Suppr超能文献

超声引导下在坐骨神经分支单点注射行腘窝坐骨神经阻滞比经典神经刺激器技术起效更快。

Ultrasound-guided popliteal sciatic block with a single injection at the sciatic division results in faster block onset than the classical nerve stimulator technique.

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology, Hospital Clínic, Universitat de Barcelona, C/Villarroel 170, 08036 Barcelona, Spain.

出版信息

Anesth Analg. 2012 May;114(5):1121-7. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e318248e1b3. Epub 2012 Feb 24.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

For successful, fast-onset sciatic popliteal block (SPB), either a single injection above the division of the sciatic nerve, or 2 injections to block the tibial nerve (TN) and common peroneal nerve (CPN) separately have been recommended. In this study, we compared the traditional nerve stimulator (NS)-guided SPB above the division of the sciatic nerve with the ultrasound (US)-guided block with single injection of local anesthetic (LA) between the TN and CPN at the level of their division. We hypothesized that US-SPB with a single injection between TN and CPN would result in faster block onset than a single-injection NS-SPB.

METHODS

Fifty-two patients were randomized to receive either an NS-SPB or a US-SPB. For both blocks, a single injection of 20 mL mepivacaine 1.5% was given using an automated injection pump while controlling for injection force. For NS-SPB, a TN response below 0.5 mA was sought 7 cm above the popliteal fossa crease (and proximal to the divergence of the TN and peroneal nerves). For US-SPB, the injection was made after a US-guided needle was inserted between the TN and CPN at the level of their separation. Motor response was not actively sought but registered if present. The location and spread of LA were evaluated by US in both groups. Onset of motor and sensory blocks was serially assessed in 5-minute intervals in the TN and CPN divisions and compared between the groups.

RESULTS

All patients in both groups had successful block at 30 minutes after the injection, defined as sensory block to allow surgery without supplementation. A higher proportion of patients in the US-SPB group had a complete sensory (80% vs 4%, P < 0.001) and motor block (60% vs 8%, P < 0.001), defined as anesthesia and paralysis in all nerve territories, at 15 minutes after injection. US signs of intraepineural injection were present in 19 patients (73%) in the NS-SPB group and 25 patients (100%) in the US-SPB group (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

A single injection of LA in US-SPB with needle insertion at the separation of the TN and CPN results in a similar success rate at 30 minutes; however, more patients in the US-SPB group than in the NS-SPB group had complete block at 15 minutes.

摘要

背景

为了实现成功的、快速起效的坐骨-膕窝阻滞(SPB),推荐在坐骨神经分叉上方进行单次注射,或分别对胫神经(TN)和腓总神经(CPN)进行 2 次阻滞注射。本研究比较了传统神经刺激器(NS)引导下在坐骨神经分叉上方进行 SPB 与超声(US)引导下在 TN 和 CPN 分叉水平进行单次注射局部麻醉药(LA)的阻滞效果。我们假设在 TN 和 CPN 之间进行单次注射的 US-SPB 比单次注射 NS-SPB 起效更快。

方法

52 名患者被随机分为 NS-SPB 组或 US-SPB 组。对于这两种阻滞,均使用自动注射泵以 20ml 1.5%甲哌卡因进行单次注射,同时控制注射力。对于 NS-SPB,在腘窝皱褶上方 7cm 处(在 TN 和腓总神经分叉近端)寻找低于 0.5mA 的 TN 反应。对于 US-SPB,在超声引导下将针尖插入 TN 和 CPN 之间进行阻滞。不主动寻找运动反应,但如果有反应则记录。在两组中均通过 US 评估 LA 的注射部位和扩散情况。在 TN 和 CPN 分支中,每隔 5 分钟连续评估运动和感觉阻滞的起效情况,并对两组进行比较。

结果

两组患者在注射后 30 分钟均达到成功阻滞的标准,定义为感觉阻滞,无需补充即可进行手术。注射后 15 分钟,US-SPB 组中感觉(80%比 4%,P<0.001)和运动(60%比 8%,P<0.001)完全阻滞的患者比例更高,定义为所有神经支配区域的麻醉和瘫痪。NS-SPB 组中有 19 名患者(73%)和 US-SPB 组中有 25 名患者(100%)出现神经内注射的 US 征象(P<0.001)。

结论

在超声引导下将针尖插入 TN 和 CPN 之间进行单次注射 LA,在 30 分钟时达到相似的成功率;然而,US-SPB 组中比 NS-SPB 组中更多的患者在 15 分钟时达到完全阻滞。

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