Suppr超能文献

内镜下腕管松解术伴或不伴镇静。

Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release with and without Sedation.

机构信息

Philadelphia, Pa.

From the Rothman Institute, Thomas Jefferson University.

出版信息

Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018 Mar;141(3):685-690. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000004113.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated outcomes and complications with endoscopic carpal tunnel release performed with local anesthesia only versus local anesthesia with sedation. The authors hypothesized that patient outcomes and satisfaction would be equivalent in both groups irrespective of anesthesia type.

METHODS

One hundred fifty-four consecutive patients undergoing endoscopic carpal tunnel release with local anesthesia either with or without sedation were prospectively enrolled in a study of satisfaction and outcomes. Patients were surveyed preoperatively and at 2 weeks and 3 months postoperatively to evaluate satisfaction, symptoms, complications, and disability using the 11-question Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire survey; the Levine-Katz carpal tunnel survey; and a customized Likert scale.

RESULTS

The hypothesis was upheld. Patients reported high levels of satisfaction (96 percent in the local anesthesia group and 93 percent in the local anesthesia with sedation group at 3 weeks). Disability, pain, and symptom scores did not differ significantly between groups at either postoperative time point. After surgery, patients in the sedation group recalled more mean preoperative anxiety (four of 10 versus 2.03 of 10 at 3 months). If they were to undergo surgery again, patients in the sedation group were likely to desire either sedation (68 percent) or general anesthesia (29 percent), whereas patients in the local anesthesia-only group were likely to wish for similar local-only anesthesia (78 percent). There were no reoperations or epinephrine-related complications in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing endoscopic carpal tunnel release with the local anesthesia or local anesthesia plus sedation experience similar levels of satisfaction and outcomes. Both methods of anesthesia provide excellent results and allow surgeons and patients to choose freely between the two anesthetic techniques.

摘要

背景

本研究评估了仅行局部麻醉与局部麻醉联合镇静下行内镜腕管松解术的疗效和并发症。作者假设,无论麻醉类型如何,两组患者的结局和满意度均相当。

方法

154 例连续接受局部麻醉联合或不联合镇静的内镜腕管松解术的患者前瞻性地纳入一项满意度和结局研究。患者在术前、术后 2 周和 3 个月接受调查,使用 11 项问卷(包括手臂、肩部和手部残疾问卷,Levine-Katz 腕管问卷,以及定制的李克特量表)评估满意度、症状、并发症和残疾。

结果

该假设成立。患者报告了较高的满意度(3 周时,局部麻醉组为 96%,局部麻醉联合镇静组为 93%)。两组在任何术后时间点的残疾、疼痛和症状评分均无显著差异。手术后,镇静组患者回忆起更多的术前平均焦虑(10 分制中 4 分,3 个月时 2.03 分)。如果再次接受手术,镇静组患者可能希望接受镇静(68%)或全身麻醉(29%),而局部麻醉组患者可能希望接受类似的局部麻醉(78%)。两组均无再次手术或肾上腺素相关并发症。

结论

行内镜腕管松解术的患者接受局部麻醉或局部麻醉联合镇静的疗效和结局相似。两种麻醉方法均能取得良好效果,可让术者和患者在这两种麻醉技术之间自由选择。

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