超声引导下的横筋膜平面阻滞或腹横肌平面阻滞用于剖腹产后恢复:随机临床试验。

IF 4.2 2区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
European Journal of Anaesthesiology Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-22 DOI:10.1097/EJA.0000000000002041
Ahmet Pinarbaşi, Başak Altiparmak, Melike Korkmaz Toker, Fatih Pirinççi, Bakiye Uğur
{"title":"超声引导下的横筋膜平面阻滞或腹横肌平面阻滞用于剖腹产后恢复:随机临床试验。","authors":"Ahmet Pinarbaşi, Başak Altiparmak, Melike Korkmaz Toker, Fatih Pirinççi, Bakiye Uğur","doi":"10.1097/EJA.0000000000002041","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Caesarean section is a widely performed surgical procedure that often results in moderate-to-severe postoperative pain. If left untreated, this pain can lead to short-term and long-term consequences. Transversalis fascia plane (TFP) block and transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block are among the regional anaesthesia techniques employed for managing pain after a caesarean section.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to compare the impact of these two blocks on the quality of recovery in patients undergoing elective caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A single-centre, double-blind, randomised trial.</p><p><strong>Settings: </strong>Operating room, postanaesthesia recovery unit, and ward in a tertiary hospital.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Ninety-three patients (ASA 2 to 3) were recruited. After exclusion, 79 patients were included in the final analysis: 40 in the TFP block group and 39 in the TAP block group.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>After surgery, participants received either TFP block (20 ml 0.25% bupivacaine for each side) or TAP block (20 ml 0.25% bupivacaine for each side).</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>The primary outcome was the difference in obstetric quality of recovery 11-Turkish (ObsQoR-11T) scores between groups. Secondary outcomes included pain scores, opioid consumption and incidence of opioid-related complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean ObsQoR-11T score was higher in the TFP block group compared with the TAP block group (97.13 ± 6.67 points vs. 87.10 ± 9.84 points, respectively; P  < 0.001). The pain scores in the TFP block group were slightly lower between postoperative 4 and 24 h. The mean total morphine consumption was 15.08 ± 2.21 mg in the TFP block group and 22.21 ± 3.04 mg in the TAP block group ( P  < 0.001). More patients required rescue analgesia between 4 and 8 h in the TAP block group [2.00 (5.00%) vs. 9.00 (23.08%), P  = 0.02]. No significant differences were observed between groups in terms of opioid-related side effects.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>TFP block used for analgesic purposes yielded a better quality recovery period than TAP block and also reduced opioid consumption.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05999981).</p><p><strong>Visual abstract: </strong>http://links.lww.com/EJA/B6 .</p>","PeriodicalId":11920,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Anaesthesiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ultrasound-guided transversalis fascia plane block or transversus abdominis plane block for recovery after caesarean section: A randomised clinical trial.\",\"authors\":\"Ahmet Pinarbaşi, Başak Altiparmak, Melike Korkmaz Toker, Fatih Pirinççi, Bakiye Uğur\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/EJA.0000000000002041\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Caesarean section is a widely performed surgical procedure that often results in moderate-to-severe postoperative pain. If left untreated, this pain can lead to short-term and long-term consequences. Transversalis fascia plane (TFP) block and transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block are among the regional anaesthesia techniques employed for managing pain after a caesarean section.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to compare the impact of these two blocks on the quality of recovery in patients undergoing elective caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A single-centre, double-blind, randomised trial.</p><p><strong>Settings: </strong>Operating room, postanaesthesia recovery unit, and ward in a tertiary hospital.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Ninety-three patients (ASA 2 to 3) were recruited. After exclusion, 79 patients were included in the final analysis: 40 in the TFP block group and 39 in the TAP block group.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>After surgery, participants received either TFP block (20 ml 0.25% bupivacaine for each side) or TAP block (20 ml 0.25% bupivacaine for each side).</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>The primary outcome was the difference in obstetric quality of recovery 11-Turkish (ObsQoR-11T) scores between groups. Secondary outcomes included pain scores, opioid consumption and incidence of opioid-related complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean ObsQoR-11T score was higher in the TFP block group compared with the TAP block group (97.13 ± 6.67 points vs. 87.10 ± 9.84 points, respectively; P  < 0.001). The pain scores in the TFP block group were slightly lower between postoperative 4 and 24 h. The mean total morphine consumption was 15.08 ± 2.21 mg in the TFP block group and 22.21 ± 3.04 mg in the TAP block group ( P  < 0.001). More patients required rescue analgesia between 4 and 8 h in the TAP block group [2.00 (5.00%) vs. 9.00 (23.08%), P  = 0.02]. No significant differences were observed between groups in terms of opioid-related side effects.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>TFP block used for analgesic purposes yielded a better quality recovery period than TAP block and also reduced opioid consumption.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05999981).</p><p><strong>Visual abstract: </strong>http://links.lww.com/EJA/B6 .</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11920,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Anaesthesiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Anaesthesiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/EJA.0000000000002041\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/22 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Anaesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/EJA.0000000000002041","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:剖腹产是一种广泛实施的外科手术,通常会导致中度到重度的术后疼痛。如果不及时治疗,这种疼痛会导致短期和长期的后果。横筋膜平面(TFP)阻滞和腹横肌平面(TAP)阻滞是用于控制剖腹产术后疼痛的区域麻醉技术之一:我们旨在比较这两种阻滞对脊髓麻醉下择期剖腹产患者恢复质量的影响:设计:单中心、双盲、随机试验:地点:一家三甲医院的手术室、麻醉后恢复室和病房:招募了 93 名患者(ASA 2 至 3 级)。经排除后,79 名患者被纳入最终分析:TFP 阻滞组 40 人,TAP 阻滞组 39 人:手术后,参与者接受TFP阻滞(每侧20毫升0.25%布比卡因)或TAP阻滞(每侧20毫升0.25%布比卡因):主要结果是两组间产科恢复质量 11-Turkish (ObsQoR-11T) 评分的差异。次要结果包括疼痛评分、阿片类药物用量和阿片类药物相关并发症的发生率:结果:与 TAP 阻滞组相比,TFP 阻滞组的平均 ObsQoR-11T 得分更高(分别为 97.13±6.67 分与 87.10±9.84 分;P 结论:TAP 阻滞组的平均 ObsQoR-11T 得分更高(分别为 97.13±6.67 分与 87.10±9.84 分):用于镇痛的 TFP 阻滞比 TAP 阻滞的恢复期质量更好,同时还减少了阿片类药物的用量:试验注册:Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05999981).视觉摘要:http://links.lww.com/EJA/B6.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ultrasound-guided transversalis fascia plane block or transversus abdominis plane block for recovery after caesarean section: A randomised clinical trial.

