腹腔镜胆囊切除术术后疼痛的超声引导与腹腔镜引导腹横肌平面阻滞:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Abdullah Yousef Aldalati, Ayham Mohammad Hussein, Dang Nguyen, Cameron John Sabet, Bara M Hammadeh, Wesam I Abo-Elenien, Zaid Kamal, Ramez M Odat
{"title":"腹腔镜胆囊切除术术后疼痛的超声引导与腹腔镜引导腹横肌平面阻滞:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Abdullah Yousef Aldalati, Ayham Mohammad Hussein, Dang Nguyen, Cameron John Sabet, Bara M Hammadeh, Wesam I Abo-Elenien, Zaid Kamal, Ramez M Odat","doi":"10.1007/s11845-024-03861-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Postoperative pain following laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is a major concern. The transversus abdominis plane block (TAPB) is one of the anesthetic techniques that has been developed to address this issue. The TAPB can be delivered by the guidance of either ultrasound (UTAPB) or laparoscopic (LTAPB). Our aim is to compare the efficacy of these guidance methods in reducing postoperative pain after LC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases from inception to June 2024 for randomized studies comparing the delivery of TAPB under ultrasound and laparoscopic guidance. Data analysis was conducted using Review Manager V5.4.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five randomized studies were included in our study. UTAPB was significantly more effective in reducing postoperative pain after 6 h compared to LTAPB (MD =  - 0.38, 95% CI, - 0.67 to 0.09, p = 0.01). However, UTAPB was insignificantly more effective than LTAPB in reducing postoperative pain after 12 h (MD =  - 0.14, 95% CI, - 0.44 to 0.17, p = 0.39), 24 h (MD =  - 0.09, 95% CI, - 0.41 to 0.23, p = 0.60), and 48 h (MD =  - 0.12, 95% CI, - 0.44 to 0.19, p = 0.44). UTAPB insignificantly resulted in decreased opioid consumption (SMD: - 0.09; 95% CI: - 0.42, 0.25; p = 0.62) and less postoperative nausea and vomiting (OR = 0.73, 95% CI, 0.21 to 2.51, p = 0.62) in comparison with LTAPB.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Ultrasound guidance of TAPB offers superior pain relief in the setting of LC, especially in the early postoperative period. Further trials are needed to prove and support the results.</p>","PeriodicalId":14507,"journal":{"name":"Irish Journal of Medical Science","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ultrasound-guided vs. laparoscopic-guided transversus abdominis plane block for postoperative pain following laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Abdullah Yousef Aldalati, Ayham Mohammad Hussein, Dang Nguyen, Cameron John Sabet, Bara M Hammadeh, Wesam I Abo-Elenien, Zaid Kamal, Ramez M Odat\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11845-024-03861-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Postoperative pain following laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is a major concern. The transversus abdominis plane block (TAPB) is one of the anesthetic techniques that has been developed to address this issue. The TAPB can be delivered by the guidance of either ultrasound (UTAPB) or laparoscopic (LTAPB). Our aim is to compare the efficacy of these guidance methods in reducing postoperative pain after LC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases from inception to June 2024 for randomized studies comparing the delivery of TAPB under ultrasound and laparoscopic guidance. Data analysis was conducted using Review Manager V5.4.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five randomized studies were included in our study. UTAPB was significantly more effective in reducing postoperative pain after 6 h compared to LTAPB (MD =  - 0.38, 95% CI, - 0.67 to 0.09, p = 0.01). However, UTAPB was insignificantly more effective than LTAPB in reducing postoperative pain after 12 h (MD =  - 0.14, 95% CI, - 0.44 to 0.17, p = 0.39), 24 h (MD =  - 0.09, 95% CI, - 0.41 to 0.23, p = 0.60), and 48 h (MD =  - 0.12, 95% CI, - 0.44 to 0.19, p = 0.44). UTAPB insignificantly resulted in decreased opioid consumption (SMD: - 0.09; 95% CI: - 0.42, 0.25; p = 0.62) and less postoperative nausea and vomiting (OR = 0.73, 95% CI, 0.21 to 2.51, p = 0.62) in comparison with LTAPB.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Ultrasound guidance of TAPB offers superior pain relief in the setting of LC, especially in the early postoperative period. Further trials are needed to prove and support the results.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14507,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Irish Journal of Medical Science\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Irish Journal of Medical Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-024-03861-9\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Irish Journal of Medical Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-024-03861-9","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

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 vs. laparoscopic-guided transversus abdominis plane block for postoperative pain following laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Postoperative pain following laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is a major concern. The transversus abdominis plane block (TAPB) is one of the anesthetic techniques that has been developed to address this issue. The TAPB can be delivered by the guidance of either ultrasound (UTAPB) or laparoscopic (LTAPB). Our aim is to compare the efficacy of these guidance methods in reducing postoperative pain after LC.

Methods: A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases from inception to June 2024 for randomized studies comparing the delivery of TAPB under ultrasound and laparoscopic guidance. Data analysis was conducted using Review Manager V5.4.

Results: Five randomized studies were included in our study. UTAPB was significantly more effective in reducing postoperative pain after 6 h compared to LTAPB (MD =  - 0.38, 95% CI, - 0.67 to 0.09, p = 0.01). However, UTAPB was insignificantly more effective than LTAPB in reducing postoperative pain after 12 h (MD =  - 0.14, 95% CI, - 0.44 to 0.17, p = 0.39), 24 h (MD =  - 0.09, 95% CI, - 0.41 to 0.23, p = 0.60), and 48 h (MD =  - 0.12, 95% CI, - 0.44 to 0.19, p = 0.44). UTAPB insignificantly resulted in decreased opioid consumption (SMD: - 0.09; 95% CI: - 0.42, 0.25; p = 0.62) and less postoperative nausea and vomiting (OR = 0.73, 95% CI, 0.21 to 2.51, p = 0.62) in comparison with LTAPB.

Conclusion: Ultrasound guidance of TAPB offers superior pain relief in the setting of LC, especially in the early postoperative period. Further trials are needed to prove and support the results.

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
Irish Journal of Medical Science
Irish Journal of Medical Science 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
4.80%
发文量
357
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Irish Journal of Medical Science is the official organ of the Royal Academy of Medicine in Ireland. Established in 1832, this quarterly journal is a contribution to medical science and an ideal forum for the younger medical/scientific professional to enter world literature and an ideal launching platform now, as in the past, for many a young research worker. The primary role of both the Academy and IJMS is that of providing a forum for the exchange of scientific information and to promote academic discussion, so essential to scientific progress.
×
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