Suppr超能文献

全膝关节置换术患者多部位浸润镇痛与股神经或收肌管阻滞相比对疼痛管理和早期康复的影响:一项前瞻性随机对照试验

Effects of multi-site infiltration analgesia on pain management and early rehabilitation compared with femoral nerve or adductor canal block for patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

作者信息

Li Donghai, Tan Zhen, Kang Pengde, Shen Bin, Pei Fuxing

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedics Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, 37# Wainan Guoxue Road, Chengdu, 610041, People's Republic of China.

出版信息

Int Orthop. 2017 Jan;41(1):75-83. doi: 10.1007/s00264-016-3278-0. Epub 2016 Aug 25.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to combine intra-articular and peri-articular with wound infiltration analgesia (multi-site infiltration analgesia, MIA) for patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and compare its pain management and early rehabilitation effect with the commonly used nerve block including adductor cannel block (FNB) and femoral nerve block (ACB).

METHOD

We conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial and 77 patients were included for analysis. The patients were randomized over three groups. The first group (26 patients) received multi-site infiltration analgesia (MIA group), the second group (27 patients) received femoral nerve block (FNB group), and the third group (24 patients) received adductor cannel block (ACB group).

RESULTS

MIA showed better pain control at rest during the first 12 hours (p < 0.05 respectively) and less opioid consumption after operation than the other two groups (p < 0.05, respectively), but ACB and FNB revealed similar outcomes (p > 0.05). At the same time, there are no significant differences in pain score with activity, vital signs, and occurrence of complication (p > 0.05, respectively) among the three groups. When evaluated the early rehabilitation, MIA and ACB had similar outcomes on post-operative muscle strength (p > 0.05), but they showed better quadriceps strength when compared FNB (p < 0.05). Although the knee ROM of the patients with FNB showed better results (p < 0.05), their ambulation ability was inferior to those in MIA group (p < 0.05 and ACB group (p < 0.05) early after the operation, besides, MIA patients were superior to ACB patients (p < 0.05). Furthermore, MIA spent less time on operation and post-operative hospital stays when compared with FNB and ACB (p < 0.05, respectively), while the ACB and FNB were without significant difference (p < 0.05, respectively).

CONCLUSION

ACB was not inferior to FNB on pain control, but it was better on early mobilization. However, MIA that combine intra-articular and peri-articular with wound infiltration analgesia after TKA was more effective on pain control at rest, with better efficacy on early rehabilitation and easier to perform when compared with these commonly used nerve block. We recommended our MIA for pain relief and fast rehabilitation after TKA.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在对全膝关节置换术(TKA)患者采用关节内、关节周围联合伤口浸润镇痛(多部位浸润镇痛,MIA),并将其疼痛管理和早期康复效果与常用的神经阻滞(包括收肌管阻滞(FNB)和股神经阻滞(ACB))进行比较。

方法

我们进行了一项前瞻性随机对照试验,纳入77例患者进行分析。患者被随机分为三组。第一组(26例患者)接受多部位浸润镇痛(MIA组),第二组(27例患者)接受股神经阻滞(FNB组),第三组(24例患者)接受收肌管阻滞(ACB组)。

结果

与其他两组相比,MIA在术后12小时内静息时疼痛控制更好(分别为p < 0.05),术后阿片类药物消耗量更少(分别为p < 0.05),但ACB和FNB结果相似(p > 0.05)。同时,三组在活动时疼痛评分、生命体征及并发症发生率方面无显著差异(分别为p > 0.05)。在评估早期康复情况时,MIA和ACB术后肌肉力量结果相似(p > 0.05),但与FNB相比,它们的股四头肌力量更强(p < 0.05)。虽然FNB组患者的膝关节活动度(ROM)结果更好(p < 0.05),但其术后早期的步行能力不如MIA组(p < 0.05)和ACB组(p < 0.05),此外,MIA组患者优于ACB组患者(p < 0.05)。此外,与FNB和ACB相比,MIA的手术时间和术后住院时间更短(分别为p < 0.05),而ACB和FNB之间无显著差异(分别为p > 0.05)。

结论

ACB在疼痛控制方面不劣于FNB,但在早期活动方面更好。然而,TKA术后采用关节内、关节周围联合伤口浸润镇痛的MIA在静息时疼痛控制更有效,早期康复效果更好,且与这些常用神经阻滞相比更容易实施。我们推荐在TKA术后采用MIA进行疼痛缓解和快速康复。

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