Suppr超能文献

[幻肢痛的预防:区域镇痛是否无效?]

[Prophylaxis of phantom pain: is regional analgesia ineffective?].

作者信息

Gehling M, Tryba M

机构信息

Klinik für Anästhesiologie, Intensivmedizin und Schmerztherapie, Klinikum Kassel gGmbH.

出版信息

Schmerz. 2003 Jan;17(1):11-9. doi: 10.1007/s00482-002-0198-2.

Abstract

AIM

A recently published randomized study failed to show a significant reduction of phantom limb pain after perioperative epidural analgesia EDA [9]. Since these findings were not supported by previous studies,we conducted an analysis of factors contributing to the results of phantom limb pain prophylaxis. We calculated the efficacy of perioperative EDA as "Number Needed to Treat" (NNT).

METHODS

Included studies were retrieved by a medline-search from 1966 to 1999 and published articles on phantom limb pain prophylaxis. First,we analyzed the influence of patient data, type of intervention and study design on the results. Then,we stratified studies in comparable groups and outcome measures. The efficacy of perioperative EDA in phantom limb pain prophylaxis was calculated using NNT's. The outcome criterion in this analysis was "free of phantom limb pain < or = 3 on an analogue scale from 0 ( no pain) to 10 (worst pain) 12 months after amputation".

RESULTS

Variations in preoperative pain, start and duration of regional analgesia and the definition of phantom limb pain were associated with different results. After stratifying the results by the above mentioned definition of phantom pain intensity, only time and duration of regional analgesia showed effects on the study results. Pre-, intra- and postoperative EDA was associated with a significant reduction of phantom limb pain 12 months after amputation, NNT = 5,8 (95%-CI 3,2-28,6). However, a reduction of phantom limb pain by postoperative EDA alone could not be confirmed on the basis of the analysed data.

CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative EDA has been shown to be an effective prophylaxis of phantom limb pain. The most important differences between studies were the definition of phantom limb pain by intensity ratings. Thus, perioperative EDA does not completely abolish phantom limb pain, but increases the number of patients with a mild form of phantom pain.

摘要

目的

最近发表的一项随机研究未能显示围手术期硬膜外镇痛(EDA)后幻肢痛有显著减轻[9]。由于这些发现未得到先前研究的支持,我们对影响幻肢痛预防结果的因素进行了分析。我们将围手术期EDA的疗效计算为“需治疗人数”(NNT)。

方法

通过对1966年至1999年的医学文献数据库进行检索,获取有关幻肢痛预防的已发表研究。首先,我们分析了患者数据、干预类型和研究设计对结果的影响。然后,我们将研究分层为可比组和结局指标。使用NNT计算围手术期EDA预防幻肢痛的疗效。该分析中的结局标准为“截肢后12个月,在0(无疼痛)至10(最严重疼痛)的模拟量表上幻肢痛≤3”。

结果

术前疼痛、区域镇痛的开始和持续时间以及幻肢痛的定义存在差异,结果也不同。根据上述幻痛强度定义对结果进行分层后,只有区域镇痛的时间和持续时间对研究结果有影响。术前、术中和术后EDA与截肢后12个月幻肢痛的显著减轻相关,NNT = 5.8(95%置信区间3.2 - 28.6)。然而,根据分析数据,无法证实仅术后EDA能减轻幻肢痛。

结论

围手术期EDA已被证明是预防幻肢痛的有效方法。研究之间最重要的差异是根据强度评级对幻肢痛的定义。因此,围手术期EDA并不能完全消除幻肢痛,但会增加轻度幻痛患者的数量。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验