Suppr超能文献

超声引导下经旁正中横向扫描且针在平面内进行腰椎硬膜外穿刺的可行性:与旁正中矢状面扫描的比较

Feasibility of ultrasound-guided lumbar epidural access using paramedian transverse scanning with the needle in-plane: a comparison with paramedian sagittal scanning.

作者信息

Li Huili, Kang Yi, Jin Li, Ma Danxu, Liu Yang, Wang Yun

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, No. 8, Gongtinan Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100020, China.

Department of Pharmaceutical Science, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.

出版信息

J Anesth. 2020 Feb;34(1):29-35. doi: 10.1007/s00540-019-02704-7. Epub 2019 Oct 30.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The present study was designed to compare the feasibility of ultrasound (US)-guided lumbar epidural access using paramedian sagittal scanning (PMSS) and paramedian transverse scanning (PMTS) approaches.

METHODS

Fifty patients undergoing surgery of the lower extremities were randomly allocated into 2 groups. The patients in PMSS group received PMSS-guided in-plane epidural access, whereas patients in PMTS group received PMTS-guided in-plane epidural access. The US visibility of neuraxial structures and of Tuohy needle during US scout scan, procedure duration, the number of attempts to access epidural space, Tuohy needle puncture depth in the epidural space, and extent of sensory block after spinal block between two groups were compared.

RESULTS

The US visibility of Tuohy needle and neuraxial structures was comparable between two groups. There was an overall decrease in procedure duration in the PMTS group relative to the PMSS group (360 ± 42 vs. 490 ± 38 s). The number of attempts needed to access the epidural space in PMSS group was significantly higher than in PMTS group. Distances between the epidural space and the puncture site in PMSS group and PMTS group showed a significant difference (7.13 ± 0.67 vs. 5.24 ± 0.21 cm). No significant differences in the extent of sensory block after spinal block were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that PMTS approach was superior as a means of achieving epidural access relative to the PMSS approach, since PMTS approach can be conducted more quickly given shorter path of the needle and less times needed for epidural access during this procedure.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, clinical trial number ChiCTR1800015815, date of registration April 24, 2018.

摘要

背景与目的

本研究旨在比较超声(US)引导下采用旁正中矢状面扫描(PMSS)和旁正中横断面扫描(PMTS)方法进行腰椎硬膜外穿刺的可行性。

方法

50例行下肢手术的患者被随机分为2组。PMSS组患者接受PMSS引导下的平面内硬膜外穿刺,而PMTS组患者接受PMTS引导下的平面内硬膜外穿刺。比较两组在超声预扫描时神经轴结构和Tuohy针的超声可见性、操作时间、硬膜外腔穿刺尝试次数、Tuohy针在硬膜外腔的穿刺深度以及脊麻后感觉阻滞范围。

结果

两组Tuohy针和神经轴结构的超声可见性相当。与PMSS组相比,PMTS组的操作时间总体缩短(360±42秒对490±38秒)。PMSS组进入硬膜外腔所需的尝试次数显著高于PMTS组。PMSS组和PMTS组硬膜外腔与穿刺点之间的距离存在显著差异(7.13±0.67厘米对5.24±0.21厘米)。脊麻后感觉阻滞范围未观察到显著差异。

结论

我们发现,相对于PMSS方法,PMTS方法作为一种实现硬膜外穿刺的手段更具优势,因为PMTS方法可通过更短的针路径和在此过程中更少的硬膜外穿刺次数更快地完成。

临床试验注册

中国临床试验注册中心,临床试验编号ChiCTR1800015815,注册日期2018年4月24日。

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