Background: Caesarean section is a widely performed surgical procedure that often results in moderate-to-severe postoperative pain. If left untreated, this pain can lead to short-term and long-term consequences. Transversalis fascia plane (TFP) block and transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block are among the regional anaesthesia techniques employed for managing pain after a caesarean section.

Objective: We aimed to compare the impact of these two blocks on the quality of recovery in patients undergoing elective caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia.

Design: A single-centre, double-blind, randomised trial.

Settings: Operating room, postanaesthesia recovery unit, and ward in a tertiary hospital.

Participants: Ninety-three patients (ASA 2 to 3) were recruited. After exclusion, 79 patients were included in the final analysis: 40 in the TFP block group and 39 in the TAP block group.

Interventions: After surgery, participants received either TFP block (20 ml 0.25% bupivacaine for each side) or TAP block (20 ml 0.25% bupivacaine for each side).

Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was the difference in obstetric quality of recovery 11-Turkish (ObsQoR-11T) scores between groups. Secondary outcomes included pain scores, opioid consumption and incidence of opioid-related complications.

Results: The mean ObsQoR-11T score was higher in the TFP block group compared with the TAP block group (97.13 ± 6.67 points vs. 87.10 ± 9.84 points, respectively; P  < 0.001). The pain scores in the TFP block group were slightly lower between postoperative 4 and 24 h. The mean total morphine consumption was 15.08 ± 2.21 mg in the TFP block group and 22.21 ± 3.04 mg in the TAP block group ( P  < 0.001). More patients required rescue analgesia between 4 and 8 h in the TAP block group [2.00 (5.00%) vs. 9.00 (23.08%), P  = 0.02]. No significant differences were observed between groups in terms of opioid-related side effects.

Conclusion: TFP block used for analgesic purposes yielded a better quality recovery period than TAP block and also reduced opioid consumption.

Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05999981).

Visual abstract: http://links.lww.com/EJA/B6 .

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
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
351
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Anaesthesiology (EJA) publishes original work of high scientific quality in the field of anaesthesiology, pain, emergency medicine and intensive care. Preference is given to experimental work or clinical observation in man, and to laboratory work of clinical relevance. The journal also publishes commissioned reviews by an authority, editorials, invited commentaries, special articles, pro and con debates, and short reports (correspondences, case reports, short reports of clinical studies).
×
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