双缝阻滞与单缝阻滞对全膝关节置换术术后镇痛的比较分析——一项随机、双盲研究。

IF 1.5 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Devyani Desai, Neha Shah, Kanchan Choube
{"title":"双缝阻滞与单缝阻滞对全膝关节置换术术后镇痛的比较分析——一项随机、双盲研究。","authors":"Devyani Desai, Neha Shah, Kanchan Choube","doi":"10.4103/joacp.joacp_206_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>This study compared the dual sub-sartorial block (DSB), which allegedly includes all pain generators of the anterior and posterior compartments of the knee joint, to the routinely used single sub-sartorial bock (SSB), in terms of analgesic efficacy and preservation of motor strength after unilateral total knee arthroplasty (TKA).</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Sixty patients aged 18-80 years and ASA grade I-III undergoing unilateral TKA were randomised to two groups postoperatively to receive DSB or SSB. Patients in group DSB received distal femoral triangle block (15 ml) + proximal adductor canal block (20 ml), while group SSB received only proximal adductor canal block (20 ml). Primarily, the changes in pain intensity and pain control in terms of static and dynamic visual analogue score (VAS) with the duration of analgesia and cumulative dose requirement of rescue analgesic in the first 24 hours postoperatively were studied. Secondary outcomes were the postoperative degree of motor blockade, the ability of early ambulation, patient satisfaction and complications. Statistical analysis was done using the student <i>t</i>-test and Chi-square test using MedCalc version 12.4.3.0.</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>At all time intervals, the static and dynamic VAS scores were lower in the patients with the DSB group (<i>P</i> < 0.001) with longer duration of postoperative analgesia (14.96 ± 5.05 vs 6.03 ± 1.73 hours, <i>P</i> < 0.0001) and less requirement of total parenteral analgesic (1.06 ± 0.37 vs 2 ± 0.52, <i>P</i> < 0.0001) in first 24 hours postoperatively. A shorter time was required to finish the Timed Up and Go test for patients belonging to the DSB group (53.48 ± 4.06 vs 66.16 ± 6.23 seconds, <i>P</i> < 0.0001) in comparison to group SSB.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>DSB provided better pain control with a longer duration of analgesia and required fewer doses of parenteral analgesics in the first 24 hours postoperatively after TKA, as opposed to SSB. Neither block had incidences of motor weakness and other complications.</p>","PeriodicalId":14946,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anaesthesiology, Clinical Pharmacology","volume":"41 3","pages":"470-477"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12237161/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative analysis of dual versus single subsartorial block for postoperative analgesia after total knee arthroplasty - A randomized, double-blind study.\",\"authors\":\"Devyani Desai, Neha Shah, Kanchan Choube\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/joacp.joacp_206_24\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>This study compared the dual sub-sartorial block (DSB), which allegedly includes all pain generators of the anterior and posterior compartments of the knee joint, to the routinely used single sub-sartorial bock (SSB), in terms of analgesic efficacy and preservation of motor strength after unilateral total knee arthroplasty (TKA).</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Sixty patients aged 18-80 years and ASA grade I-III undergoing unilateral TKA were randomised to two groups postoperatively to receive DSB or SSB. Patients in group DSB received distal femoral triangle block (15 ml) + proximal adductor canal block (20 ml), while group SSB received only proximal adductor canal block (20 ml). Primarily, the changes in pain intensity and pain control in terms of static and dynamic visual analogue score (VAS) with the duration of analgesia and cumulative dose requirement of rescue analgesic in the first 24 hours postoperatively were studied. Secondary outcomes were the postoperative degree of motor blockade, the ability of early ambulation, patient satisfaction and complications. Statistical analysis was done using the student <i>t</i>-test and Chi-square test using MedCalc version 12.4.3.0.</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>At all time intervals, the static and dynamic VAS scores were lower in the patients with the DSB group (<i>P</i> < 0.001) with longer duration of postoperative analgesia (14.96 ± 5.05 vs 6.03 ± 1.73 hours, <i>P</i> < 0.0001) and less requirement of total parenteral analgesic (1.06 ± 0.37 vs 2 ± 0.52, <i>P</i> < 0.0001) in first 24 hours postoperatively. A shorter time was required to finish the Timed Up and Go test for patients belonging to the DSB group (53.48 ± 4.06 vs 66.16 ± 6.23 seconds, <i>P</i> < 0.0001) in comparison to group SSB.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>DSB provided better pain control with a longer duration of analgesia and required fewer doses of parenteral analgesics in the first 24 hours postoperatively after TKA, as opposed to SSB. Neither block had incidences of motor weakness and other complications.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14946,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Anaesthesiology, Clinical Pharmacology\",\"volume\":\"41 3\",\"pages\":\"470-477\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12237161/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Anaesthesiology, Clinical Pharmacology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/joacp.joacp_206_24\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/6/2 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Anaesthesiology, Clinical Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/joacp.joacp_206_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:本研究比较了双缝下阻滞(DSB)和常规使用的单缝下阻滞(SSB)在单侧全膝关节置换术(TKA)后的镇痛效果和运动力量的保存。双缝下阻滞据称包括膝关节前后腔室的所有疼痛源。材料与方法:60例年龄18-80岁,ASA分级I-III级的单侧TKA患者,术后随机分为两组,分别接受DSB或SSB治疗。DSB组患者行股骨远端三角阻滞(15 ml) +近端内收肌管阻滞(20 ml), SSB组仅行近端内收肌管阻滞(20 ml)。首先,研究术后24小时内疼痛强度和疼痛控制的静态和动态视觉模拟评分(VAS)随镇痛时间和抢救镇痛药累积剂量需求的变化。次要结果为术后运动阻滞程度、早期活动能力、患者满意度和并发症。统计学分析采用学生t检验和卡方检验,使用MedCalc 12.4.3.0版本。结果:在所有时间间隔内,DSB组患者的静态和动态VAS评分均较低(P < 0.001),且术后24 h内镇痛时间较长(14.96±5.05比6.03±1.73 h, P < 0.0001),总静脉外镇痛需求较低(1.06±0.37比2±0.52,P < 0.0001)。与SSB组相比,DSB组完成Timed Up and Go测试所需时间更短(53.48±4.06 vs 66.16±6.23秒,P < 0.0001)。结论:与SSB相比,DSB在TKA术后24小时内镇痛效果更好,镇痛持续时间更长,需要的肠外镇痛剂量较少。两组阻滞均未发生运动无力和其他并发症。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative analysis of dual versus single subsartorial block for postoperative analgesia after total knee arthroplasty - A randomized, double-blind study.

