Suppr超能文献

一项比较三种肌间沟阻滞技术与局部浸润镇痛用于全肩关节置换术的 3 臂随机临床试验。

A 3-arm randomized clinical trial comparing interscalene blockade techniques with local infiltration analgesia for total shoulder arthroplasty.

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.

Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.

出版信息

J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2019 Oct;28(10):e325-e338. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2019.05.013. Epub 2019 Jul 26.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The ideal analgesic modality for total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) remains controversial. We hypothesized that a multimodal analgesic pathway incorporating continuous interscalene blockade (ISB) provides better analgesic efficacy than both single-injection ISB and local infiltration analgesia.

METHODS

This single-center, parallel, unblinded, randomized clinical trial evaluated 129 adults undergoing primary TSA. Patients were allocated to single-injection ISB, continuous ISB, or local infiltration analgesia. The primary outcome was the Overall Benefit of Analgesia Score (range, 0 [best] to 28 [worst]) on postoperative day 1. Additional outcomes included pain scores, opioid consumption, quality of life, and postoperative complications in the first 24 hours, at 3 months, and at 1 year.

RESULTS

We analyzed 125 patients (42 with single-injection ISB, 41 with continuous ISB, and 42 with local infiltration analgesia). The Overall Benefit of Analgesia Score was significantly improved in the continuous group (median [25th percentile, 75th percentile], 0 [0, 2]) compared with the single-injection group (2 [1, 4]; P = .002) and local infiltration analgesia group (3 [2, 4]; P < .001). Pain scores were significantly lower in the continuous group compared with the local infiltration analgesia group (P < .001 for all time points) and after 12 hours from ward arrival compared with the single-injection group (median [25th percentile, 75th percentile], 1.0 [0.0, 2.8] vs. 2.5 [0.0, 4.0]; P = .016). After postanesthesia recovery discharge, opioid consumption (oral morphine equivalents) was significantly lower in the continuous group (median [25th percentile, 75th percentile], 7.5 mg [0.0, 25.0 mg]) than in the local infiltration analgesia group (30 mg [15.0, 52.5 mg]; P < .001) and single-injection group (17.6 mg [7.5, 45.5 mg]; P = .010). No differences were found across groups for complications, 3-month outcomes, and 1-year outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Continuous ISB provides superior analgesia compared with single-injection ISB and local infiltration analgesia in the first 24 hours after TSA.

摘要

背景

全肩关节置换术(TSA)的理想镇痛方式仍存在争议。我们假设,包含连续肌间沟阻滞(ISB)的多模式镇痛途径比单次注射 ISB 和局部浸润性镇痛提供更好的镇痛效果。

方法

这是一项单中心、平行、非盲、随机临床试验,评估了 129 例接受初次 TSA 的成年人。患者被分配至单次注射 ISB、连续 ISB 或局部浸润性镇痛组。主要结局是术后第 1 天的总体镇痛效果评分(范围 0[最佳]至 28[最差])。其他结局包括术后 24 小时、3 个月和 1 年时的疼痛评分、阿片类药物用量、生活质量和术后并发症。

结果

我们分析了 125 例患者(42 例接受单次注射 ISB,41 例接受连续 ISB,42 例接受局部浸润性镇痛)。与单次注射 ISB 组(2[1,4];P=0.002)和局部浸润性镇痛组(3[2,4];P<0.001)相比,连续 ISB 组的总体镇痛效果评分显著提高(中位数[25 百分位数,75 百分位数],0[0,2])。与局部浸润性镇痛组相比,连续 ISB 组的疼痛评分在所有时间点均显著降低(所有时间点 P<0.001),且与单次注射 ISB 组相比,在术后 12 小时从病房离开时显著降低(中位数[25 百分位数,75 百分位数],1.0[0.0,2.8] vs. 2.5[0.0,4.0];P=0.016)。在麻醉后恢复出院时,连续 ISB 组的阿片类药物用量(口服吗啡当量)明显低于局部浸润性镇痛组(中位数[25 百分位数,75 百分位数],7.5mg[0.0,25.0mg])和单次注射 ISB 组(17.6mg[7.5,45.5mg];P=0.010)。三组在并发症、3 个月结局和 1 年结局方面无差异。

结论

与单次注射 ISB 和局部浸润性镇痛相比,连续 ISB 在 TSA 后 24 小时内提供更好的镇痛效果。

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