Suppr超能文献

股神经阻滞在脊柱阻滞前定位股骨干骨折患者的疗效和安全性:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Efficacy and safety of femoral nerve block for the positioning of femur fracture patients before a spinal block - A systematic review and meta-analysis.

机构信息

Emergency Department, Wan Fang Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.

Graduate Institute of Clinical Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2019 May 2;14(5):e0216337. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0216337. eCollection 2019.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The evidence supporting the benefit of femoral nerve block (FNB) for positioning before spinal anesthesia (SA) in patients suffering from a femur fracture remains inconclusive. In the present study, the authors intended to determine the efficacy and safety of FNB versus an intravenous analgesic (IVA) for positioning before SA in patients with a femur fracture.

METHOD

PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Scopus databases were searched up to January 2018. We included randomized controlled studies (RCTs) and observational studies that compared FNB versus IVA for the positioning of patients with femur fracture receiving SA. The primary outcome was pain scores during positioning within 30 min before SA. Secondary outcomes were the time for SA, additional analgesic requirements, anesthesiologist's satisfaction with the quality of positioning for SA, participant acceptance, and hemodynamic changes. A random-effects model was used to synthesize the data. We registered the study at PROSPERO with an ID of CRD42018091450.

RESULTS

Ten studies with 584 patients were eligible for inclusion. FNB achieved significantly lower pain scores than IVA during positioning within 30 min before SA (pooled standardized mean deviation (SMD): -1.27, 95% confidence interval (CI): -1.84 to -0.70, p < 0.05). A subgroup analysis showed that the analgesic effect was larger in patients in the sitting position for SA than a non-sitting position (sitting position vs non-sitting: pooled SMD: -1.75 (p < 0.05) vs -0.61 (not significant). A multivariate regression showed that the analgesic effect was also associated with age and the total equivalent amount as lidocaine after adjusting for gender (age: coefficient 0.048, p < 0.05; total equivalent amount as lidocaine: coefficient 0.005, p < 0.05). Patients receiving FNB also had a significantly shorter time for SA, greater anesthesiologist satisfaction, and higher patient acceptance than patients receiving IVA. The use of local anesthetics did not produce significant clinical hemodynamic change.

CONCLUSION

Compared to IVA, FNB was an effective and safe strategy for the positioning of femur fracture patients for a spinal block, particularly patients who received SA in the sitting position.

摘要

背景

在接受脊髓麻醉(SA)前,股神经阻滞(FNB)对股骨骨折患者定位的益处的证据仍不明确。本研究旨在确定 FNB 与静脉内镇痛(IVA)在股骨骨折患者接受 SA 前定位中的疗效和安全性。

方法

检索 PubMed、EMBASE、Cochrane 和 Scopus 数据库,检索截至 2018 年 1 月。我们纳入了比较 FNB 与 IVA 用于接受 SA 的股骨骨折患者定位的随机对照研究(RCT)和观察性研究。主要结局是在 SA 前 30 分钟内定位时的疼痛评分。次要结局是 SA 的时间、额外的镇痛需求、麻醉医师对 SA 定位质量的满意度、参与者接受程度和血流动力学变化。采用随机效应模型对数据进行综合。我们在 PROSPERO 注册了该研究,注册号为 CRD42018091450。

结果

纳入的 10 项研究共 584 例患者符合纳入标准。FNB 在 SA 前 30 分钟内定位时的疼痛评分显著低于 IVA(汇总标准化均数差(SMD):-1.27,95%置信区间(CI):-1.84 至 -0.70,p < 0.05)。亚组分析显示,在接受坐位 SA 的患者中,镇痛效果大于非坐位患者(坐位 vs 非坐位:汇总 SMD:-1.75(p < 0.05) vs -0.61(无统计学意义)。多元回归显示,在调整性别后,镇痛效果还与年龄和作为利多卡因的总等效量相关(年龄:系数 0.048,p < 0.05;作为利多卡因的总等效量:系数 0.005,p < 0.05)。接受 FNB 的患者 SA 时间明显缩短,麻醉医师满意度更高,患者接受程度更高。局部麻醉药的使用并未产生显著的临床血流动力学变化。

结论

与 IVA 相比,FNB 是一种在接受脊髓阻滞的股骨骨折患者定位中有效且安全的策略,尤其适用于接受坐位 SA 的患者。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b311/6497313/48c5270e90d0/pone.0216337.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