布比卡因和右美托咪定后头皮阻滞治疗后颅窝手术疼痛:一项前瞻性、双盲、随机对照试验。

IF 1.4 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Sheethal N, Ashwin Pai V, Ramya Kateel, Arjun Balakrishnan, Raghavendra Nayak, Girish R Menon, Sunitha M, Ravitej Bhat
{"title":"布比卡因和右美托咪定后头皮阻滞治疗后颅窝手术疼痛:一项前瞻性、双盲、随机对照试验。","authors":"Sheethal N, Ashwin Pai V, Ramya Kateel, Arjun Balakrishnan, Raghavendra Nayak, Girish R Menon, Sunitha M, Ravitej Bhat","doi":"10.1080/17581869.2025.2470607","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Pain management in posterior fossa surgeries poses significant challenges, with opioid-based approaches causing unwanted side effects. This study evaluates the efficacy of posterior scalp block using bupivacaine and dexmedetomidine compared to skin infiltration for managing perioperative pain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial, 34 adult patients undergoing elective posterior fossa surgeries were equally assigned to either posterior scalp block or skin infiltration groups. Outcomes measured included hemodynamic parameters, pain scores, opioid consumption, time to first analgesic, and sedation levels.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The posterior scalp block group showed significantly lower opioid consumption (211.47 ± 101.95 mcg vs 305.88 ± 117.10 mcg; <i>p</i> < 0.01) and pain scores (VAS 2.29 ± 0.9 vs 5.06 ± 1.3; <i>p</i> < 0.001) at 24 hours post-surgery. This group also demonstrated better hemodynamic stability and fewer rescue opioid requirements (9 vs 15 patients; <i>p</i> < 0.009).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Posterior scalp block with bupivacaine and dexmedetomidine significantly improves pain management, reduces opioid use, and provides better hemodynamic stability compared to skin infiltration in posterior fossa surgeries.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial registration: </strong>CTRI/2023/07/0554959.</p>","PeriodicalId":20000,"journal":{"name":"Pain management","volume":" ","pages":"131-140"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11881862/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Posterior scalp block with bupivacaine and dexmedetomidine for pain management in posterior fossa surgeries: a prospective, double blind randomized controlled trial.\",\"authors\":\"Sheethal N, Ashwin Pai V, Ramya Kateel, Arjun Balakrishnan, Raghavendra Nayak, Girish R Menon, Sunitha M, Ravitej Bhat\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17581869.2025.2470607\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Pain management in posterior fossa surgeries poses significant challenges, with opioid-based approaches causing unwanted side effects. This study evaluates the efficacy of posterior scalp block using bupivacaine and dexmedetomidine compared to skin infiltration for managing perioperative pain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial, 34 adult patients undergoing elective posterior fossa surgeries were equally assigned to either posterior scalp block or skin infiltration groups. Outcomes measured included hemodynamic parameters, pain scores, opioid consumption, time to first analgesic, and sedation levels.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The posterior scalp block group showed significantly lower opioid consumption (211.47 ± 101.95 mcg vs 305.88 ± 117.10 mcg; <i>p</i> < 0.01) and pain scores (VAS 2.29 ± 0.9 vs 5.06 ± 1.3; <i>p</i> < 0.001) at 24 hours post-surgery. This group also demonstrated better hemodynamic stability and fewer rescue opioid requirements (9 vs 15 patients; <i>p</i> < 0.009).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Posterior scalp block with bupivacaine and dexmedetomidine significantly improves pain management, reduces opioid use, and provides better hemodynamic stability compared to skin infiltration in posterior fossa surgeries.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial registration: </strong>CTRI/2023/07/0554959.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20000,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pain management\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"131-140\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11881862/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pain management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17581869.2025.2470607\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17581869.2025.2470607","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:后窝手术中的疼痛管理是一项重大挑战,以阿片类药物为基础的方法会导致不必要的副作用。本研究评估了使用布比卡因和右美托咪定进行后头皮阻滞与皮肤浸润治疗围手术期疼痛的疗效:在这项前瞻性、双盲、随机对照试验中,34 名接受后窝择期手术的成年患者被平均分配到后头皮阻滞组或皮肤浸润组。测量结果包括血液动力学参数、疼痛评分、阿片类药物消耗量、首次镇痛时间和镇静水平:与后窝手术中的皮肤浸润相比,布比卡因和右美托咪定的头皮后阻滞能明显改善疼痛管理,减少阿片类药物的使用,并提供更好的血流动力学稳定性:CTRI/2023/07/0554959.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Posterior scalp block with bupivacaine and dexmedetomidine for pain management in posterior fossa surgeries: a prospective, double blind randomized controlled trial.

Background: Pain management in posterior fossa surgeries poses significant challenges, with opioid-based approaches causing unwanted side effects. This study evaluates the efficacy of posterior scalp block using bupivacaine and dexmedetomidine compared to skin infiltration for managing perioperative pain.

Methods: In this prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial, 34 adult patients undergoing elective posterior fossa surgeries were equally assigned to either posterior scalp block or skin infiltration groups. Outcomes measured included hemodynamic parameters, pain scores, opioid consumption, time to first analgesic, and sedation levels.

Results: The posterior scalp block group showed significantly lower opioid consumption (211.47 ± 101.95 mcg vs 305.88 ± 117.10 mcg; p < 0.01) and pain scores (VAS 2.29 ± 0.9 vs 5.06 ± 1.3; p < 0.001) at 24 hours post-surgery. This group also demonstrated better hemodynamic stability and fewer rescue opioid requirements (9 vs 15 patients; p < 0.009).

Conclusions: Posterior scalp block with bupivacaine and dexmedetomidine significantly improves pain management, reduces opioid use, and provides better hemodynamic stability compared to skin infiltration in posterior fossa surgeries.

Clinical trial registration: CTRI/2023/07/0554959.

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 management
Pain management CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
5.90%
发文量
62
×
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