全膝关节置换术后连续股神经阻滞和鞘内吗啡与患者自控硬膜外镇痛的疗效和不良反应:随机对照试验

Erwin Mulyawan, C. Aurelia
{"title":"全膝关节置换术后连续股神经阻滞和鞘内吗啡与患者自控硬膜外镇痛的疗效和不良反应:随机对照试验","authors":"Erwin Mulyawan, C. Aurelia","doi":"10.2174/0125896458294513240710071442","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n Achieving adequate analgesia after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) can be a challenging task. This study investigates the efficacy and adverse effects of continuous femoral nerve block using a patient-controlled analgesia machine (FNB-PCA) in comparison to intrathecal morphine (ITM) with patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) using bupivacaine in patients undergoing unilateral TKA under spinal anesthesia.\n \n \n \n Forty patients with ASA I-II scheduled for unilateral TKA were randomized into two groups. Group ITBM+Ep received 250 mcg of intrathecal morphine and 15 mg of hyperbaric bupivacaine, and group ITB-FNB received FNB with 30 ml of 0.375% Bupivacaine with 5 mcg/ml of epinephrine with 15 mg bupivacaine administered intrathecally. Post-operative analgesia for group ITBM+Ep was maintained by PCEA with bupivacaine, while group ITB-FNB used PCA. Visual analogue scales (VAS) on rest and movement, hemodynamics, and side effects were recorded post-operatively.\n \n \n \n A decrease in VAS at rest between group ITBM+Ep and ITB-FNB from the 24th - 48th hour was statistically significant (P<0.05). VAS on movement showed no statistical difference between both groups from the 1st until the 6th hour (P >0.05), but VAS was significantly different starting the 12th hour (P <0.05). Group FNB was associated with less hypotension, nausea, vomiting, and pruritus (P <0.05).\n \n \n \n This study concludes that ITB-FNB-PCA provides superior analgesia on rest and movement with a significant reduction in side effects in comparison to ITBM+Ep with PCEA for patients who underwent TKA. Further trials comparing different anesthetic techniques with larger sample sizes are necessary to establish “gold standard” management after TKA.\n \n \n \n 194/K-LKJ/ETIK/VI/2022\n","PeriodicalId":22862,"journal":{"name":"The Open Anesthesia Journal","volume":"116 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy and Adverse Effect of Continuous Femoral Nerve Block and Intrathecal Morphine with Patient-Controlled Epidural Analgesia Post-total Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomised Controlled Trial\",\"authors\":\"Erwin Mulyawan, C. Aurelia\",\"doi\":\"10.2174/0125896458294513240710071442\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n \\n Achieving adequate analgesia after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) can be a challenging task. This study investigates the efficacy and adverse effects of continuous femoral nerve block using a patient-controlled analgesia machine (FNB-PCA) in comparison to intrathecal morphine (ITM) with patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) using bupivacaine in patients undergoing unilateral TKA under spinal anesthesia.\\n \\n \\n \\n Forty patients with ASA I-II scheduled for unilateral TKA were randomized into two groups. Group ITBM+Ep received 250 mcg of intrathecal morphine and 15 mg of hyperbaric bupivacaine, and group ITB-FNB received FNB with 30 ml of 0.375% Bupivacaine with 5 mcg/ml of epinephrine with 15 mg bupivacaine administered intrathecally. Post-operative analgesia for group ITBM+Ep was maintained by PCEA with bupivacaine, while group ITB-FNB used PCA. Visual analogue scales (VAS) on rest and movement, hemodynamics, and side effects were recorded post-operatively.\\n \\n \\n \\n A decrease in VAS at rest between group ITBM+Ep and ITB-FNB from the 24th - 48th hour was statistically significant (P<0.05). VAS on movement showed no statistical difference between both groups from the 1st until the 6th hour (P >0.05), but VAS was significantly different starting the 12th hour (P <0.05). Group FNB was associated with less hypotension, nausea, vomiting, and pruritus (P <0.05).