Suppr超能文献

剖宫产腰麻中使用高压布比卡因与等压布比卡因的比较。

Use of hyperbaric versus isobaric bupivacaine for spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section.

作者信息

Sia Alex T, Tan Kelvin H, Sng Ban Leong, Lim Yvonne, Chan Edwin S Y, Siddiqui Fahad Javaid

机构信息

Department of Women’s Anaesthesia, KK Women’s and Children’s Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 May 31(5):CD005143. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005143.pub2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Bupivacaine is an amide local anaesthetic used in hyperbaric and isobaric forms. These are administered intrathecally into the spine to provide regional anaesthesia for caesarean section. Several trials have compared hyperbaric and isobaric bupivacaine but none have conclusively shown benefit of either.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aimed to summarize the effectiveness and safety of hyperbaric versus isobaric bupivacaine in providing anaesthesia for caesarean section. We considered the adequacy of anaesthesia for completion of caesarean section and the need for interventions to treat complications.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 4), MEDLINE (January 1966 to May 2011) and EMBASE (January 1980 to May 2011). We handsearched journals. We imposed no language restriction. We reran our search in the above databases from January 2011 to January 2013; the studies are awaiting assessment and will be dealt with when we update the review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized controlled trials involving parturients undergoing spinal anaesthesia for elective caesarean section that compared the use of hyperbaric with isobaric bupivacaine.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted the data. The data that were extracted included the number of events and the sample sizes in both the intervention and control groups. For continuous outcomes, we extracted mean and standard deviation.We reported odds ratios and risk ratios (RR) for binary outcomes and mean differences (MD) for continuous outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six studies with a total of 394 patients in this review. Anaesthesia performed with hyperbaric bupivacaine appeared to be less likely to need conversion to general anaesthesia (two studies, 158 patients included in meta-analysis; RR 0.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.03 to 0.94). There was no difference in the need for supplemental analgesics. The time till sensory block to the T4 level was also shorter with hyperbaric bupivacaine (two studies, 126 patients; MD -1.06 minutes, 95% CI -1.80 to -0.31). There were no other significant differences between the two anaesthetics.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The criteria for conversion to general anaesthesia should be clearly defined in future research. This review found that intrathecal hyperbaric bupivacaine had a more rapid onset of sensory blockade at the T4 level than isobaric bupivacaine. It may also result in less need for conversion to general anaesthesia and supplemental analgesia. However, due to the rarity of this outcome, variability in the dose, use of adjuvant drugs and differences in the technique used for regional anaesthesia the evidence is weak. Any apparent advantage of hyperbaric bupivacaine needs to be confirmed in larger randomized trials. There were no differences in the adverse effects studied.

摘要

背景

布比卡因是一种酰胺类局部麻醉药,有高压和等压两种剂型。这些剂型通过鞘内注射到脊髓中,为剖宫产提供区域麻醉。多项试验比较了高压布比卡因和等压布比卡因,但均未明确显示出两者的优势。

目的

本系统评价旨在总结高压布比卡因与等压布比卡因在剖宫产麻醉中的有效性和安全性。我们考虑了剖宫产手术麻醉的充分性以及治疗并发症所需的干预措施。

检索方法

我们检索了Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)(《Cochrane图书馆》2011年第4期)、MEDLINE(1966年1月至2011年5月)和EMBASE(1980年1月至2011年5月)。我们还手工检索了相关期刊。我们没有设置语言限制。我们在上述数据库中重新进行了从2011年1月至2013年1月的检索;这些研究正在等待评估,将在我们更新本评价时进行处理。

选择标准

我们纳入了所有涉及接受选择性剖宫产脊髓麻醉的产妇的随机对照试验,这些试验比较了高压布比卡因与等压布比卡因的使用情况。

数据收集与分析

两位作者独立提取数据。提取的数据包括干预组和对照组的事件数量和样本量。对于连续性结局,我们提取了均值和标准差。我们报告了二分类结局的比值比和风险比(RR)以及连续性结局的均值差(MD)。

主要结果

本评价纳入了6项研究,共394例患者。使用高压布比卡因进行麻醉似乎较少需要转为全身麻醉(两项研究,Meta分析纳入158例患者;RR 0.17,95%置信区间(CI)0.03至0.94)。在补充镇痛药的需求方面没有差异。高压布比卡因使达到T4感觉阻滞水平的时间也更短(两项研究,126例患者;MD -1.06分钟,95%CI -1.80至-0.31)。两种麻醉药之间没有其他显著差异。

作者结论

在未来的研究中应明确转为全身麻醉的标准。本评价发现,鞘内注射高压布比卡因在T4水平的感觉阻滞起效比等压布比卡因更快。它还可能减少转为全身麻醉和补充镇痛的需求。然而,由于这种结局罕见,剂量的变异性、辅助药物的使用以及区域麻醉技术的差异,证据较弱。高压布比卡因的任何明显优势都需要在更大规模的随机试验中得到证实。在所研究的不良反应方面没有差异。

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