Suppr超能文献

膝关节置换术后急性疼痛的股神经阻滞

Femoral nerve blocks for acute postoperative pain after knee replacement surgery.

作者信息

Chan Ee-Yuee, Fransen Marlene, Parker David A, Assam Pryseley N, Chua Nelson

机构信息

Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Sydney, Cumberland Campus C42, Room 205, O Block,, 75 East Street, Sydney, NSW, Australia, 1825.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 May 13;2014(5):CD009941. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009941.pub2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Total knee replacement (TKR) is a common and often painful operation. Femoral nerve block (FNB) is frequently used for postoperative analgesia.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and risks of FNB used as a postoperative analgesic technique relative to other analgesic techniques among adults undergoing TKR.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) 2013, Issue 1, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, dissertation abstracts and reference lists of included studies. The date of the last search was 31 January 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing FNB with no FNB (intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) opioid, epidural analgesia, local infiltration analgesia, and oral analgesia) in adults after TKR. We also included RCTs that compared continuous versus single-shot FNB.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed study selection and data extraction. We undertook meta-analysis (random-effects model) and used relative risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) or standardized mean differences (SMDs) for continuous outcomes. We interpreted SMDs according to rule of thumb where 0.2 or smaller represents a small effect, 0.5 a moderate effect and 0.8 or larger, a large effect.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 45 eligible RCTs (2710 participants) from 47 publications; 20 RCTs had more than two allocation groups. A total of 29 RCTs compared FNB (with or without concurrent treatments including PCA opioid) versus PCA opioid, 10 RCTs compared FNB versus epidural, five RCTs compared FNB versus local infiltration analgesia, one RCT compared FNB versus oral analgesia and four RCTs compared continuous versus single-shot FNB. Most included RCTs were rated as low or unclear risk of bias for the aspects rated in the risk of bias assessment tool, except for the aspect of blinding. We rated 14 (31%) RCTs at high risk for both participant and assessor blinding and rated eight (18%) RCTs at high risk for one blinding aspect.Pain at rest and pain on movement were less for FNB (of any type) with or without a concurrent PCA opioid compared with PCA opioid alone during the first 72 hours post operation. Pooled results demonstrated a moderate effect of FNB for pain at rest at 24 hours (19 RCTs, 1066 participants, SMD -0.72, 95% CI -0.93 to -0.51, moderate-quality evidence) and a moderate to large effect for pain on movement at 24 hours (17 RCTs, 1017 participants, SMD -0.94, 95% CI -1.32 to -0.55, moderate-quality evidence). Pain was also less in each FNB subgroup: single-shot FNB, continuous FNB and continuous FNB + sciatic block, compared with PCA. FNB also was associated with lower opioid consumption (IV morphine equivalent) at 24 hours (20 RCTs, 1156 participants, MD -14.74 mg, 95% CI -18.68 to -10.81 mg, high-quality evidence) and at 48 hours (MD -14.53 mg, 95% CI -20.03 to -9.02 mg), lower risk of nausea and/or vomiting (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.68, number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) four, high-quality evidence), greater knee flexion (11 RCTs, 596 participants, MD 6.48 degrees, 95% CI 4.27 to 8.69 degrees, moderate-quality evidence) and greater patient satisfaction (four RCTs, 180 participants, SMD 1.06, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.38, low-quality evidence) compared with PCA.We could not demonstrate a difference in pain between FNB (any type) and epidural analgesia in the first 72 hours post operation, including pain at 24 hours at rest (six RCTs, 328 participants, SMD -0.05, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.32, moderate-quality evidence) and on movement (six RCTs, 317 participants, SMD 0.01, 95% CI -0.21 to 0.24, high-quality evidence). No difference was noted at 24 hours for opioid consumption (five RCTs, 341 participants, MD -4.35 mg, 95% CI -9.95 to 1.26 mg, high-quality evidence) or knee flexion (six RCTs, 328 participants, MD -1.65, 95% CI -5.14 to 1.84, high-quality evidence). However, FNB demonstrated lower risk of nausea/vomiting (four RCTs, 183 participants, RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.97, NNTH 8, moderate-quality evidence) and higher patient satisfaction (two RCTs, 120 participants, SMD 0.60, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.97, low-quality evidence), compared with epidural analgesia.Pooled results of four studies (216 participants) comparing FNB with local infiltration analgesia detected no difference in analgesic effects between the groups at 24 hours for pain at rest (SMD 0.06, 95% CI -0.61 to 0.72, moderate-quality evidence) or pain on movement (SMD 0.38, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.86, low-quality evidence). Only one included RCT compared FNB with oral analgesia. We considered this evidence insufficient to allow judgement of the effects of FNB compared with oral analgesia.Continuous FNB provided less pain compared with single-shot FNB (four RCTs, 272 participants) at 24 hours at rest (SMD -0.62, 95% CI -1.17 to -0.07, moderate-quality evidence) and on movement (SMD -0.42, 95% CI -0.67 to -0.17, high-quality evidence). Continuous FNB also demonstrated lower opioid consumption compared with single-shot FNB at 24 hours (three RCTs, 236 participants, MD -13.81 mg, 95% CI -23.27 to -4.35 mg, moderate-quality evidence).Generally, the meta-analyses demonstrated considerable statistical heterogeneity, with type of FNB, allocation concealment and blinding of participants, personnel and outcome assessors reducing heterogeneity in the analyses. Available evidence was insufficient to allow determination of the comparative safety of the various analgesic techniques. Few RCTs reported on serious adverse effects such as neurological injury, postoperative falls or thrombotic events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Following TKR, FNB (with or without concurrent treatments including PCA opioid) provided more effective analgesia than PCA opioid alone, similar analgesia to epidural analgesia and less nausea/vomiting compared with PCA alone or epidural analgesia. The review also found that continuous FNB provided better analgesia compared with single-shot FNB. RCTs were insufficient to allow definitive conclusions on the comparison between FNB and local infiltration analgesia or oral analgesia.