\\n \\n \\n \\n This study concludes that ITB-FNB-PCA provides superior analgesia on rest and movement with a significant reduction in side effects in comparison to ITBM+Ep with PCEA for patients who underwent TKA. Further trials comparing different anesthetic techniques with larger sample sizes are necessary to establish “gold standard” management after TKA.\\n \\n \\n \\n 194/K-LKJ/ETIK/VI/2022\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":22862,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Open Anesthesia Journal\",\"volume\":\"116 10\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Open Anesthesia Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2174/0125896458294513240710071442\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Open Anesthesia Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/0125896458294513240710071442","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在全膝关节置换术(TKA)后实现充分镇痛是一项具有挑战性的任务。本研究调查了在脊髓麻醉下接受单侧 TKA 手术的患者中,使用患者自控镇痛机(FNB-PCA)进行连续股神经阻滞与使用布比卡因的鞘内吗啡(ITM)和患者自控硬膜外镇痛(PCEA)的疗效和不良反应的比较。 40 名 ASA I-II 级的单侧 TKA 患者被随机分为两组。ITBM+Ep 组接受 250 微克鞘内吗啡和 15 毫克高压布比卡因,ITB-FNB 组接受 30 毫升 0.375% 布比卡因和 5 微克/毫升肾上腺素的 FNB,鞘内注射 15 毫克布比卡因。ITBM+Ep 组采用布比卡因 PCEA 维持术后镇痛,而 ITB-FNB 组则采用 PCA。术后记录了休息和运动的视觉模拟量表(VAS)、血液动力学和副作用。 ITBM+Ep组和ITB-FNB组在第24-48小时的静息状态下的VAS下降有统计学意义(P0.05),但从第12小时开始VAS有显著差异(P <0.05)。FNB 组出现低血压、恶心、呕吐和瘙痒的情况较少(P <0.05)。 本研究得出结论:与使用 PCEA 的 ITBM+Ep 相比,ITB-FNB-PCA 可为接受 TKA 的患者提供更佳的休息和运动镇痛效果,同时显著减少副作用。有必要进一步开展样本量更大的试验,比较不同的麻醉技术,以确定 TKA 术后的 "金标准 "管理。 194/K-LKJ/ETIK/VI/2022
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Efficacy and Adverse Effect of Continuous Femoral Nerve Block and Intrathecal Morphine with Patient-Controlled Epidural Analgesia Post-total Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomised Controlled Trial
Achieving adequate analgesia after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) can be a challenging task. This study investigates the efficacy and adverse effects of continuous femoral nerve block using a patient-controlled analgesia machine (FNB-PCA) in comparison to intrathecal morphine (ITM) with patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) using bupivacaine in patients undergoing unilateral TKA under spinal anesthesia. Forty patients with ASA I-II scheduled for unilateral TKA were randomized into two groups. Group ITBM+Ep received 250 mcg of intrathecal morphine and 15 mg of hyperbaric bupivacaine, and group ITB-FNB received FNB with 30 ml of 0.375% Bupivacaine with 5 mcg/ml of epinephrine with 15 mg bupivacaine administered intrathecally. Post-operative analgesia for group ITBM+Ep was maintained by PCEA with bupivacaine, while group ITB-FNB used PCA. Visual analogue scales (VAS) on rest and movement, hemodynamics, and side effects were recorded post-operatively. A decrease in VAS at rest between group ITBM+Ep and ITB-FNB from the 24th - 48th hour was statistically significant (P<0.05). VAS on movement showed no statistical difference between both groups from the 1st until the 6th hour (P >0.05), but VAS was significantly different starting the 12th hour (P <0.05). Group FNB was associated with less hypotension, nausea, vomiting, and pruritus (P <0.05). This study concludes that ITB-FNB-PCA provides superior analgesia on rest and movement with a significant reduction in side effects in comparison to ITBM+Ep with PCEA for patients who underwent TKA. Further trials comparing different anesthetic techniques with larger sample sizes are necessary to establish “gold standard” management after TKA. 194/K-LKJ/ETIK/VI/2022
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
0.90
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