Hadzic Admir, Kerimoglu Beklen, Loreio Dan, Karaca Pelin Emine, Claudio Richard E, Yufa Marina, Wedderburn Ray, Santos Alan C, Thys Daniel M
The Department of Anesthesiology, St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital Center, College of Physicians and Surgeons of Columbia University, New York, New York 10025, USA.
Anesth Analg. 2006 Apr;102(4):1076-81. doi: 10.1213/01.ane.0000196532.56221.f2.
Inguinal herniorrhaphy is commonly performed on an outpatient basis under nerve blocks or local or general anesthesia (GA). Our hypothesis is that use of paravertebral blocks (PVB) as the sole anesthetic technique will result in shorter time to achieve home readiness and improved same-day recovery over a 'fast-track' GA. Fifty patients were randomly assigned to receive either PVB or GA under standardized protocols (PVB = 0.75% ropivacaine, followed by propofol sedation; GA = dolasetron 12.5 mg, propofol induction, rocuronium, endotracheal intubation; desflurane; bupivacaine 0.25% for field block). Eligibility for postanesthetic care unit (PACU) bypass and data on time-to-postoperative pain, ambulation, home readiness, and incidence of adverse events were collected. More patients in the PVB group (71%) met the criteria to bypass the postanesthetic care unit compared with patients in the GA group (8%; P < 0.001). Only 3 (13%) of patients in the PVB group requested treatment for pain while in the hospital, compared with 12 (50%) patients in the GA group, despite infiltration with local anesthetic (P = 0.005). Patients in the PVB group were able to ambulate earlier (102 +/- 55 minutes) than those in the GA group (213 +/- 108 minutes; P < 0.001). Time-to-home readiness and discharge times were shorter for patients in the PVB group (156 +/- 60 and 253 +/- 37 minutes) compared with those in the GA group (203 +/- 91 and 218 +/- 93 minutes) (P < 0.001). Adverse events (e.g., nausea, vomiting, sore throat) and pain requiring treatment in the first 24 hours occurred less frequently in patients who had received PVB than in those who had received GA. In outpatients undergoing inguinal herniorrhaphy, PVB resulted in faster time to home readiness and was associated with fewer adverse events and better analgesia before discharge than GA.
腹股沟疝修补术通常在门诊进行,采用神经阻滞或局部或全身麻醉(GA)。我们的假设是,使用椎旁阻滞(PVB)作为唯一的麻醉技术,与“快速通道”GA相比,将缩短达到可回家状态的时间,并改善当日恢复情况。50名患者按照标准化方案随机分配接受PVB或GA(PVB = 0.75%罗哌卡因,随后给予丙泊酚镇静;GA = 12.5 mg多拉司琼,丙泊酚诱导,罗库溴铵,气管插管;地氟醚;0.25%布比卡因用于局部阻滞)。收集了麻醉后护理单元(PACU)旁路的合格情况以及术后疼痛、行走、可回家状态和不良事件发生率的数据。与GA组患者(8%)相比,PVB组更多患者(71%)符合绕过麻醉后护理单元的标准(P < 0.001)。尽管使用了局部麻醉剂浸润,但PVB组只有3名(13%)患者在住院期间要求止痛治疗,而GA组有12名(50%)患者(P = 0.005)。PVB组患者比GA组患者更早能够行走(102±55分钟对213±108分钟;P < 0.001)。与GA组患者(203±91和218±93分钟)相比,PVB组患者达到可回家状态的时间和出院时间更短(156±60和253±37分钟)(P < 0.001)。接受PVB的患者在术后24小时内发生的不良事件(如恶心、呕吐、喉咙痛)和需要治疗的疼痛比接受GA的患者更少。在接受腹股沟疝修补术的门诊患者中,PVB导致达到可回家状态的时间更快,与GA相比,出院前不良事件更少,镇痛效果更好。