Suppr超能文献

超声引导与电刺激用于股神经周围神经导管插入术。

Ultrasound guidance versus electrical stimulation for femoral perineural catheter insertion.

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology, University of California, San Diego Medical Center, 200 W Arbor Dr, San Diego, CA 92103-8770, USA.

出版信息

J Ultrasound Med. 2009 Nov;28(11):1453-60. doi: 10.7863/jum.2009.28.11.1453.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Continuous femoral nerve blocks provide potent analgesia and other benefits after knee surgery. Perineural catheter placement techniques using ultrasound guidance and electrical stimulation (ES) have been described, but the optimal method remains undetermined. We tested the hypothesis that ultrasound guidance alone requires less time for femoral perineural catheter insertion and produces equivalent results compared with ES alone.

METHODS

Preoperatively, patients receiving a femoral perineural catheter for knee surgery were randomly assigned to either ultrasound guidance with a nonstimulating catheter or ES with a stimulating catheter. The primary outcome was the catheter placement procedure time (minutes) starting when the ultrasound transducer (ultrasound group) or catheter insertion needle (ES group) first touched the patient and ending when the catheter insertion needle was removed after catheter insertion.

RESULTS

Perineural catheters placed with ultrasound guidance (n = 20) took a median (10th-90th percentiles) of 5.0 (3.9-10.0) minutes compared with 8.5 (4.8-30.0) minutes for ES (n = 20; P = .012). All ultrasound-guided catheters were placed according to the protocol (n = 20) versus 85% of ES-guided catheters (n = 20; P = .086). Patients in the ultrasound group had a median procedure-related discomfort score of 0.5 (0.0-3.1) compared with 2.5 (0.0-7.6) for the ES group (P = .015). There were no vascular punctures with ultrasound guidance versus 4 in the ES group (P = .039).

CONCLUSIONS

Placement of femoral perineural catheters takes less time with ultrasound guidance compared with ES. In addition, ultrasound guidance produces less procedure-related pain and prevents inadvertent vascular puncture.

摘要

目的

连续股神经阻滞可为膝关节手术后提供有效的镇痛和其他益处。已经描述了使用超声引导和电刺激(ES)进行外周神经导管放置的技术,但最佳方法仍未确定。我们检验了这样一个假设,即与单独使用 ES 相比,单独使用超声引导进行股神经周围导管插入所需的时间更短,并且产生的结果相当。

方法

在膝关节手术中接受股神经周围导管的患者术前随机分配至超声引导非刺激导管或 ES 刺激导管。主要结局是从超声换能器(超声组)或导管插入针(ES 组)首次接触患者开始到导管插入后拔出导管插入针结束时的导管放置程序时间(分钟)。

结果

与 ES 组(n = 20)的 8.5(4.8-30.0)分钟相比,超声引导下放置的周围神经导管中位数(10 分位数-90 分位数)为 5.0(3.9-10.0)分钟(P =.012)。所有超声引导下的导管均按照方案放置(n = 20),而 ES 引导下的导管有 85%(n = 20;P =.086)。超声组患者的操作相关不适评分中位数为 0.5(0.0-3.1),而 ES 组为 2.5(0.0-7.6)(P =.015)。与 ES 组相比,超声引导下无血管穿刺(n = 20),而 ES 组有 4 例(P =.039)。

结论

与 ES 相比,使用超声引导放置股神经周围导管所需的时间更短。此外,超声引导可减少操作相关疼痛并防止意外血管穿刺。

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