Suppr超能文献

布比卡因局部麻醉剂降低根治性膀胱切除术后阿片类药物需求:剂型重要吗?

Bupivacaine local anesthetic to decrease opioid requirements after radical cystectomy: Does formulation matter?

作者信息

Schmidt Bogdana, Bhambhvani Hriday P, Greenberg Daniel R, Prado Kris, Shafer Steven, Thong Alan, Gill Harcharan, Skinner Eila, Shah Jay B

机构信息

Department of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA.

Department of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA.

出版信息

Urol Oncol. 2021 Jun;39(6):369.e1-369.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2020.11.008. Epub 2020 Dec 8.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Reduction of opioids is an important goal in the care of patients undergoing radical cystectomy (RC). Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) has been shown to be a safe and effective pain reliever in the immediate postoperative period and has been reported to reduce postoperative opioid requirements. Since the liposomal formulation is predicated on slow systemic absorption, the amount of bupivacaine administered is notably higher than that typically used with standard bupivacaine (SB) formulations. In addition, LB is costly, not universally available, and studies comparing this formulation to SB are lacking. We sought to determine if there is a difference in postoperative opioid requirements in patients who receive LB vs. high dose SB at the time of RC.

METHODS

In May 2019 we transitioned to administration of high-volume SB injected intraoperatively at the time of RC. This prospective cohort was compared to a historical cohort of patients who received injection of LB at the time of surgery. Primary endpoints included postsurgical opioid use measured in morphine equivalent dose (MED) and patient-reported Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) pain scores and length of stay. All patients were managed using principles of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS).

RESULTS

From May 2019 through August 2019, 28 patients underwent RC and met eligibility criteria to receive SB at the time of surgery. They were compared to a historical cohort of 34 patients who received LB between November 2017 and July 2018. There was no difference in MED exposure either in the postanesthesia care unit (SB 9.0 ± 8.9 MED vs. LB 6.5 ± 9.4 MED, P= 0.29) or during the remainder of the hospital stay (SB 36.8 ± 56.9 MED vs. LB 42.1 ± 102.5 MED, P= 0.81), no difference in NRS pain scores on postoperative day 1 (SB 2.6 ± 1.6 vs. LB 2.1 ± 1.7, P= 0.23), day 2 (SB 2.4 ± 1.8 vs. LB 1.9 ± 1.6, P= 0.19), or day 3 (SB 1.9 ± 1.8 vs. LB 1.7 ± 1.7, P= 0.69) and no difference in length of stay (SB 5.0 ± 1.7 days, LB 4.9 ± 3.3 days, P= 0.93). Subgroup analysis of open RC and robotic-assisted RC showed no significant difference in MED or pain scores between LB and SB patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients undergoing RC under ERAS protocol there was no significant difference in postoperative opioid consumption, NRS pain scores, or length of stay among patients receiving SB compared to LB.

摘要

引言

减少阿片类药物的使用是根治性膀胱切除术(RC)患者护理中的一个重要目标。脂质体布比卡因(LB)已被证明在术后即刻是一种安全有效的止痛剂,并且据报道可减少术后阿片类药物的需求量。由于脂质体制剂的基础是缓慢的全身吸收,因此所给予的布比卡因量明显高于标准布比卡因(SB)制剂通常使用的量。此外,LB成本高昂,并非普遍可用,并且缺乏将该制剂与SB进行比较的研究。我们试图确定在RC时接受LB与高剂量SB的患者术后阿片类药物需求量是否存在差异。

方法

2019年5月,我们在RC时改为术中注射大容量SB。将这个前瞻性队列与手术时接受LB注射的历史队列患者进行比较。主要终点包括以吗啡等效剂量(MED)衡量的术后阿片类药物使用情况、患者报告的数字评分量表(NRS)疼痛评分和住院时间。所有患者均按照术后加速康复(ERAS)原则进行管理。

结果

从2019年5月至2019年8月,28例患者接受了RC并符合手术时接受SB的资格标准。将他们与2017年 November 至2018年7月期间接受LB的34例患者的历史队列进行比较。在麻醉后护理单元(SB为9.0±8.9 MED,LB为6.5±9.4 MED,P = 0.29)或住院剩余时间(SB为36.8±56.9 MED,LB为42.1±102.5 MED,P = 0.81),MED暴露量没有差异;术后第1天(SB为2.6±1.6,LB为2.1±1.7,P =

0.23)、第2天(SB为2.4±1.8,LB为1.9±1.6,P = 0.19)或第3天(SB为1.9±1.8,LB为1.7±1.7,P = 0.69)的NRS疼痛评分没有差异,住院时间也没有差异(SB为5.0±1.7天,LB为4.9±3.3天,P = 0.93)。开放性RC和机器人辅助RC的亚组分析显示,LB组和SB组患者在MED或疼痛评分方面没有显著差异。

结论

在接受ERAS方案的RC患者中,接受SB与LB的患者在术后阿片类药物消耗量、NRS疼痛评分或住院时间方面没有显著差异。

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