摘要

背景

全膝关节置换术(TKR)是一种常见且通常会带来疼痛的手术。股神经阻滞(FNB)常用于术后镇痛。

目的

评估在接受TKR的成年人中,FNB作为一种术后镇痛技术相对于其他镇痛技术的益处和风险。

检索方法

我们检索了Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)2013年第1期、MEDLINE、EMBASE、CINAHL、科学引文索引、学位论文摘要以及纳入研究的参考文献列表。最后一次检索日期为2013年1月31日。

选择标准

我们纳入了比较TKR术后成年人FNB与无FNB(静脉自控镇痛(PCA)阿片类药物、硬膜外镇痛、局部浸润镇痛和口服镇痛)的随机对照试验(RCT)。我们还纳入了比较持续FNB与单次FNB的RCT。

数据收集与分析

两位综述作者独立进行研究选择和数据提取。我们进行了荟萃分析(随机效应模型),对于二分结局使用相对危险度(RR),对于连续结局使用均数差(MD)或标准化均数差(SMD)。我们根据经验法则解释SMD,其中0.2或更小表示小效应,0.5表示中等效应,0.8或更大表示大效应。

主要结果

我们从47篇出版物中纳入了45项符合条件的RCT(2710名参与者);20项RCT有两个以上的分配组。共有29项RCT比较了FNB(有或无包括PCA阿片类药物在内的联合治疗)与PCA阿片类药物,10项RCT比较了FNB与硬膜外镇痛,5项RCT比较了FNB与局部浸润镇痛,1项RCT比较了FNB与口服镇痛,4项RCT比较了持续FNB与单次FNB。除了盲法方面,大多数纳入的RCT在偏倚风险评估工具所评定的方面被评为低或不清楚的偏倚风险。我们将14项(31%)RCT评定为参与者和评估者双盲的高风险,将8项(18%)RCT评定为一个盲法方面的高风险。与单独使用PCA阿片类药物相比,在术后72小时内,无论有无联合PCA阿片类药物的任何类型FNB,静息时疼痛和活动时疼痛都更低。汇总结果显示,FNB在24小时时对静息疼痛有中等效应(19项RCT,1066名参与者,SMD -0.72,95%CI -0.93至-0.51,中等质量证据),对活动时疼痛有中等至大效应(17项RCT,1017名参与者,SMD -0.94,95%CI -1.32至-0.55,中等质量证据)。与PCA相比,每个FNB亚组(单次FNB、持续FNB和持续FNB+坐骨神经阻滞)的疼痛也更低。FNB还与24小时时较低的阿片类药物消耗量(静脉注射吗啡当量)相关(20项RCT,1156名参与者,MD -14.74mg,95%CI -18.68至-10.81mg,高质量证据)和48小时时(MD -14.53mg,95%CI -20.03至-9.02mg),恶心和/或呕吐的风险更低(RR 0.47,95%CI 0.33至0.68,需治疗以避免额外有害结局的人数(NNTH)为4,高质量证据),膝关节屈曲度更大(11项RCT,596名参与者,MD 6.48度,95%CI 4.27至8.69度,中等质量证据)以及患者满意度更高(4项RCT,180名参与者,SMD 1.06,95%CI 0.74至1.38,低质量证据)。在术后72小时内,我们无法证明FNB(任何类型)与硬膜外镇痛之间在疼痛方面存在差异,包括24小时时的静息疼痛(6项RCT,328名参与者,SMD -0.05,95%CI -0.43至0.32,中等质量证据)和活动时疼痛(6项RCT,317名参与者,SMD 0.01,95%CI -0.21至0.24,高质量证据)。在24小时时,阿片类药物消耗量(5项RCT,341名参与者,MD -4.35mg,95%CI -9.95至1.26mg,高质量证据)或膝关节屈曲度(6项RCT,328名参与者,MD -1.65,95%CI -5.14至1.84,高质量证据)没有差异。然而,与硬膜外镇痛相比,FNB恶心/呕吐的风险更低(4项RCTs,183名参与者,RR 0.63,95%CI 0.41至0.97,NNTH 8,中等质量证据),患者满意度更高(2项RCT,120名参与者,SMD 0.60,95%CI 0.23至0.97,低质量证据)。比较FNB与局部浸润镇痛的四项研究(216名参与者)的汇总结果显示,两组在24小时时静息疼痛(SMD 0.06,95%CI -0.61至0.72,中等质量证据)或活动时疼痛(SMD 0.38,95%CI -0.10至0.86,低质量证据)的镇痛效果上没有差异。仅一项纳入的RCT比较了FNB与口服镇痛。我们认为该证据不足以判断FNB与口服镇痛相比的效果。与单次FNB相比,持续FNB在24小时时静息疼痛(4项RCT,272名参与者,SMD -0.62,95%CI -1.17至-0.07,中等质量证据)和活动时疼痛(SMD -0.42,95%CI -0.67至-0.17,高质量证据)更低。持续FNB在24小时时阿片类药物消耗量也比单次FNB更低(3项RCT,236名参与者,MD -13.81mg,95%CI -23.27至-4.35mg,中等质量证据)。一般来说,荟萃分析显示出相当大的统计异质性,FNB类型、分配隐藏以及参与者、研究人员和结局评估者的盲法减少了分析中的异质性。现有证据不足以确定各种镇痛技术的相对安全性。很少有RCT报告严重不良反应,如神经损伤、术后跌倒或血栓形成事件。

