Guay Joanne, Johnson Rebecca L, Kopp Sandra
Department of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Oct 31;10(10):CD011608. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011608.pub2.
It is estimated that over 300,000 total hip replacements are performed each year in the USA. For European countries, the number of hip replacement procedures per 100,000 people performed in 2007 varied from less than 50 to over 250. To facilitate postoperative rehabilitation, pain must be adequately treated. Peripheral nerve blocks and neuraxial blocks have been proposed to replace or supplement systemic analgesia.
We aimed to compare the relative effects (benefits and harms) of the different nerve blocks that may be used to relieve pain after elective hip replacement in adults.
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, Issue 12, 2016), MEDLINE (Ovid SP) (1946 to December Week 49, 2016), Embase (Ovid SP) (1980 to December week 49, 2016), CINAHL (EBSCO host) (1982 to 6 December 2016), ISI Web of Science (1973 to 6 December 2016), Scopus (from inception to December 2016), trials registers, and relevant web sites.
We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) performed in adults undergoing elective primary hip replacement and comparing peripheral nerve blocks to any other pain treatment modality. We applied no language or publication status restrictions.
Data were extracted independently by two review authors. We contacted study authors.
We included 51 RCTs with 2793 participants; of these 45 RCTs (2491 participants: peripheral nerve block = 1288; comparators = 1203) were included in meta-analyses. There are 11 ongoing studies and three awaiting classification.Compared to systemic analgesia alone, peripheral nerve blocks reduced: pain at rest on arrival in the postoperative care unit (SMD -1.12, 95% CI -1.67 to -0.56; 9 trials, 429 participants; equivalent to 3.2 on 0 to 10 scale; moderate-quality evidence); risk of acute confusional status: risk ratio (RR) 0.10 95% CI 0.02 to 0.54; 1 trial, 225 participants; number needed to treat for additional benefit (NNTB) 12, 95% CI 11 to 22; very low-quality evidence); pruritus (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.70; 2 trials, 259 participants for continuous peripheral nerve blocks; NNTB 4 (95% CI 4 to 8); very low-quality evidence); hospital length of stay (SMD -0.75, 95% CI -1.02 to -0.48; very low-quality evidence; 2 trials, 249 participants; equivalent to 0.75 day). Participant satisfaction increased (SMD 0.67, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.89; low-quality evidence; 5 trials, 363 participants; equivalent to 2.4 on 0 to 10 scale). We did not find a difference for the number of participants walking on postoperative day one (very low-quality evidence). Two nerve block-related complications were reported: one local haematoma and one delayed persistent paresis.Compared to neuraxial blocks, peripheral nerve blocks reduced the risk of pruritus (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.58; 6 trials, 299 participants; moderate-quality evidence; NNTB 6 (95% CI 5 to 9). We did not find a difference for pain at rest on arrival in the postoperative care unit (moderate-quality evidence); number of nerve block-related complications (low-quality evidence); acute confusional status (very low-quality evidence); hospital length of stay (low quality-evidence); time to first walk (low-quality evidence); or participant satisfaction (high-quality evidence).We found that peripheral nerve blocks provide better pain control compared to systemic analgesia with no major differences between peripheral nerve blocks and neuraxial blocks. We also found that peripheral nerve blocks may be associated with reduced risk of postoperative acute confusional state and a modest reduction in hospital length of stay that could be meaningful in terms of cost reduction considering the increasing numbers of procedures performed annually.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Compared to systemic analgesia alone, there is moderate-quality evidence that peripheral nerve blocks reduce postoperative pain, low-quality evidence that patient satisfaction is increased and very low-quality evidence for reductions in acute confusional status, pruritus and hospital length of stay .We found moderate-quality evidence that peripheral nerve blocks reduce pruritus compared with neuraxial blocks.The 11 ongoing studies, once completed, and the three studies awaiting classification may alter the conclusions of the review once assessed.
据估计,美国每年进行超过30万例全髋关节置换手术。在欧洲国家,2007年每10万人中进行的髋关节置换手术数量从不到50例到超过250例不等。为促进术后康复,必须充分治疗疼痛。已有人提出使用外周神经阻滞和神经轴阻滞来替代或补充全身镇痛。
我们旨在比较不同神经阻滞用于缓解成人择期髋关节置换术后疼痛的相对效果(益处和危害)。
我们检索了Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL,2016年第12期)、MEDLINE(Ovid SP)(1946年至2016年12月第49周)、Embase(Ovid SP)(1980年至2016年12月第49周)、CINAHL(EBSCO主机)(1982年至2016年12月6日)、ISI科学网(1973年至2016年12月6日)、Scopus(自创刊至2016年12月)、试验注册库及相关网站。
我们纳入了所有在接受择期初次髋关节置换的成人中进行的随机对照试验(RCT),并将外周神经阻滞与任何其他疼痛治疗方式进行比较。我们未设置语言或发表状态限制。
由两位综述作者独立提取数据。我们与研究作者进行了联系。
我们纳入了51项RCT,共2793名参与者;其中45项RCT(2491名参与者:外周神经阻滞组 = 1288名;对照 = 1203名)纳入了荟萃分析。有11项正在进行的研究和3项等待分类的研究。与单纯全身镇痛相比,外周神经阻滞降低了:术后护理单元入院时静息痛(标准化均数差 -1.12,95%置信区间 -1.67至 -0.56;9项试验,429名参与者;相当于0至10分制中的3.2分;中等质量证据);急性意识模糊状态的风险:风险比(RR)0.10,95%置信区间0.02至0.54;1项试验,225名参与者;额外获益所需治疗人数(NNTB)12,95%置信区间11至22;极低质量证据);瘙痒(RR 0.16,95%置信区间0.04至0.70;2项试验,259名连续接受外周神经阻滞的参与者;NNTB 4(95%置信区间4至8);极低质量证据);住院时间(标准化均数差 -0.75,95%置信区间 -1.02至 -0.48;极低质量证据;2项试验,249名参与者;相当于0.75天)。参与者满意度提高(标准化均数差0.67,95%置信区间0.45至0.89;低质量证据;5项试验,363名参与者;相当于0至10分制中的2.4分)。我们未发现术后第1天行走参与者数量存在差异(极低质量证据)。报告了2例与神经阻滞相关的并发症:1例局部血肿和1例延迟性持续性轻瘫。与神经轴阻滞相比,外周神经阻滞降低了瘙痒风险(RR 0.33,95%置信区间0.19至0.58;6项试验,299名参与者;中等质量证据;NNTB 6(95%置信区间5至9)。我们未发现术后护理单元入院时静息痛(中等质量证据)、神经阻滞相关并发症数量(低质量证据)、急性意识模糊状态(极低质量证据)、住院时间(低质量证据)、首次行走时间(低质量证据)或参与者满意度(高质量证据)存在差异。我们发现,与全身镇痛相比,外周神经阻滞能提供更好的疼痛控制,外周神经阻滞与神经轴阻滞之间无重大差异。我们还发现,外周神经阻滞可能与降低术后急性意识模糊状态的风险以及适度缩短住院时间有关考虑到每年进行的手术数量不断增加,这在成本降低方面可能具有重要意义。
与单纯全身镇痛相比,有中等质量证据表明外周神经阻滞可减轻术后疼痛,低质量证据表明患者满意度提高,极低质量证据表明可降低急性意识模糊状态、瘙痒和住院时间。我们发现有中等质量证据表明外周神经阻滞与神经轴阻滞相比可减轻瘙痒。这11项正在进行的研究一旦完成,以及3项等待分类的研究一旦评估,可能会改变本综述的结论。