用于下腹部手术的腹横肌平面阻滞中的脂质体布比卡因。

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Pain Practice Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-24 DOI:10.1111/papr.13347
Obiyo Osuchukwu, James Gagnon, Janelle Richard, Wendy Craig, Aurora Quaye
{"title":"用于下腹部手术的腹横肌平面阻滞中的脂质体布比卡因。","authors":"Obiyo Osuchukwu, James Gagnon, Janelle Richard, Wendy Craig, Aurora Quaye","doi":"10.1111/papr.13347","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Transversus abdominis plane blocks are an established method of postoperative analgesia for abdominopelvic surgeries. Liposomal bupivacaine is an extended-release formulation of bupivacaine providing up to 72 h of analgesia. This study aims to determine if transversus abdominis plane blocks performed with liposomal bupivacaine are associated with reduced opioid consumption and level of pain intensity compared to conventional bupivacaine in patients undergoing lower abdominal surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective cohort study was conducted at a single institution between December 2020 and December 2021. After institutional review board approval, we identified patients who underwent lower abdominopelvic surgery with transversus abdominis plane blocks done with liposomal or conventional bupivacaine and collected demographic, clinical, and procedural information for analysis. We compared total opioid consumption over 72-h postoperatively in milligram morphine equivalents (MME), frequency of opioid utilization, and average level of pain intensity between groups. These outcomes were also evaluated after adjusting for covariates. Data were presented as mean ± SD, median [IQR] or frequency (%), as appropriate; p < 0.05 was accepted as significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 178 patients met inclusion criteria, with 79 patients receiving an admixture of liposomal bupivacaine and conventional bupivacaine and 99 patients receiving conventional bupivacaine. The liposomal bupivacaine group had a median opioid consumption 72-h postoperatively of 47.5 [18-91.8] MME compared to 88 [43.8-160] MME in the conventional bupivacaine group, p = 0.045. Differences in opioid consumption between the groups did not reach statistical significance after adjustment for demographic and clinical characteristics, p = 0.11. There was no significant difference in frequency of opioid use or average pain intensity.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Transversus abdominis plane blocks using an admixture of liposomal bupivacaine conventional bupivacaine are not associated with decreased opioid consumption or reduced pain up to 72 h following elective abdominopelvic surgery.</p>","PeriodicalId":19974,"journal":{"name":"Pain Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11178472/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Liposomal bupivacaine in transversus abdominis plane blocks for lower abdominal surgery.\",\"authors\":\"Obiyo Osuchukwu, James Gagnon, Janelle Richard, Wendy Craig, Aurora Quaye\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/papr.13347\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Transversus abdominis plane blocks are an established method of postoperative analgesia for abdominopelvic surgeries. Liposomal bupivacaine is an extended-release formulation of bupivacaine providing up to 72 h of analgesia. This study aims to determine if transversus abdominis plane blocks performed with liposomal bupivacaine are associated with reduced opioid consumption and level of pain intensity compared to conventional bupivacaine in patients undergoing lower abdominal surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective cohort study was conducted at a single institution between December 2020 and December 2021. After institutional review board approval, we identified patients who underwent lower abdominopelvic surgery with transversus abdominis plane blocks done with liposomal or conventional bupivacaine and collected demographic, clinical, and procedural information for analysis. We compared total opioid consumption over 72-h postoperatively in milligram morphine equivalents (MME), frequency of opioid utilization, and average level of pain intensity between groups. These outcomes were also evaluated after adjusting for covariates. Data were presented as mean ± SD, median [IQR] or frequency (%), as appropriate; p < 0.05 was accepted as significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 178 patients met inclusion criteria, with 79 patients receiving an admixture of liposomal bupivacaine and conventional bupivacaine and 99 patients receiving conventional bupivacaine. The liposomal bupivacaine group had a median opioid consumption 72-h postoperatively of 47.5 [18-91.8] MME compared to 88 [43.8-160] MME in the conventional bupivacaine group, p = 0.045. Differences in opioid consumption between the groups did not reach statistical significance after adjustment for demographic and clinical characteristics, p = 0.11. There was no significant difference in frequency of opioid use or average pain intensity.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Transversus abdominis plane blocks using an admixture of liposomal bupivacaine conventional bupivacaine are not associated with decreased opioid consumption or reduced pain up to 72 h following elective abdominopelvic surgery.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19974,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pain Practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11178472/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pain Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/papr.13347\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/papr.13347","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:腹横肌平面阻滞是腹盆腔手术术后镇痛的一种成熟方法。脂质体布比卡因是布比卡因的缓释制剂,可提供长达 72 小时的镇痛。本研究旨在确定与传统布比卡因相比,使用脂质体布比卡因进行腹横肌平面阻滞是否会减少下腹部手术患者的阿片类药物用量和疼痛强度:这项回顾性队列研究于 2020 年 12 月至 2021 年 12 月在一家医疗机构进行。经机构审查委员会批准后,我们确定了使用脂质体或传统布比卡因进行腹横肌平面阻滞的下腹盆腔手术患者,并收集了人口统计学、临床和手术信息进行分析。我们比较了不同组别术后 72 小时的阿片类药物总消耗量(以毫克吗啡当量计)、阿片类药物使用频率和平均疼痛强度。在对协变量进行调整后,我们还对这些结果进行了评估。数据视情况以均数±标准差、中位数[IQR]或频率(%)表示;P 结果:共有 178 名患者符合纳入标准,其中 79 名患者接受了脂质体布比卡因和传统布比卡因的混合疗法,99 名患者接受了传统布比卡因。脂质体布比卡因组术后72小时的阿片类药物中位消耗量为47.5 [18-91.8] MME,而传统布比卡因组为88 [43.8-160] MME,P = 0.045。在对人口统计学和临床特征进行调整后,两组间阿片类药物消耗量的差异未达到统计学意义(p = 0.11)。阿片类药物的使用频率和平均疼痛强度没有明显差异:结论:使用脂质体布比卡因和传统布比卡因混合液进行腹横肌平面阻滞与阿片类药物用量减少或择期腹盆腔手术后72小时内疼痛减轻无关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Liposomal bupivacaine in transversus abdominis plane blocks for lower abdominal surgery.

