竖棘平面阻滞用于经皮肝胆道引流的比较分析。

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Çağrı Erdim, Mehmet Hamza Türkcanoğlu, Rabia Deniz, Hamit Özgül, Zöhre Okur, Tevfik Güzelbey, Mustafa Fatih Arslan, Özgür Kılıçkesmez
{"title":"竖棘平面阻滞用于经皮肝胆道引流的比较分析。","authors":"Çağrı Erdim, Mehmet Hamza Türkcanoğlu, Rabia Deniz, Hamit Özgül, Zöhre Okur, Tevfik Güzelbey, Mustafa Fatih Arslan, Özgür Kılıçkesmez","doi":"10.1007/s00270-025-04108-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) is associated with significant procedural pain, typically managed with opioid-based sedation, which carries risks such as respiratory depression, nausea, and hemodynamic instability. The erector spinae plane block (ESPB) has emerged as an opioid-sparing alternative for perioperative pain management. This study aimed to evaluate the analgesic efficacy of ESPB compared to procedural analgesia with fentanyl (PAF) in PTBD patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients who underwent PTBD with ESPB or PAF were assessed using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at five time points: pre-procedure, intra-procedure, and 1, 6, and 12 h post-procedure. Opioid consumption and procedure-related complications were also recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>101 patients who underwent PTBD with either pre-procedural ESPB (n = 41) or PAF (n = 60) were included. The ESPB group demonstrated significantly lower median pain scores at 1 h (3 vs. 6, p < 0.001), 6 h (2 vs. 4, p < 0.001), and 12 h (1 vs. 2, p < 0.001) post-procedure compared to the PAF group. Although intra-procedural pain scores were comparable between the two groups, patients in the ESPB group experienced a more rapid decline in post-procedural pain, returning to near-baseline levels at 1 h, whereas pain in the PAF group remained elevated (p < 0.001). No patients in the ESPB group required additional opioid analgesia post-procedure, whereas tramadol was administered in the PAF group as needed for breakthrough pain (NRS ≥ 6).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>ESPB provides effective analgesia for PTBD, minimizing opioid use while enhancing patient comfort and procedural success.</p>","PeriodicalId":9591,"journal":{"name":"CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Erector Spinae Plane Block for Percutaneous Transhepatic Biliary Drainage: A Comparative Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Çağrı Erdim, Mehmet Hamza Türkcanoğlu, Rabia Deniz, Hamit Özgül, Zöhre Okur, Tevfik Güzelbey, Mustafa Fatih Arslan, Özgür Kılıçkesmez\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00270-025-04108-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) is associated with significant procedural pain, typically managed with opioid-based sedation, which carries risks such as respiratory depression, nausea, and hemodynamic instability. The erector spinae plane block (ESPB) has emerged as an opioid-sparing alternative for perioperative pain management. This study aimed to evaluate the analgesic efficacy of ESPB compared to procedural analgesia with fentanyl (PAF) in PTBD patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients who underwent PTBD with ESPB or PAF were assessed using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at five time points: pre-procedure, intra-procedure, and 1, 6, and 12 h post-procedure. Opioid consumption and procedure-related complications were also recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>101 patients who underwent PTBD with either pre-procedural ESPB (n = 41) or PAF (n = 60) were included. The ESPB group demonstrated significantly lower median pain scores at 1 h (3 vs. 6, p < 0.001), 6 h (2 vs. 4, p < 0.001), and 12 h (1 vs. 2, p < 0.001) post-procedure compared to the PAF group. Although intra-procedural pain scores were comparable between the two groups, patients in the ESPB group experienced a more rapid decline in post-procedural pain, returning to near-baseline levels at 1 h, whereas pain in the PAF group remained elevated (p < 0.001). No patients in the ESPB group required additional opioid analgesia post-procedure, whereas tramadol was administered in the PAF group as needed for breakthrough pain (NRS ≥ 6).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>ESPB provides effective analgesia for PTBD, minimizing opioid use while enhancing patient comfort and procedural success.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9591,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-025-04108-5\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-025-04108-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:经皮经肝胆道引流术(PTBD)与明显的手术性疼痛相关,通常使用阿片类药物镇静治疗,这有呼吸抑制、恶心和血流动力学不稳定等风险。直立脊柱平面阻滞(ESPB)已成为一种节省阿片类药物的围手术期疼痛管理替代方案。本研究旨在评价ESPB与芬太尼(PAF)手术镇痛对PTBD患者的镇痛效果。方法:采用数字评定量表(NRS)在5个时间点对伴有ESPB或PAF的PTBD患者进行评估:术前、术中、术后1、6和12小时。阿片类药物消耗和手术相关并发症也被记录下来。结果:101例PTBD患者包括术前ESPB (n = 41)或PAF (n = 60)。ESPB组在1 h时的中位疼痛评分显著降低(3比6,p)。结论:ESPB为PTBD提供了有效的镇痛,最大限度地减少了阿片类药物的使用,同时提高了患者的舒适度和手术成功率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Erector Spinae Plane Block for Percutaneous Transhepatic Biliary Drainage: A Comparative Analysis.

Purpose: Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) is associated with significant procedural pain, typically managed with opioid-based sedation, which carries risks such as respiratory depression, nausea, and hemodynamic instability. The erector spinae plane block (ESPB) has emerged as an opioid-sparing alternative for perioperative pain management. This study aimed to evaluate the analgesic efficacy of ESPB compared to procedural analgesia with fentanyl (PAF) in PTBD patients.

Methods: Patients who underwent PTBD with ESPB or PAF were assessed using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at five time points: pre-procedure, intra-procedure, and 1, 6, and 12 h post-procedure. Opioid consumption and procedure-related complications were also recorded.

Results: 101 patients who underwent PTBD with either pre-procedural ESPB (n = 41) or PAF (n = 60) were included. The ESPB group demonstrated significantly lower median pain scores at 1 h (3 vs. 6, p < 0.001), 6 h (2 vs. 4, p < 0.001), and 12 h (1 vs. 2, p < 0.001) post-procedure compared to the PAF group. Although intra-procedural pain scores were comparable between the two groups, patients in the ESPB group experienced a more rapid decline in post-procedural pain, returning to near-baseline levels at 1 h, whereas pain in the PAF group remained elevated (p < 0.001). No patients in the ESPB group required additional opioid analgesia post-procedure, whereas tramadol was administered in the PAF group as needed for breakthrough pain (NRS ≥ 6).

Conclusion: ESPB provides effective analgesia for PTBD, minimizing opioid use while enhancing patient comfort and procedural success.

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
5.50
自引率
13.80%
发文量
306
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology (CVIR) is the official journal of the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe, and is also the official organ of a number of additional distinguished national and international interventional radiological societies. CVIR publishes double blinded peer-reviewed original research work including clinical and laboratory investigations, technical notes, case reports, works in progress, and letters to the editor, as well as review articles, pictorial essays, editorials, and special invited submissions in the field of vascular and interventional radiology. Beside the communication of the latest research results in this field, it is also the aim of CVIR to support continuous medical education. Articles that are accepted for publication are done so with the understanding that they, or their substantive contents, have not been and will not be submitted to any other publication.
×
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