From the Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, and the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (F.W.A.) the Department of Anesthesia (F.W.A.) the Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute (F.W.A.) the Department of Anesthesia (J.M., G.A.P., R.M., R.B.) the Department of Surgery, Division of Orthopedic Surgery, Women's College Hospital (J.C., J.T., T.D.) the Department of Anesthesia, Toronto Western Hospital (G.A.P.), University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Anesthesiology. 2019 Sep;131(3):619-629. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000002817.
The ideal location for single-injection adductor canal block that maximizes analgesia while minimizing quadriceps weakness after painful knee surgery is unclear. This triple-blind trial compares ultrasound-guided adductor canal block injection locations with the femoral artery positioned medial (proximal adductor canal), inferior (mid-adductor canal), and lateral (distal adductor canal) to the sartorius muscle to determine the location that optimizes postoperative analgesia and motor function. The hypothesis was that distal adductor block has (1) a superior opioid-sparing effect and (2) preserved quadriceps strength, compared with proximal and mid-locations for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.
For the study, 108 patients were randomized to proximal, mid-, or distal adductor canal injection locations for adductor canal block. Cumulative 24-h oral morphine equivalent consumption and percentage quadriceps strength decrease (maximum voluntary isometric contraction) at 30 min postinjection were coprimary outcomes. The time to first analgesic request, pain scores, postoperative nausea/vomiting at least once within the first 24 h, and block-related complications at 2 weeks were also evaluated.
All patients completed the study. Contrary to the hypothesis, proximal adductor canal block decreased 24-h morphine consumption to a mean ± SD of 34.3 ± 19.1 mg, (P < 0.0001) compared to 64.0 ± 33.6 and 65.7 ± 22.9 mg for the mid- and distal locations, respectively, with differences [95% CI] of 29.7 mg [17.2, 42.2] and 31.4 mg [21.5, 41.3], respectively, mostly in the postanesthesia care unit. Quadriceps strength was similar, with 16.7%:13.4%:15.3% decreases for proximal:mid:distal adductor canal blocks. The nausea/vomiting risk was also lower with proximal adductor canal block (10 of 34, 29.4%) compared to distal location (23 of 36, 63.9%; P = 0.005). The time to first analgesic request was longer, and postoperative pain was improved up to 6 h for proximal adductor canal block, compared to mid- and distal locations.
A proximal adductor canal injection location decreases opioid consumption and opioid-related side effects without compromising quadriceps strength compared to mid- and distal locations for adductor canal block in patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.
在接受膝关节疼痛手术后,为了最大限度地提高镇痛效果,同时最小化股四头肌无力,单点注射收肌管阻滞的理想位置尚不清楚。本项三盲试验比较了股动脉位于收肌管内(近端收肌管)、下方(中收肌管)和外侧(远端收肌管)相对于股四头肌肌的收肌管阻滞注射位置,以确定优化术后镇痛和运动功能的位置。假设是,与前交叉韧带重建的近端和中间位置相比,(1)远端收肌管阻滞具有更好的阿片类药物节省作用,(2)保留股四头肌力量。
在这项研究中,108 名患者随机分为接受近端、中间或远端收肌管阻滞注射的收肌管阻滞。主要的次要结局是累积 24 小时口服吗啡等效消耗量和注射后 30 分钟时股四头肌力量下降的百分比(最大自愿等长收缩)。首次镇痛请求的时间、疼痛评分、术后 24 小时内至少一次出现恶心/呕吐,以及 2 周时与阻滞相关的并发症也进行了评估。
所有患者均完成了研究。与假设相反,与中、远端位置(分别为 64.0 ± 33.6 和 65.7 ± 22.9 mg)相比,近端收肌管阻滞可使 24 小时吗啡消耗量降低至 34.3 ± 19.1 mg(平均±SD)(P < 0.0001),差异分别为 29.7 mg [17.2,42.2] 和 31.4 mg [21.5,41.3],主要发生在麻醉后护理病房。股四头肌力量相似,近端、中间和远端收肌管阻滞的股四头肌力量分别下降 16.7%:13.4%:15.3%。与远端位置(23/36,63.9%;P = 0.005)相比,近端收肌管阻滞的恶心/呕吐风险也较低(10/34,29.4%)。与中、远端位置相比,近端收肌管阻滞首次镇痛请求时间更长,术后疼痛可改善至 6 小时。
与中、远端位置相比,在接受前交叉韧带重建的患者中,单点注射收肌管阻滞时,与中、远端位置相比,近端收肌管阻滞位置可减少阿片类药物的消耗和阿片类药物相关的副作用,而不会损害股四头肌力量。