anesthesia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Anesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00540-024-03309-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The impact of the combination of abdominal peripheral nerve block (PNB) and the depth of neuromuscular blockade on the surgical field were assessed.

Methods: Thirty-eight patients undergoing elective robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP) were randomized into two groups: a PNB group (moderate neuromuscular block [train-of-four 1-3 twitches] with abdominal PNB) and a non-PNB group (deep neuromuscular block [post-tetanic count 0-2 twitches] without abdominal PNB). The primary outcome was the change in the depth of the abdominal cavity relaxation assessed by the change in the distance (Δdistance) between the umbilicus port and peritoneum upon pneumoperitoneal pressure increase from 8 to 12 mmHg. The secondary outcomes were the CO2 usage for the pneumoperitoneal pressure increase and the subjective differences in the Surgical Rating Score (SRS) during surgery.

Results: The Δdistance and the CO2 usage from 8 to 12 mmHg did not differ significantly between the non-PNB and PNB groups (1.34 ± 0.65 vs. 1.28 ± 0.61 cm, p = 0.763 and 3.64 ± 1.68 vs. 4.34 ± 1.44 L, p = 0.180, respectively). There was also no significant difference in SRS. Comparisons of the Δdistance values for pressure increases from 6 to 8 mmHg, 6 to 10 mmHg and 6 to 12 mmHg between the non-PNB and PNB groups also showed no between-group differences, despite significant intra-group differences (p < 0.001) by pressure increment.

Conclusions: Our findings indicate that moderate neuromuscular block with abdominal PNB maintained an adequate surgical space for RARP, with no significant difference from the space achieved by deep neuromuscular block.

Abstract Image

机器人辅助腹腔镜手术中腹部周围神经阻滞和神经肌肉阻滞联合应用对手术空间的影响:一项前瞻性随机对照研究。
目的:评估腹部周围神经阻滞(PNB)和神经肌肉阻滞深度的组合对手术视野的影响:38名接受机器人辅助腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术(RARP)的患者被随机分为两组:PNB组(中度神经肌肉阻滞[四次抽搐1-3次],腹部PNB)和非PNB组(深度神经肌肉阻滞[四次抽搐后计数0-2次],无腹部PNB)。主要结果是腹腔压力从 8 mmHg 增加到 12 mmHg 时,脐孔与腹膜之间距离(Δdistance)的变化,以此评估腹腔松弛深度的变化。次要结果是腹腔积气压力增加时的二氧化碳用量和手术过程中手术评分(SRS)的主观差异:结果:非腹腔镜手术组和腹腔镜手术组的Δ距离和 8 至 12 mmHg 的二氧化碳用量没有显著差异(分别为 1.34 ± 0.65 cm 对 1.28 ± 0.61 cm,p = 0.763 和 3.64 ± 1.68 L 对 4.34 ± 1.44 L,p = 0.180)。SRS 也无明显差异。比较非 PNB 组和 PNB 组之间压力增加 6 至 8 mmHg、6 至 10 mmHg 和 6 至 12 mmHg 时的Δ距离值,也没有发现组间差异,尽管组内差异显著(p 结论:PNB 组和 PNB 组之间压力增加 6 至 8 mmHg、6 至 10 mmHg 和 6 至 12 mmHg 时的Δ距离值没有发现组间差异:我们的研究结果表明,腹腔 PNB 中度神经肌肉阻滞可为 RARP 保持足够的手术空间,与深部神经肌肉阻滞所获得的手术空间无明显差异。
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
Journal of Anesthesia
Journal of Anesthesia 医学-麻醉学
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
7.10%
发文量
112
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Anesthesia is the official journal of the Japanese Society of Anesthesiologists. This journal publishes original articles, review articles, special articles, clinical reports, short communications, letters to the editor, and book and multimedia reviews. The editors welcome the submission of manuscripts devoted to anesthesia and related topics from any country of the world. Membership in the Society is not a prerequisite. The Journal of Anesthesia (JA) welcomes case reports that show unique cases in perioperative medicine, intensive care, emergency medicine, and pain management.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
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