Aprato A, Audisio A, Santoro A, Grosso E, Devivo S, Berardino M, Massè A
School of Medicine, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
School of Medicine, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Injury. 2018 Dec;49(12):2203-2208. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2018.09.042. Epub 2018 Sep 26.
The aim of this study was to compare the fascia-iliaca compartment block and the intra-articular hip injection in terms of pain management and the need for additional systemic analgesia in the preoperative phase of intracapsular hip fractures.
Patients >65 years old with an intracapsular hip fracture were randomized in this prospective, blind, controlled, parallel trial in a Level-I trauma center. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either the fascia-iliaca compartment block (cohort FICB) or the intra-articular hip injection (cohort IAHI) upon admission to the emergency department. The primary outcome was pain relief at 20 min, 12 h, 24 h and 48 h after the regional anesthesia, both at rest and during internal rotation of the fractured limb. The Numeric Rating Scale was used. Residual pain was managed with the same protocol in all patients. Additional analgesic drug administration during the 48 h from admission was recorded.
A total of 120 patients with comparable baseline characteristics were analyzed in this study: the FICB group consisted of 70 subjects, while the IAHI group consisted of 50 subjects. Pain was significantly lower in the IAHI group during movement of the fractured limb at 20 min (p < 0.05), 12 h (p < 0.05), 24 h (p < 0.05) and 48 h (p < 0.05). In the FICB cohort 72.9% of patients needed to take oxycodone, in contrast to 28.6% of the IAHI cohort (p < 0.05). In the FICB cohort 14.09 ± 11.57 mg of oxycodone was administered, while in the IAHI cohort 4.38 ± 7.63 mg (p < 0.05). No adverse events related to either technique were recorded.
Intra-articular hip injection provides better pre-operatory pain management in elder patients with intracapsular hip fractures compared to the fascia-iliaca compartment block. It also reduced the need for supplementary systemic analgesia.
Therapeutic Level I.
本研究旨在比较在囊内髋部骨折术前阶段,筋膜髂筋膜间隙阻滞与髋关节腔内注射在疼痛管理及额外全身镇痛需求方面的差异。
在一级创伤中心进行的这项前瞻性、盲法、对照、平行试验中,将65岁以上的囊内髋部骨折患者随机分组。患者在急诊入院时被随机分配接受筋膜髂筋膜间隙阻滞(FICB组)或髋关节腔内注射(IAHI组)。主要结局指标为区域麻醉后20分钟、12小时、24小时和48小时时,休息及骨折肢体内旋时的疼痛缓解情况。采用数字评分量表。所有患者均按照相同方案处理残余疼痛。记录入院后48小时内额外镇痛药的使用情况。
本研究共分析了120例基线特征可比的患者:FICB组70例,IAHI组50例。在骨折肢体活动时,IAHI组在20分钟(p<0.05)、12小时(p<0.05)、24小时(p<0.05)和48小时(p<0.05)时的疼痛明显更低。FICB组中72.9%的患者需要服用羟考酮,而IAHI组为28.6%(p<0.05)。FICB组给予羟考酮14.09±11.57毫克,而IAHI组为4.38±7.63毫克(p<0.05)。未记录到与任何一种技术相关的不良事件。
与筋膜髂筋膜间隙阻滞相比,髋关节腔内注射在老年囊内髋部骨折患者的术前疼痛管理方面效果更佳。它还减少了补充全身镇痛的需求。
治疗性I级。