臂丛阻滞与全麻上肢手术:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
European Surgical Research Pub Date : 2026-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-12-22 DOI:10.1159/000550121
Rafael Llombart-Blanco, María Benlloch, Gonzalo Mariscal, Pablo Vera, Egor Polevoi, Ali Dway, Carlos Barrios, Rafael Llombart-Ais
{"title":"臂丛阻滞与全麻上肢手术:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Rafael Llombart-Blanco, María Benlloch, Gonzalo Mariscal, Pablo Vera, Egor Polevoi, Ali Dway, Carlos Barrios, Rafael Llombart-Ais","doi":"10.1159/000550121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This meta-analysis investigated differences in rebound pain and opioid consumption when using brachial plexus blockade (BPB) versus general anesthesia (GA) for upper limb surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Four databases were searched. Odds ratios (OR), mean differences (MD), and standard mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Outcomes included were pain, opioid consumption, adverse events, and discharge time. The risk of bias was assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nine clinical trials involving 487 patients were included. BPB resulted in significantly lower pain scores within 2 h postoperatively (MD -4.57, 95% CI -5.76 to 3.38; participants = 263; studies = 5; I2 = 0%; p < 0.00001) but not from 6 to 24 h. Opioid consumption (mg) was lower in the BPB group in the first 24 h (SMD -0.85, 95% CI -1.41 to -0.29; participants = 188; studies = 3; I2 = 67%; p < 0.003). BPB was associated with fewer postoperative nausea/vomiting events (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.10-0.33; participants = 326; studies = 6; I2 = 45%; p < 0.00001) and shorter hospital stay (SMD -1.20, 95% CI -1.73 to -0.66; participants = 213; studies = 4; I2 = 69%; p < 0.0001). There was no difference in the number of patients not requiring opioids from 24 to 48 h.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>BPB provided superior pain control at 2 h postoperatively and was associated with reduced opioid use, fewer adverse events, and shorter discharge time. No significant differences in pain scores were observed at 6-24 h or beyond 24 h, likely due to block wear-off. Despite this limitation, BPB still offered perioperative advantages over GA.</p>","PeriodicalId":12222,"journal":{"name":"European Surgical Research","volume":" ","pages":"66-76"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Brachial Plexus Blockage versus General Anesthesia for Upper Extremity Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Rafael Llombart-Blanco, María Benlloch, Gonzalo Mariscal, Pablo Vera, Egor Polevoi, Ali Dway, Carlos Barrios, Rafael Llombart-Ais\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000550121\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This meta-analysis investigated differences in rebound pain and opioid consumption when using brachial plexus blockade (BPB) versus general anesthesia (GA) for upper limb surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Four databases were searched. Odds ratios (OR), mean differences (MD), and standard mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Outcomes included were pain, opioid consumption, adverse events, and discharge time. The risk of bias was assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nine clinical trials involving 487 patients were included. BPB resulted in significantly lower pain scores within 2 h postoperatively (MD -4.57, 95% CI -5.76 to 3.38; participants = 263; studies = 5; I2 = 0%; p < 0.00001) but not from 6 to 24 h. Opioid consumption (mg) was lower in the BPB group in the first 24 h (SMD -0.85, 95% CI -1.41 to -0.29; participants = 188; studies = 3; I2 = 67%; p < 0.003). BPB was associated with fewer postoperative nausea/vomiting events (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.10-0.33; participants = 326; studies = 6; I2 = 45%; p < 0.00001) and shorter hospital stay (SMD -1.20, 95% CI -1.73 to -0.66; participants = 213; studies = 4; I2 = 69%; p < 0.0001). There was no difference in the number of patients not requiring opioids from 24 to 48 h.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>BPB provided superior pain control at 2 h postoperatively and was associated with reduced opioid use, fewer adverse events, and shorter discharge time. No significant differences in pain scores were observed at 6-24 h or beyond 24 h, likely due to block wear-off. Despite this limitation, BPB still offered perioperative advantages over GA.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12222,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Surgical Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"66-76\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Surgical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000550121\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/12/22 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Surgical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000550121","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/12/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本荟萃分析调查了上肢手术中使用臂丛阻滞(BPB)和全身麻醉(GA)时反跳疼痛和阿片类药物消耗的差异。方法:检索4个数据库。计算95%置信区间(ci)的优势比(OR)、平均差异(MD)和标准平均差异(SMD)。结果包括疼痛、阿片类药物消耗、不良事件和出院时间。评估偏倚风险。结果:纳入9项临床试验,共487例患者。BPB导致术后2小时内疼痛评分显著降低(MD-4.57, 95%CI-5.76 - 3.38;参与者=263;研究=5;I2=0%;结论:BPB在术后2小时内提供了更好的疼痛控制,并与阿片类药物使用减少、不良事件减少和出院时间缩短有关。疼痛评分在6-24小时或24小时以上无显著差异,可能是由于阻滞磨损。尽管存在这些局限性,BPB仍比GA具有围手术期优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Brachial Plexus Blockage versus General Anesthesia for Upper Extremity Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Introduction: This meta-analysis investigated differences in rebound pain and opioid consumption when using brachial plexus blockade (BPB) versus general anesthesia (GA) for upper limb surgery.

Methods: Four databases were searched. Odds ratios (OR), mean differences (MD), and standard mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Outcomes included were pain, opioid consumption, adverse events, and discharge time. The risk of bias was assessed.

Results: Nine clinical trials involving 487 patients were included. BPB resulted in significantly lower pain scores within 2 h postoperatively (MD -4.57, 95% CI -5.76 to 3.38; participants = 263; studies = 5; I2 = 0%; p < 0.00001) but not from 6 to 24 h. Opioid consumption (mg) was lower in the BPB group in the first 24 h (SMD -0.85, 95% CI -1.41 to -0.29; participants = 188; studies = 3; I2 = 67%; p < 0.003). BPB was associated with fewer postoperative nausea/vomiting events (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.10-0.33; participants = 326; studies = 6; I2 = 45%; p < 0.00001) and shorter hospital stay (SMD -1.20, 95% CI -1.73 to -0.66; participants = 213; studies = 4; I2 = 69%; p < 0.0001). There was no difference in the number of patients not requiring opioids from 24 to 48 h.

Conclusions: BPB provided superior pain control at 2 h postoperatively and was associated with reduced opioid use, fewer adverse events, and shorter discharge time. No significant differences in pain scores were observed at 6-24 h or beyond 24 h, likely due to block wear-off. Despite this limitation, BPB still offered perioperative advantages over GA.

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
2.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
31
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: ''European Surgical Research'' features original clinical and experimental papers, condensed reviews of new knowledge relevant to surgical research, and short technical notes serving the information needs of investigators in various fields of operative medicine. Coverage includes surgery, surgical pathophysiology, drug usage, and new surgical techniques. Special consideration is given to information on the use of animal models, physiological and biological methods as well as biophysical measuring and recording systems. The journal is of particular value for workers interested in pathophysiologic concepts, new techniques and in how these can be introduced into clinical work or applied when critical decisions are made concerning the use of new procedures or drugs.
×
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
小红书