镇痛方式对腹腔镜胰远端切除术术后恢复的影响。

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
Giovanni Guarneri, Stefano Turi, Nicolò Pecorelli, Giuseppe Culicchia, Alessia Vallorani, Renato Meani, Luigi Beretta, Massimo Falconi
{"title":"镇痛方式对腹腔镜胰远端切除术术后恢复的影响。","authors":"Giovanni Guarneri, Stefano Turi, Nicolò Pecorelli, Giuseppe Culicchia, Alessia Vallorani, Renato Meani, Luigi Beretta, Massimo Falconi","doi":"10.1007/s13304-025-02268-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the context of enhanced recovery pathways (ERP) for colorectal surgery, thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) delays recovery compared to opioid-based patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCA). Limited evidence is available for laparoscopic pancreatic surgery. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of different analgesic modalities on the time to functional recovery (TFR) following laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP). Clinical data for consecutive patients undergoing LDP were reviewed. All patients were treated within an ERP including a multimodal analgesia protocol. The main analgesic techniques used were TEA, intravenous morphine PCA, and patient-controlled sublingual sufentanil tablet system (SSTS). TFR was defined as postoperative days (PODs) needed to achieve adequate mobilization, return of gastrointestinal function, sufficient oral intake with no need for intravenous infusion, and adequate pain control with oral analgesia. Overall, 336 patients were included; 109 (32%) patients received TEA, 124 (37%) PCA, and 103 (31%) SSTS. TFR was significantly shorter for the SSTS group with median of 4 [IQR 3-5] days compared to 5 [4-6] days in both the TEA and PCA groups (p < 0.001). This difference was due to faster time to sufficient oral intake and adequate pain control with oral analgesia. On POD1, patients treated with TEA had better pain control compared to other modalities; the median NRS pain score at rest was 0 [0-3] compared to 2 [0-4] for both PCA and SSTS groups (p = 0.003). Multivariate regression showed that SSTS was associated with a 17% reduction (95% CI - 29 to - 5; p = 0.005) of TFR compared to TEA. Patients treated with SSTS had a significantly shorter TFR after LDP compared with other analgesic modalities with no difference in adverse events.</p>","PeriodicalId":23391,"journal":{"name":"Updates in Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of analgesia modality on postoperative recovery after laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy.\",\"authors\":\"Giovanni Guarneri, Stefano Turi, Nicolò Pecorelli, Giuseppe Culicchia, Alessia Vallorani, Renato Meani, Luigi Beretta, Massimo Falconi\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s13304-025-02268-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In the context of enhanced recovery pathways (ERP) for colorectal surgery, thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) delays recovery compared to opioid-based patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCA). Limited evidence is available for laparoscopic pancreatic surgery. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of different analgesic modalities on the time to functional recovery (TFR) following laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP). Clinical data for consecutive patients undergoing LDP were reviewed. All patients were treated within an ERP including a multimodal analgesia protocol. The main analgesic techniques used were TEA, intravenous morphine PCA, and patient-controlled sublingual sufentanil tablet system (SSTS). TFR was defined as postoperative days (PODs) needed to achieve adequate mobilization, return of gastrointestinal function, sufficient oral intake with no need for intravenous infusion, and adequate pain control with oral analgesia. Overall, 336 patients were included; 109 (32%) patients received TEA, 124 (37%) PCA, and 103 (31%) SSTS. TFR was significantly shorter for the SSTS group with median of 4 [IQR 3-5] days compared to 5 [4-6] days in both the TEA and PCA groups (p < 0.001). This difference was due to faster time to sufficient oral intake and adequate pain control with oral analgesia. On POD1, patients treated with TEA had better pain control compared to other modalities; the median NRS pain score at rest was 0 [0-3] compared to 2 [0-4] for both PCA and SSTS groups (p = 0.003). Multivariate regression showed that SSTS was associated with a 17% reduction (95% CI - 29 to - 5; p = 0.005) of TFR compared to TEA. Patients treated with SSTS had a significantly shorter TFR after LDP compared with other analgesic modalities with no difference in adverse events.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23391,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Updates in Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Updates in Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-025-02268-0\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Updates in Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-025-02268-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在增强恢复途径(ERP)的背景下,与基于阿片类药物的患者控制静脉镇痛(PCA)相比,胸椎硬膜外镇痛(TEA)延迟了恢复。有限的证据可用于腹腔镜胰腺手术。本研究的目的是评估不同镇痛方式对腹腔镜胰腺远端切除术(LDP)后功能恢复时间(TFR)的影响。回顾了连续接受LDP的患者的临床资料。所有患者均在包括多模式镇痛方案的ERP内治疗。主要镇痛技术为TEA、静脉吗啡PCA和患者控制的舌下舒芬太尼片系统(SSTS)。TFR定义为术后达到足够的活动、胃肠功能恢复、足够的口服摄入而无需静脉输注以及口服镇痛足以控制疼痛所需的天数(pod)。总共纳入336例患者;109例(32%)患者接受TEA, 124例(37%)接受PCA, 103例(31%)接受SSTS。SSTS组的TFR显著缩短,中位数为4 [IQR 3-5]天,而TEA组和PCA组的中位数均为5[4-6]天(p
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Impact of analgesia modality on postoperative recovery after laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy.

In the context of enhanced recovery pathways (ERP) for colorectal surgery, thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) delays recovery compared to opioid-based patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCA). Limited evidence is available for laparoscopic pancreatic surgery. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of different analgesic modalities on the time to functional recovery (TFR) following laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP). Clinical data for consecutive patients undergoing LDP were reviewed. All patients were treated within an ERP including a multimodal analgesia protocol. The main analgesic techniques used were TEA, intravenous morphine PCA, and patient-controlled sublingual sufentanil tablet system (SSTS). TFR was defined as postoperative days (PODs) needed to achieve adequate mobilization, return of gastrointestinal function, sufficient oral intake with no need for intravenous infusion, and adequate pain control with oral analgesia. Overall, 336 patients were included; 109 (32%) patients received TEA, 124 (37%) PCA, and 103 (31%) SSTS. TFR was significantly shorter for the SSTS group with median of 4 [IQR 3-5] days compared to 5 [4-6] days in both the TEA and PCA groups (p < 0.001). This difference was due to faster time to sufficient oral intake and adequate pain control with oral analgesia. On POD1, patients treated with TEA had better pain control compared to other modalities; the median NRS pain score at rest was 0 [0-3] compared to 2 [0-4] for both PCA and SSTS groups (p = 0.003). Multivariate regression showed that SSTS was associated with a 17% reduction (95% CI - 29 to - 5; p = 0.005) of TFR compared to TEA. Patients treated with SSTS had a significantly shorter TFR after LDP compared with other analgesic modalities with no difference in adverse events.

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
Updates in Surgery
Updates in Surgery Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
7.70%
发文量
208
期刊介绍: Updates in Surgery (UPIS) has been founded in 2010 as the official journal of the Italian Society of Surgery. It’s an international, English-language, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the surgical sciences. Its main goal is to offer a valuable update on the most recent developments of those surgical techniques that are rapidly evolving, forcing the community of surgeons to a rigorous debate and a continuous refinement of standards of care. In this respect position papers on the mostly debated surgical approaches and accreditation criteria have been published and are welcome for the future. Beside its focus on general surgery, the journal draws particular attention to cutting edge topics and emerging surgical fields that are publishing in monothematic issues guest edited by well-known experts. Updates in Surgery has been considering various types of papers: editorials, comprehensive reviews, original studies and technical notes related to specific surgical procedures and techniques on liver, colorectal, gastric, pancreatic, robotic and bariatric surgery.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信