Background: Transversus abdominis plane blocks are an established method of postoperative analgesia for abdominopelvic surgeries. Liposomal bupivacaine is an extended-release formulation of bupivacaine providing up to 72 h of analgesia. This study aims to determine if transversus abdominis plane blocks performed with liposomal bupivacaine are associated with reduced opioid consumption and level of pain intensity compared to conventional bupivacaine in patients undergoing lower abdominal surgery.

Methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at a single institution between December 2020 and December 2021. After institutional review board approval, we identified patients who underwent lower abdominopelvic surgery with transversus abdominis plane blocks done with liposomal or conventional bupivacaine and collected demographic, clinical, and procedural information for analysis. We compared total opioid consumption over 72-h postoperatively in milligram morphine equivalents (MME), frequency of opioid utilization, and average level of pain intensity between groups. These outcomes were also evaluated after adjusting for covariates. Data were presented as mean ± SD, median [IQR] or frequency (%), as appropriate; p < 0.05 was accepted as significant.

Results: A total of 178 patients met inclusion criteria, with 79 patients receiving an admixture of liposomal bupivacaine and conventional bupivacaine and 99 patients receiving conventional bupivacaine. The liposomal bupivacaine group had a median opioid consumption 72-h postoperatively of 47.5 [18-91.8] MME compared to 88 [43.8-160] MME in the conventional bupivacaine group, p = 0.045. Differences in opioid consumption between the groups did not reach statistical significance after adjustment for demographic and clinical characteristics, p = 0.11. There was no significant difference in frequency of opioid use or average pain intensity.

Conclusion: Transversus abdominis plane blocks using an admixture of liposomal bupivacaine conventional bupivacaine are not associated with decreased opioid consumption or reduced pain up to 72 h following elective abdominopelvic surgery.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Pain Practice
Pain Practice ANESTHESIOLOGY-CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
3.80%
发文量
92
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Pain Practice, the official journal of the World Institute of Pain, publishes international multidisciplinary articles on pain and analgesia that provide its readership with up-to-date research, evaluation methods, and techniques for pain management. Special sections including the Consultant’s Corner, Images in Pain Practice, Case Studies from Mayo, Tutorials, and the Evidence-Based Medicine combine to give pain researchers, pain clinicians and pain fellows in training a systematic approach to continuing education in pain medicine. Prior to publication, all articles and reviews undergo peer review by at least two experts in the field.
×
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