髋部手术腰方肌阻滞vs股/髂筋膜阻滞:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Yufan Wang, Lina Zhu
{"title":"髋部手术腰方肌阻滞vs股/髂筋膜阻滞:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Yufan Wang, Lina Zhu","doi":"10.12669/pjms.41.4.11531","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The current systematic review was conducted to compare quadratus lumborum block (QLB) vs fascia iliaca block (FIB) and femoral nerve block (FNB) for improving analgesic outcomes in patients undergoing hip surgeries.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched for randomized controlled trials from inception to on Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, clinical trial registry, and Google Scholar comparing QLB vs FIB/FNB for hip surgeries. The search was initiated on 1<sup>st</sup> December and culminated on 5<sup>th</sup> December 2023 to include all studies published from inception till the last day of the search. The primary outcome was 24 hours total analgesic consumption in morphine equivalents. Secondary outcomes were pain scores and incidence of quadriceps weakness at 24 hours, and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six RCTs were eligible. The meta-analysis found that 24-hours morphine consumption was found to be significantly lower in the FIB/FNB group as compared to the QLB group. Pain scores on the 10-point scale were not significantly different between the two groups at one to two hours, two to four hours, 12 hours, 24 hours, and 48 hours. Incidence of quadriceps weakness and PONV was also not significantly difference between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Meta-analysis of a limited number of RCTs shows that QLB does not provide better postoperative analgesia as compared to FIB/FNB after hip surgery. Twenty four hours total opioid consumption was significantly higher with QLB but without any difference in pain scores. Incidence of quadriceps weakness and PONV does not differ between QLB and FIB/FNB.</p>","PeriodicalId":19958,"journal":{"name":"Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences","volume":"41 4","pages":"1193-1201"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12022575/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quadratus lumborum block vs femoral/fascia iliaca block for hip surgeries: A systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Yufan Wang, Lina Zhu\",\"doi\":\"10.12669/pjms.41.4.11531\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The current systematic review was conducted to compare quadratus lumborum block (QLB) vs fascia iliaca block (FIB) and femoral nerve block (FNB) for improving analgesic outcomes in patients undergoing hip surgeries.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched for randomized controlled trials from inception to on Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, clinical trial registry, and Google Scholar comparing QLB vs FIB/FNB for hip surgeries. The search was initiated on 1<sup>st</sup> December and culminated on 5<sup>th</sup> December 2023 to include all studies published from inception till the last day of the search. The primary outcome was 24 hours total analgesic consumption in morphine equivalents. Secondary outcomes were pain scores and incidence of quadriceps weakness at 24 hours, and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six RCTs were eligible. The meta-analysis found that 24-hours morphine consumption was found to be significantly lower in the FIB/FNB group as compared to the QLB group. Pain scores on the 10-point scale were not significantly different between the two groups at one to two hours, two to four hours, 12 hours, 24 hours, and 48 hours. Incidence of quadriceps weakness and PONV was also not significantly difference between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Meta-analysis of a limited number of RCTs shows that QLB does not provide better postoperative analgesia as compared to FIB/FNB after hip surgery. Twenty four hours total opioid consumption was significantly higher with QLB but without any difference in pain scores. Incidence of quadriceps weakness and PONV does not differ between QLB and FIB/FNB.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19958,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences\",\"volume\":\"41 4\",\"pages\":\"1193-1201\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12022575/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.41.4.11531\",\"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":"Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.41.4.11531","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

目的:本系统综述比较腰方肌阻滞(QLB)与髂筋膜阻滞(FIB)和股神经阻滞(FNB)对改善髋关节手术患者镇痛效果的作用。方法:我们在Embase、PubMed、Web of Science、临床试验注册库和谷歌Scholar上检索了从开始到现在的随机对照试验,比较QLB与FIB/FNB在髋关节手术中的应用。检索于2023年12月1日开始,并于12月5日结束,包括从开始到检索最后一天发表的所有研究。主要终点是吗啡当量的24小时总镇痛用量。次要结局是疼痛评分和24小时股四头肌无力发生率,以及术后恶心和呕吐(PONV)。结果:6项rct符合条件。荟萃分析发现,与QLB组相比,FIB/FNB组的24小时吗啡用量显著降低。两组在1 - 2小时、2 - 4小时、12小时、24小时和48小时的疼痛评分在10分制上没有显著差异。股四头肌无力和PONV的发生率在两组之间也无显著差异。结论:有限数量的随机对照试验的荟萃分析显示,与FIB/FNB相比,QLB不能提供更好的髋关节术后镇痛。QLB组24小时阿片类药物总消耗量显著增加,但疼痛评分无差异。股四头肌无力和PONV的发生率在QLB和FIB/FNB之间没有差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Quadratus lumborum block vs femoral/fascia iliaca block for hip surgeries: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objective: The current systematic review was conducted to compare quadratus lumborum block (QLB) vs fascia iliaca block (FIB) and femoral nerve block (FNB) for improving analgesic outcomes in patients undergoing hip surgeries.

Methods: We searched for randomized controlled trials from inception to on Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, clinical trial registry, and Google Scholar comparing QLB vs FIB/FNB for hip surgeries. The search was initiated on 1st December and culminated on 5th December 2023 to include all studies published from inception till the last day of the search. The primary outcome was 24 hours total analgesic consumption in morphine equivalents. Secondary outcomes were pain scores and incidence of quadriceps weakness at 24 hours, and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).

Results: Six RCTs were eligible. The meta-analysis found that 24-hours morphine consumption was found to be significantly lower in the FIB/FNB group as compared to the QLB group. Pain scores on the 10-point scale were not significantly different between the two groups at one to two hours, two to four hours, 12 hours, 24 hours, and 48 hours. Incidence of quadriceps weakness and PONV was also not significantly difference between the two groups.

Conclusion: Meta-analysis of a limited number of RCTs shows that QLB does not provide better postoperative analgesia as compared to FIB/FNB after hip surgery. Twenty four hours total opioid consumption was significantly higher with QLB but without any difference in pain scores. Incidence of quadriceps weakness and PONV does not differ between QLB and FIB/FNB.

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
Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences
Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
9.10%
发文量
363
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: It is a peer reviewed medical journal published regularly since 1984. It was previously known as quarterly "SPECIALIST" till December 31st 1999. It publishes original research articles, review articles, current practices, short communications & case reports. It attracts manuscripts not only from within Pakistan but also from over fifty countries from abroad. Copies of PJMS are sent to all the import medical libraries all over Pakistan and overseas particularly in South East Asia and Asia Pacific besides WHO EMRO Region countries. Eminent members of the medical profession at home and abroad regularly contribute their write-ups, manuscripts in our publications. We pursue an independent editorial policy, which allows an opportunity to the healthcare professionals to express their views without any fear or favour. That is why many opinion makers among the medical and pharmaceutical profession use this publication to communicate their viewpoint.
×
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