Background and aims: This study compared the dual sub-sartorial block (DSB), which allegedly includes all pain generators of the anterior and posterior compartments of the knee joint, to the routinely used single sub-sartorial bock (SSB), in terms of analgesic efficacy and preservation of motor strength after unilateral total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

Material and methods: Sixty patients aged 18-80 years and ASA grade I-III undergoing unilateral TKA were randomised to two groups postoperatively to receive DSB or SSB. Patients in group DSB received distal femoral triangle block (15 ml) + proximal adductor canal block (20 ml), while group SSB received only proximal adductor canal block (20 ml). Primarily, the changes in pain intensity and pain control in terms of static and dynamic visual analogue score (VAS) with the duration of analgesia and cumulative dose requirement of rescue analgesic in the first 24 hours postoperatively were studied. Secondary outcomes were the postoperative degree of motor blockade, the ability of early ambulation, patient satisfaction and complications. Statistical analysis was done using the student t-test and Chi-square test using MedCalc version 12.4.3.0.

Result: At all time intervals, the static and dynamic VAS scores were lower in the patients with the DSB group (P < 0.001) with longer duration of postoperative analgesia (14.96 ± 5.05 vs 6.03 ± 1.73 hours, P < 0.0001) and less requirement of total parenteral analgesic (1.06 ± 0.37 vs 2 ± 0.52, P < 0.0001) in first 24 hours postoperatively. A shorter time was required to finish the Timed Up and Go test for patients belonging to the DSB group (53.48 ± 4.06 vs 66.16 ± 6.23 seconds, P < 0.0001) in comparison to group SSB.

Conclusion: DSB provided better pain control with a longer duration of analgesia and required fewer doses of parenteral analgesics in the first 24 hours postoperatively after TKA, as opposed to SSB. Neither block had incidences of motor weakness and other complications.

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
1.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
129
期刊介绍: The JOACP publishes original peer-reviewed research and clinical work in all branches of anaesthesiology, pain, critical care and perioperative medicine including the application to basic sciences. In addition, the journal publishes review articles, special articles, brief communications/reports, case reports, and reports of new equipment, letters to editor, book reviews and obituaries. It is international in scope and comprehensive in coverage.
×
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