作者结论

TKR术后,FNB(有或无包括PCA阿片类药物在内的联合治疗)比单独使用PCA阿片类药物提供更有效的镇痛,与硬膜外镇痛效果相似,与单独使用PCA或硬膜外镇痛相比恶心/呕吐更少。该综述还发现,与单次FNB相比,持续FNB提供更好的镇痛。RCT不足以就FNB与局部浸润镇痛或口服镇痛之间的比较得出明确结论。

相似文献

1
Femoral nerve blocks for acute postoperative pain after knee replacement surgery.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 May 13;2014(5):CD009941. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009941.pub2.
2
Continuous intravenous perioperative lidocaine infusion for postoperative pain and recovery in adults.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jun 4;6(6):CD009642. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009642.pub3.
3
Regional analgesia techniques for postoperative pain after breast cancer surgery: a network meta-analysis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2025 Jun 4;6(6):CD014818. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014818.pub2.
4
Peripheral nerve blocks for postoperative pain after major knee surgery.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014(12):CD010937. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010937.pub2. Epub 2014 Dec 11.
5
Patient-controlled analgesia with remifentanil versus alternative parenteral methods for pain management in labour.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Apr 13;4(4):CD011989. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011989.pub2.
6
Erector spinae plane block for postoperative pain.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Oct 9;10(10):CD013763. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013763.pub2.
8
Erector spinae plane block for postoperative pain.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Feb 12;2(2):CD013763. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013763.pub3.
9
Dexamethasone as an adjuvant to peripheral nerve block.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Nov 9;11(11):CD011770. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011770.pub2.
10
Continuous intravenous perioperative lidocaine infusion for postoperative pain and recovery.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Jul 16(7):CD009642. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009642.pub2.

引用本文的文献

2
Sudden Severe Hypotension After Ultrasound Guided Femoral Nerve Block in a Fracture Neck Femur Patient: A Case Report.
Clin Case Rep. 2025 Jun 12;13(6):e70562. doi: 10.1002/ccr3.70562. eCollection 2025 Jun.
4
Continuous femoral nerve block as pain management following total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review.
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2025 Apr 11;145(1):238. doi: 10.1007/s00402-025-05855-3.
6
Periarticular Infiltration Compared to Single Femoral Nerve Block in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective Randomized Study.
Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo). 2024 Apr 10;59(2):e241-e246. doi: 10.1055/s-0044-1785449. eCollection 2024 Apr.

本文引用的文献

2
Falls and major orthopaedic surgery with peripheral nerve blockade: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Br J Anaesth. 2013 Apr;110(4):518-28. doi: 10.1093/bja/aet013. Epub 2013 Feb 24.
4
Single-injection femoral nerve block lacks preemptive effect on postoperative pain and morphine consumption in total knee arthroplasty.
Acta Anaesthesiol Taiwan. 2012 Jun;50(2):54-8. doi: 10.1016/j.aat.2012.05.007. Epub 2012 Jun 21.
6
Is femoral nerve block necessary during total knee arthroplasty?: a randomized controlled trial.
J Arthroplasty. 2012 Dec;27(10):1800-5. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2012.03.052. Epub 2012 May 31.
7
Pain management after total knee arthroplasty using a multimodal approach.
Orthopedics. 2012 May;35(5):e660-4. doi: 10.3928/01477447-20120426-19.
8
Continuous femoral nerve block versus patient-controlled analgesia following total knee arthroplasty.
J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2012 Apr;20(1):23-6. doi: 10.1177/230949901202000105.

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