Suppr超能文献

L5-S1节段术前超声引导旁正中脊髓麻醉:这比体表标志引导的中线入路更好吗?一项随机对照试验。

Pre-procedure ultrasound-guided paramedian spinal anaesthesia at L5-S1: Is this better than landmark-guided midline approach? A randomised controlled trial.

作者信息

Srinivasan Karthikeyan Kallidaikurichi, Leo Anne-Marie, Iohom Gabriella, Loughnane Frank, Lee Peter J

机构信息

Department of Anaesthesia, Adelaide and Meath Hospital, National Children's Hospital Incorporated, Tallaght, Dublin, Ireland.

Department of Anaesthesia, Hospital for Sick Kids, Toronto, Canada.

出版信息

Indian J Anaesth. 2018 Jan;62(1):53-60. doi: 10.4103/ija.IJA_448_17.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Routine use of pre-procedural ultrasound guided midline approach has not shown to improve success rate in administering subarachnoid block. The study hypothesis was that the routine use of pre-procedural (not real time) ultrasound-guided paramedian spinals at L5-S1 interspace could reduce the number of passes (i.e., withdrawal and redirection of spinal needle without exiting the skin) required to enter the subarachnoid space when compared to the conventional landmark-guided midline approach.

METHODS

After local ethics approval, 120 consenting patients scheduled for elective total joint replacements (Hip and Knee) were randomised into either Group C where conventional midline approach with palpated landmarks was used or Group P where pre-procedural ultrasound was used to perform subarachnoid block by paramedian approach at L5-S1 interspace (real time ultrasound guidance was not used).

RESULTS

There was no difference in primary outcome (difference in number of passes) between the two groups. Similarly there was no difference in the number of attempts (i.e., the number of times the spinal needle was withdrawn from the skin and reinserted). The first pass success rates (1 attempt and 1 pass) was significantly greater in Group C compared to Group P [43% vs. 22%, = 0.02].

CONCLUSION

Routine use of paramedian spinal anaesthesia at L5-S1 interspace, guided by pre-procedure ultrasound, in patients undergoing lower limb joint arthroplasties did not reduce the number of passes or attempts needed to achieve successful dural puncture.

摘要

背景与目的

术前常规使用超声引导中线入路并未显示能提高蛛网膜下腔阻滞的成功率。本研究的假设是,与传统的体表标志引导中线入路相比,术前(非实时)超声引导L5 - S1间隙旁正中脊髓穿刺可减少进入蛛网膜下腔所需的穿刺次数(即脊髓穿刺针在不穿出皮肤的情况下回撤和重新定向的次数)。

方法

经当地伦理委员会批准后,将120例计划接受择期全关节置换术(髋关节和膝关节)且签署知情同意书的患者随机分为C组(采用传统的体表标志触诊中线入路)和P组(术前使用超声引导在L5 - S1间隙采用旁正中入路进行蛛网膜下腔阻滞,不使用实时超声引导)。

结果

两组的主要结局(穿刺次数差异)无差异。同样,尝试次数(即脊髓穿刺针从皮肤拔出并重新插入的次数)也无差异。C组的首次穿刺成功率(1次尝试和1次穿刺)显著高于P组[43%对22%,P = 0.02]。

结论

对于接受下肢关节置换术的患者,术前超声引导下在L5 - S1间隙常规使用旁正中脊髓麻醉并不能减少成功硬膜穿刺所需的穿刺次数或尝试次数。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4db2/5787891/f5502c102c73/IJA-62-53-g001.jpg

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