超声腹壁平面阻滞与局部浸润镇痛用于腹腔镜双侧疝修补术后急慢性疼痛控制的单中心随机对照试验

IF 0.1 Q4 ANESTHESIOLOGY
M. Hosni, J. P. Soulios, D. Francart
{"title":"超声腹壁平面阻滞与局部浸润镇痛用于腹腔镜双侧疝修补术后急慢性疼痛控制的单中心随机对照试验","authors":"M. Hosni, J. P. Soulios, D. Francart","doi":"10.56126/71.4.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background : we compared the efficacy of transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block versus local infiltration on acute and chronic pain after a first laparoscopic surgical treatment of bilateral inguinal hernia performed in a day hospital.\n\nMethods : In this randomized, prospective, double-blind study, we studied 52 patients scheduled for lapa-roscopic bilateral hernia repair. The patients were randomly allocated to receive local infiltration (group 1) or a TAP block (group 2). The surgeon locally injected the patients in group 1 with a solution of 20 mL of 0.5 levo- bupivacaine. An ultrasound-guided injection of 40 mL 0.25 levobupivacaine was administered to the patients in group 2 by the anesthesiologist. The pain score was assessed using a numeric rating scale at the arrival in the recovery room, one hour after surgery and 6 hours (H+6) after arrival at the recovery room. Subsequently, the pain was assessed 24 hours (H+24), 3 weeks (D21) and 3 months (M3) after surgery.\n\nResults : We observed significant differences in terms of pain at H+6 and at H+24 in favor of the TAP block group. However, there was no significant difference between both groups in postoperative pain after 3 weeks (D21) or after 3 months (M3).\n\nConclusions : In our study, we observed a significant difference in terms of pain in favor of TAP block versus local infiltration, during the first 24 hours after a first laparoscopic treatment of inguinal hernia. We did not find any significant difference on chronic pain.","PeriodicalId":7024,"journal":{"name":"Acta anaesthesiologica Belgica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ultrasound transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block versus local infiltration analgesia for acute and chronic postoperative pain control after laparoscopic bilateral hernia repair : a single-center randomized controlled trial\",\"authors\":\"M. Hosni, J. P. Soulios, D. Francart\",\"doi\":\"10.56126/71.4.2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background : we compared the efficacy of transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block versus local infiltration on acute and chronic pain after a first laparoscopic surgical treatment of bilateral inguinal hernia performed in a day hospital.\\n\\nMethods : In this randomized, prospective, double-blind study, we studied 52 patients scheduled for lapa-roscopic bilateral hernia repair. The patients were randomly allocated to receive local infiltration (group 1) or a TAP block (group 2). The surgeon locally injected the patients in group 1 with a solution of 20 mL of 0.5 levo- bupivacaine. An ultrasound-guided injection of 40 mL 0.25 levobupivacaine was administered to the patients in group 2 by the anesthesiologist. The pain score was assessed using a numeric rating scale at the arrival in the recovery room, one hour after surgery and 6 hours (H+6) after arrival at the recovery room. Subsequently, the pain was assessed 24 hours (H+24), 3 weeks (D21) and 3 months (M3) after surgery.\\n\\nResults : We observed significant differences in terms of pain at H+6 and at H+24 in favor of the TAP block group. However, there was no significant difference between both groups in postoperative pain after 3 weeks (D21) or after 3 months (M3).\\n\\nConclusions : In our study, we observed a significant difference in terms of pain in favor of TAP block versus local infiltration, during the first 24 hours after a first laparoscopic treatment of inguinal hernia. We did not find any significant difference on chronic pain.\",\"PeriodicalId\":7024,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta anaesthesiologica Belgica\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta anaesthesiologica Belgica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.56126/71.4.2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta anaesthesiologica Belgica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56126/71.4.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

背景:我们比较了在日间医院首次腹腔镜手术治疗双侧腹股沟疝后,腹横肌平面(TAP)阻滞与局部浸润对急性和慢性疼痛的疗效。方法:在这项随机、前瞻性、双盲研究中,我们研究了52名计划接受腹腔镜双侧疝修补术的患者。患者被随机分配接受局部浸润(第1组)或TAP阻断(第2组)。外科医生为第1组患者局部注射20 mL 0.5左旋布比卡因溶液。麻醉师在超声引导下向第2组患者注射40mL 0.25左旋布比卡因。在到达康复室时、手术后1小时和到达康复室后6小时(H+6)使用数字评定量表评估疼痛评分。随后,在手术后24小时(H+24)、3周(D21)和3个月(M3)评估疼痛。结果:我们观察到在H+6和H+24时疼痛方面的显著差异,有利于TAP阻断组。然而,两组在3周后(D21)或3个月后(M3)的术后疼痛方面没有显著差异。结论:在我们的研究中,我们观察到,在首次腹腔镜治疗腹股沟疝后的前24小时内,TAP阻滞与局部浸润在疼痛方面存在显著差异。我们在慢性疼痛方面没有发现任何显著差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ultrasound transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block versus local infiltration analgesia for acute and chronic postoperative pain control after laparoscopic bilateral hernia repair : a single-center randomized controlled trial
Background : we compared the efficacy of transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block versus local infiltration on acute and chronic pain after a first laparoscopic surgical treatment of bilateral inguinal hernia performed in a day hospital. Methods : In this randomized, prospective, double-blind study, we studied 52 patients scheduled for lapa-roscopic bilateral hernia repair. The patients were randomly allocated to receive local infiltration (group 1) or a TAP block (group 2). The surgeon locally injected the patients in group 1 with a solution of 20 mL of 0.5 levo- bupivacaine. An ultrasound-guided injection of 40 mL 0.25 levobupivacaine was administered to the patients in group 2 by the anesthesiologist. The pain score was assessed using a numeric rating scale at the arrival in the recovery room, one hour after surgery and 6 hours (H+6) after arrival at the recovery room. Subsequently, the pain was assessed 24 hours (H+24), 3 weeks (D21) and 3 months (M3) after surgery. Results : We observed significant differences in terms of pain at H+6 and at H+24 in favor of the TAP block group. However, there was no significant difference between both groups in postoperative pain after 3 weeks (D21) or after 3 months (M3). Conclusions : In our study, we observed a significant difference in terms of pain in favor of TAP block versus local infiltration, during the first 24 hours after a first laparoscopic treatment of inguinal hernia. We did not find any significant difference on chronic pain.
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
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
期刊介绍: L’Acta Anaesthesiologica Belgica est le journal de la SBAR, publié 4 fois par an. L’Acta a été publié pour la première fois en 1950. Depuis 1973 l’Acta est publié dans la langue Anglaise, ce qui a été résulté à un rayonnement plus internationaux. Depuis lors l’Acta est devenu un journal à ne pas manquer dans le domaine d’Anesthésie Belge, offrant e.a. les textes du congrès annuel, les Research Meetings, … Vous en trouvez aussi les dates des Research Meetings, du congrès annuel et des autres réunions.
×
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