一项回顾性研究表明,在布比卡因脂质体经腹平面阻滞中加入鞘内吗啡比单独布比卡因脂质体经腹平面阻滞更有效。

IF 1.5 Q3 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Local and Regional Anesthesia Pub Date : 2019-02-22 eCollection Date: 2019-01-01 DOI:10.2147/LRA.S190225
Jacob L Hutchins, Leslie Renfro, Florin Orza, Cody Honl, Sagar Navare, Aaron A Berg
{"title":"一项回顾性研究表明,在布比卡因脂质体经腹平面阻滞中加入鞘内吗啡比单独布比卡因脂质体经腹平面阻滞更有效。","authors":"Jacob L Hutchins,&nbsp;Leslie Renfro,&nbsp;Florin Orza,&nbsp;Cody Honl,&nbsp;Sagar Navare,&nbsp;Aaron A Berg","doi":"10.2147/LRA.S190225","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The purpose of this study was to determine if the standardization of using liposomal bupivacaine in transversus abdominis plane (LB TAP) blocks eliminated the benefit of intrathecal morphine (ITM) in patients after undergoing a cesarean section.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective review of 358 patients who underwent cesarean section over an 11-month period. Patients were divided into two groups: those who received only an LB TAP (67 patients) vs those who received an LB TAP and ITM (291 patients). All blocks were placed bilaterally under ultrasound guidance after closure of the surgical incision, and morphine was added to the spinal used for the case.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The group that received ITM in addition to the LB TAP received less opioids in the first 24 hours (median 5 range 0-150 mg morphine equivalents [ME] vs 15 range 0-76 mg ME; <i>P</i><0.001) and less opioids overall (35 mg range 0-450 mg ME vs 47.5 mg range 0-189 mg ME; <i>P</i>=0.041) when compared to the LB TAP block only group. There was no difference between the two groups in opioid use from 24 to 48 hours or 48 to 72 hours.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Patients who received ITM in addition to an LB TAP block received less opioids in the first 24 hours and overall when compared to those who received an LB TAP alone. This suggests that ITM still plays a role in providing analgesia to patients who have also received an LB TAP block as a part of their multimodal pain regimen for cesarean sections.</p>","PeriodicalId":18203,"journal":{"name":"Local and Regional Anesthesia","volume":"12 ","pages":"7-13"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2147/LRA.S190225","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The addition of intrathecal morphine to a transversus abdominis plane block with liposome bupivacaine provides more effective analgesia than transversus abdominis plane block with liposome bupivacaine alone: a retrospective study.\",\"authors\":\"Jacob L Hutchins,&nbsp;Leslie Renfro,&nbsp;Florin Orza,&nbsp;Cody Honl,&nbsp;Sagar Navare,&nbsp;Aaron A Berg\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/LRA.S190225\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The purpose of this study was to determine if the standardization of using liposomal bupivacaine in transversus abdominis plane (LB TAP) blocks eliminated the benefit of intrathecal morphine (ITM) in patients after undergoing a cesarean section.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective review of 358 patients who underwent cesarean section over an 11-month period. Patients were divided into two groups: those who received only an LB TAP (67 patients) vs those who received an LB TAP and ITM (291 patients). All blocks were placed bilaterally under ultrasound guidance after closure of the surgical incision, and morphine was added to the spinal used for the case.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The group that received ITM in addition to the LB TAP received less opioids in the first 24 hours (median 5 range 0-150 mg morphine equivalents [ME] vs 15 range 0-76 mg ME; <i>P</i><0.001) and less opioids overall (35 mg range 0-450 mg ME vs 47.5 mg range 0-189 mg ME; <i>P</i>=0.041) when compared to the LB TAP block only group. There was no difference between the two groups in opioid use from 24 to 48 hours or 48 to 72 hours.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Patients who received ITM in addition to an LB TAP block received less opioids in the first 24 hours and overall when compared to those who received an LB TAP alone. This suggests that ITM still plays a role in providing analgesia to patients who have also received an LB TAP block as a part of their multimodal pain regimen for cesarean sections.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18203,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Local and Regional Anesthesia\",\"volume\":\"12 \",\"pages\":\"7-13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-02-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2147/LRA.S190225\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Local and Regional Anesthesia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/LRA.S190225\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2019/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Local and Regional Anesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/LRA.S190225","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

目的:本研究的目的是确定在经腹平面(LB TAP)使用布比卡因脂质体的标准化是否消除了剖宫产术后患者鞘内吗啡(ITM)的益处。方法:回顾性分析358例剖宫产手术患者11个月的资料。患者被分为两组:仅接受LB TAP(67例)和接受LB TAP和ITM(291例)的患者。手术切口闭合后,在超声引导下双侧放置阻滞,并在病例所用脊柱上添加吗啡。结果:在接受LB TAP的同时接受ITM的组在前24小时内获得的阿片类药物较少(中位5范围0-150 mg吗啡当量[ME] vs中位15范围0-76 mg ME;PP=0.041),与仅LB TAP阻滞组相比。两组在24 - 48小时或48 - 72小时使用阿片类药物方面没有差异。结论:与单独接受LB TAP的患者相比,接受ITM和LB TAP阻断的患者在最初24小时内和总体上接受的阿片类药物较少。这表明ITM仍然在为接受LB TAP阻滞作为剖宫产多模式疼痛方案的一部分的患者提供镇痛方面发挥作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

The addition of intrathecal morphine to a transversus abdominis plane block with liposome bupivacaine provides more effective analgesia than transversus abdominis plane block with liposome bupivacaine alone: a retrospective study.

The addition of intrathecal morphine to a transversus abdominis plane block with liposome bupivacaine provides more effective analgesia than transversus abdominis plane block with liposome bupivacaine alone: a retrospective study.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine if the standardization of using liposomal bupivacaine in transversus abdominis plane (LB TAP) blocks eliminated the benefit of intrathecal morphine (ITM) in patients after undergoing a cesarean section.

Methods: This was a retrospective review of 358 patients who underwent cesarean section over an 11-month period. Patients were divided into two groups: those who received only an LB TAP (67 patients) vs those who received an LB TAP and ITM (291 patients). All blocks were placed bilaterally under ultrasound guidance after closure of the surgical incision, and morphine was added to the spinal used for the case.

Results: The group that received ITM in addition to the LB TAP received less opioids in the first 24 hours (median 5 range 0-150 mg morphine equivalents [ME] vs 15 range 0-76 mg ME; P<0.001) and less opioids overall (35 mg range 0-450 mg ME vs 47.5 mg range 0-189 mg ME; P=0.041) when compared to the LB TAP block only group. There was no difference between the two groups in opioid use from 24 to 48 hours or 48 to 72 hours.

Conclusion: Patients who received ITM in addition to an LB TAP block received less opioids in the first 24 hours and overall when compared to those who received an LB TAP alone. This suggests that ITM still plays a role in providing analgesia to patients who have also received an LB TAP block as a part of their multimodal pain regimen for cesarean sections.

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
6.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
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