Kuivalainen Anna-Maria, Ebeling Freja, Rosenberg Per
Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University of Helsinki, PO Box 20, FIN-00014 Helsinki, Finland.
Department of Haematology, Helsinki University Central Hospital, PO Box 372, FIN-00029 HUS, Finland.
Scand J Pain. 2014 Jan 1;5(1):43-47. doi: 10.1016/j.sjpain.2013.10.003.
Background and purpose Local infiltration anaesthesia is frequently painful due to low pH of the used anaesthetics, such as lidocaine. Usually pH of the solution is near 4.0, which causes tissue irritation and excitation of the pain mediating nerve endings. Warming and buffering the local anaesthetic solution have been shown to reduce the patient's experience of pain and unpleasantness during infiltration. Buffering reduces the dissociation of the local anaesthetic molecule and may enhance the anaesthetic's entrance into nerve cells. In this randomized placebo-controlled trial warmed and buffered lidocaine with adrenaline was compared to room temperature unbuffered lidocaine with adrenaline infiltrated before bone marrow aspiration and/or biopsy (BMAB). The aim was to find out to what extent warming and buffering would diminish pain during infiltration and whether this would be reflected in less pain also during subsequent steps of the BMAB procedure. Methods One hundred patients scheduled to undergo BMAB were interviewed regarding subjective experiences from previous medical procedures, current chronic and temporary medications, and their present state of anxiety before the BMAB procedure. They received local anaesthetic infiltration of lidocaine prior to BMAB. The solution used was either warmed lidocaine 20 mg/ml with adrenaline buffered with sodium bicarbonate 75 mg/ml (warmed and buffered group, 50 patients, pH approximately 7.3, 32°C) or unbuffered lidocaine 20 mg/ml with adrenaline mixed with NaCl 0.9% solution (control group, 50 patients, pH approximately 3.7, room temperature). The lidocaine concentration was similar in both groups. The bone marrow sampling needle was inserted 2 min after local anaesthetic infiltration. The grade of preprocedural anxiety, and pain sensations during the BMAB, both rated on NRS (numeral rating scale, 0-10) were compared between the groups. Results In comparison with the use of an unbuffered solution at room temperature warmed and buffered lidocaine with adrenaline caused less pain during infiltration (median NRS 4.0 vs. 2.0, P < 0.002) but it did not make performing the other phases of BMAB any less painful. As expected, painful experiences from previous medical, other than BMAB, or dental procedures and anxiety were associated with local anaesthetic infiltration pain during BMAB. Patients' own pain or anxiolytic medication did not lessen pain during BMAB. Conclusions By warming and buffering the lidocaine solution containing adrenaline it is possible to make the pain during infiltration less intense. Unfortunately, such benefit was not detected during the following steps of BMAB, initiated 2 min later. Preprocedural anxiety made procedural pain more intense including that of the local anaesthetic infiltration. Implications Warming and buffering the local anaesthetic prior to its administration is an effective and simple way of diminishing pain during infiltration. This benefit seems to be underutilized in the BMAB procedure. However, warming and buffering are not sufficient enough to diminish pain during bone marrow sampling and thus additional pain alleviating methods should be used, particularly in patients showing preprocedural anxiety.
由于所使用的麻醉剂(如利多卡因)pH值较低,局部浸润麻醉常常会引起疼痛。通常溶液的pH值接近4.0,这会导致组织刺激并激发介导疼痛的神经末梢。已证明对局部麻醉溶液进行加热和缓冲可减少患者在浸润过程中的疼痛体验和不适感。缓冲可减少局部麻醉分子的解离,并可能增强麻醉剂进入神经细胞的能力。在这项随机安慰剂对照试验中,将加热并缓冲的含肾上腺素利多卡因与室温下未缓冲的含肾上腺素利多卡因在骨髓穿刺和/或活检(BMAB)前进行浸润时进行了比较。目的是确定加热和缓冲在多大程度上会减轻浸润过程中的疼痛,以及这是否也会在BMAB程序的后续步骤中体现为疼痛减轻。方法:对100名计划接受BMAB的患者就其既往医疗程序的主观体验、当前的慢性和临时用药情况以及BMAB程序前的焦虑状态进行了访谈。他们在BMAB前接受了利多卡因的局部麻醉浸润。所使用的溶液要么是用75mg/ml碳酸氢钠缓冲的20mg/ml加热利多卡因与肾上腺素(加热和缓冲组,50名患者,pH约7.3,32°C),要么是20mg/ml未缓冲的利多卡因与肾上腺素混合0.9%氯化钠溶液(对照组,50名患者,pH约3.7,室温)。两组中的利多卡因浓度相似。在局部麻醉浸润2分钟后插入骨髓采样针。比较两组在NRS(数字评分量表,0 - 10)上的术前焦虑等级以及BMAB过程中的疼痛感觉。结果:与使用室温下未缓冲的溶液相比,加热并缓冲的含肾上腺素利多卡因在浸润过程中引起的疼痛较轻(NRS中位数4.0对2.0,P < 0.002),但在BMAB的其他阶段进行时并没有使疼痛减轻。正如预期的那样,既往除BMAB外的医疗或牙科程序中的疼痛经历以及焦虑与BMAB过程中的局部麻醉浸润疼痛相关。患者自身使用的止痛或抗焦虑药物在BMAB过程中并未减轻疼痛。结论:通过加热和缓冲含肾上腺素的利多卡因溶液,可以使浸润过程中的疼痛减轻。不幸的是在2分钟后开始的BMAB后续步骤中未检测到这种益处。术前焦虑使包括局部麻醉浸润疼痛在内的手术疼痛更加剧烈。启示:在局部麻醉剂给药前进行加热和缓冲是减轻浸润过程中疼痛的一种有效且简单的方法。这种益处似乎在BMAB程序中未得到充分利用。然而,加热和缓冲不足以减轻骨髓采样过程中的疼痛,因此应使用额外的疼痛缓解方法,特别是在表现出术前焦虑的患者中。