Suppr超能文献

用于颈动脉内膜切除术的浅或深颈丛阻滞:并发症的系统评价

Superficial or deep cervical plexus block for carotid endarterectomy: a systematic review of complications.

作者信息

Pandit J J, Satya-Krishna R, Gration P

机构信息

Nuffield Department of Anaesthetics, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford OX3 9DU, UK.

出版信息

Br J Anaesth. 2007 Aug;99(2):159-69. doi: 10.1093/bja/aem160. Epub 2007 Jun 18.

Abstract

Carotid endarterectomy is commonly conducted under regional (deep, superficial, intermediate, or combined) cervical plexus block, but it is not known if complication rates differ. We conducted a systematic review of published papers to assess the complication rate associated with superficial (or intermediate) and deep (or combined deep plus superficial/intermediate). The null hypothesis was that complication rates were equal. Complications of interest were: (1) serious complications related to the placement of block, (2) incidence of conversion to general anaesthesia, and (3) serious systemic complications of the surgical-anaesthetic process. We retrieved 69 papers describing a total of 7558 deep/combined blocks and 2533 superficial/intermediate blocks. Deep/combined block was associated with a higher serious complication rate related to the injecting needle when compared with the superficial/intermediate block (odds ratio 2.13, P = 0.006). The conversion rate to general anaesthesia was also higher with deep/combined block (odds ratio 5.15, P < 0.0001), but there was an equivalent incidence of other systemic serious complications (odds ratio 1.13, P = 0.273; NS). We conclude that superficial/intermediate block is safer than any method that employs a deep injection. The higher rate of conversion to general anaesthesia with the deep/combined block may have been influenced by the higher incidence of direct complications, but may also suggest that the superficial/combined block provides better analgesia during surgery.

摘要

颈动脉内膜切除术通常在颈部区域(深层、浅层、中间层或联合)神经丛阻滞下进行,但尚不清楚并发症发生率是否存在差异。我们对已发表的论文进行了系统综述,以评估与浅层(或中间层)及深层(或深层加浅层/中间层联合)阻滞相关的并发症发生率。零假设是并发症发生率相等。感兴趣的并发症包括:(1)与阻滞置管相关的严重并发症,(2)转为全身麻醉的发生率,以及(3)手术麻醉过程中的严重全身并发症。我们检索到69篇论文,共描述了7558例深层/联合阻滞和2533例浅层/中间层阻滞。与浅层/中间层阻滞相比,深层/联合阻滞与注射针相关的严重并发症发生率更高(优势比2.13,P = 0.006)。深层/联合阻滞转为全身麻醉的发生率也更高(优势比5.15,P < 0.0001),但其他全身严重并发症的发生率相当(优势比1.13,P = 0.273;无显著性差异)。我们得出结论,浅层/中间层阻滞比任何采用深部注射的方法更安全。深层/联合阻滞转为全身麻醉的较高发生率可能受到直接并发症较高发生率的影响,但也可能表明浅层/联合阻滞在手术期间提供了更好的镇痛效果。

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