Suppr超能文献

锁骨下与肋锁突下入路超声引导锁骨下臂丛阻滞用于上肢手术的随机对照比较。

A randomized comparison between costoclavicular and paracoracoid ultrasound-guided infraclavicular block for upper limb surgery.

机构信息

Department of Anesthesia, Maharaj Nakorn Chiang Mai Hospital, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.

Department of Anesthesia, Montreal General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.

出版信息

Can J Anaesth. 2017 Jun;64(6):617-625. doi: 10.1007/s12630-017-0842-z. Epub 2017 Feb 15.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

This two-centre randomized trial compared costoclavicular and paracoracoid ultrasound-guided infraclavicular brachial plexus block in patients undergoing upper limb surgery. We hypothesized that both techniques would result in similar onset times and designed the study as an equivalence trial.

METHODS

Ninety patients undergoing upper limb surgery at or distal to the elbow were randomly allocated to receive a costoclavicular (n = 45) or paracoracoid (n = 45) ultrasound-guided infraclavicular brachial plexus block. Both groups received a 35-mL mixture of 1% lidocaine-0.25% bupivacaine with epinephrine 5 µg·mL. In the costoclavicular group, local anesthetic was injected into the costoclavicular space in the middle of the three cords of the brachial plexus. In the paracoracoid group, local anesthetic was deposited dorsal to the axillary artery in the lateral infraclavicular fossa. A blinded observer recorded the block onset time (primary endpoint), success rate (i.e., surgical anesthesia), block-related pain scores, as well as the incidence of hemidiaphragmatic paralysis. Performance time and the number of needle passes were also recorded during the performance of the block. The total anesthesia-related time was defined as the sum of the performance and onset times.

RESULTS

The mean (SD) onset times were comparable between the costoclavicular and paracoracoid groups [16.0 (7.5) min vs 16.8 (6.2) min, respectively; mean difference, 0.8; 95% confidence interval, -2.3 to 3.8; P = 0.61]. Furthermore, no intergroup differences were found in terms of performance time (P = 0.09), total anesthesia-related time (P = 0.90), surgical anesthesia (P > 0.99), and hemidiaphragmatic paralysis (P > 0.99). The paracoracoid technique required marginally fewer median [interquartile range] needle passes than the costoclavicular technique (2 [1-4] vs 2 [1-6], respectively; P = 0.048); however, procedural pain was comparable between the two study groups.

CONCLUSION

Costoclavicular and paracoracoid ultrasound-guided infraclavicular blocks resulted in similar onset times. Furthermore, no intergroup differences were found in terms of performance times and success rates. Future dose-finding trials are required to elucidate the minimum effective volume of local anesthetic for costoclavicular infraclavicular blocks. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.in.th (Study ID: TCTR20160525001).

摘要

背景

本项在两个中心开展的随机试验比较了经锁骨下入路和锁骨旁入路超声引导下臂丛神经阻滞在接受上肢手术的患者中的效果。我们假设这两种技术的起效时间会相似,并将本研究设计为等效性试验。

方法

90 例行肘或肘以下上肢手术的患者被随机分配至接受经锁骨下入路(n = 45)或锁骨旁入路(n = 45)超声引导下臂丛神经阻滞。两组均接受 35 mL 的 1%利多卡因-0.25%布比卡因加肾上腺素 5 µg·mL。在锁骨下入路组,局麻药注射至臂丛神经 3 束的中间的锁骨下间隙。在锁骨旁入路组,局麻药注射至腋动脉背侧的锁骨下窝外侧。一位盲法观察者记录阻滞起效时间(主要终点)、成功率(即手术麻醉)、与阻滞相关的疼痛评分以及膈神经麻痹的发生率。同时还记录了阻滞操作过程中的操作时间和进针次数。总麻醉相关时间定义为操作时间与起效时间之和。

结果

锁骨下入路组和锁骨旁入路组的平均(SD)起效时间相似[分别为 16.0(7.5)min 和 16.8(6.2)min;平均差值,0.8;95%置信区间,-2.3 至 3.8;P = 0.61]。此外,两组在操作时间(P = 0.09)、总麻醉相关时间(P = 0.90)、手术麻醉(P>0.99)和膈神经麻痹(P>0.99)方面均无组间差异。锁骨旁入路技术所需的中位数(四分位距)进针次数比锁骨下入路技术略少[分别为 2 [1-4]和 2 [1-6];P = 0.048];然而,两组的操作疼痛程度相当。

结论

经锁骨下入路和锁骨旁入路超声引导下臂丛神经阻滞的起效时间相似。此外,两组在操作时间和成功率方面无组间差异。需要进一步开展剂量探索试验以阐明锁骨下入路阻滞的最小有效局麻药容量。本试验在 www.clinicaltrials.in.th 注册(注册号:TCTR20160525001)。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验