Suppr超能文献

舌癌患者经口外与口内途径行舌咽神经阻滞缓解疼痛的比较:一项前瞻性随机研究。

Comparison of extraoral and intraoral routes of glossopharyngeal nerve block for pain relief in patient with carcinoma tongue: A prospective randomized study.

作者信息

Singh Neetu, Singh Sarita, Mishra Neel Kamal, Kumar Vijay, Gautam Shefali

机构信息

Department of Anaesthesiology, King George Medical University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.

Department of Surgical Oncology, King George Medical University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.

出版信息

J Cancer Res Ther. 2020 Apr-Jun;16(3):534-538. doi: 10.4103/jcrt.JCRT_309_18.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Glossopharyngeal nerve block (GNB) technique has been used as alternative of treatment of cancer and noncancer pain of the oral cavity. The objective of the study is to compare the two approaches (extraoral and intraoral) of GNB in patients of carcinoma of the tongue in terms of efficacy, duration, and complications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a prospective comparative randomized study over a period of 1 year. Fifty patients of either sex of ASA physical status and 2, between 21 and 70 years of age, suffering from carcinoma of the tongue, were selected. The patients were randomly divided into two groups. Group I received 4 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine combined with 40 mg, of triamcinolonacetonide by extraoral approach of GNB, and Group II received the same amount of drug by intraoral approach of GNB. Hemodynamic parameters, degree of pain relief using visual analog scale (VAS), number of attempts, effect on quality of life (QOL), and complication were noted during the performance of GNB.

RESULTS

Demographic profile in both groups was comparable. Rate of complication and number of attempts to complete intervention were higher in Group I, which was found to be statistically significant. However, mean VAS scores in Group I were significantly higher as compared to those in Group II during most of the study period starting from the 1 follow-up at 30 min to the 2 month postintervention (P < 0.05). No statistically significant difference in mean QOL scores of two groups was observed for the entire study period except at 1 week when mean scores in Group I were higher as compared to those in Group II (P = 0.011).

CONCLUSION

The intraoral approach of GNB was better with respect to pain control and improvement in QOL whereas the rate of complication and number of attempts was lower in extraoral approach of GNB.

摘要

背景与目的

舌咽神经阻滞(GNB)技术已被用作治疗口腔癌性和非癌性疼痛的替代方法。本研究的目的是比较GNB的两种方法(口外法和口内法)在舌癌患者中的疗效、持续时间和并发症。

材料与方法

这是一项为期1年的前瞻性比较随机研究。选取50例年龄在21至70岁之间、ASA身体状况分级为2级的舌癌患者,男女不限。将患者随机分为两组。第一组通过GNB口外法接受4 mL 0.5%布比卡因联合40 mg曲安奈德,第二组通过GNB口内法接受相同剂量的药物。在进行GNB时记录血流动力学参数、使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)的疼痛缓解程度、穿刺次数、对生活质量(QOL)的影响以及并发症。

结果

两组的人口统计学特征具有可比性。第一组的并发症发生率和完成干预的穿刺次数较高,差异具有统计学意义。然而,从30分钟的首次随访到干预后2个月的大部分研究期间,第一组的平均VAS评分显著高于第二组(P < 0.05)。在整个研究期间,两组的平均QOL评分无统计学显著差异,但在第1周时,第一组的平均评分高于第二组(P = 0.011)。

结论

GNB口内法在疼痛控制和QOL改善方面更好,而GNB口外法的并发症发生率和穿刺次数较低。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验