Suppr超能文献

用于门诊膝关节手术的鞘内氯普鲁卡因还是高压布比卡因?一项前瞻性随机研究。

Intrathecal chloroprocaine or hyperbaric prilocaine for ambulatory knee surgery? A prospective randomized study.

作者信息

Guntz E, Vasseur C, Ifrim D, Louvard A, Fils J F, Kapessidou Y

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology, Hôpital Braine L'Alleud Waterloo, Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), 35 rue Wayez, 1420, Braine l'Alleud-Waterloo, Belgium.

Independant Biostatistician - Ars Statistica, Nivelles, Belgium.

出版信息

J Exp Orthop. 2021 Feb 24;8(1):15. doi: 10.1186/s40634-021-00332-3.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare intrathecal 1% chloroprocaine with 2% hyperbaric prilocaine in the setting of ambulatory knee arthroscopy. We hypothesized that complete resolution of the sensory block was faster with chloroprocaine.

METHODS

Eighty patients scheduled for knee arthroscopy were included in this prospective randomized double-blind study. Spinal anesthesia was performed with either chloroprocaine (50 mg) or hyperbaric prilocaine (50 mg). Characteristics of sensory and motor blocks and side effects were recorded.

RESULTS

Mean time to full sensory block recovery was shorter with chloroprocaine (169 (56.1) min vs 248 (59.4)). The characteristics of the sensory blocks were similar at the T12 dermatome level between the two groups. Differences appeared at T10: the percentage of patients with a sensory block was higher, onset quicker and duration longer with hyperbaric prilocaine. The number of patients with a sensory block at T4 dermatome level in both groups was minimal. Times to full motor recovery were identical in both groups (85 (70-99) vs 86 (76-111) min). Time to spontaneous voiding was shorter with chloroprocaine (203 (57.6) min vs 287.3 (47.2) min). Incidence of side effects was low in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

When considering the characteristics of the sensory block, the use of chloroprocaine may allow an earlier discharge of patients. Cephalic extension was to a higher dermatomal level and the sensory block at T10 level was of prolonged duration with hyperbaric prilocaine, suggesting that the choice between the two drugs should also be performed based on the level of the sensory block requested by the surgery. This study is registered in the US National Clinical Trials Registry, registration number: NCT030389 , the first of February 2017, Retrospectively registered.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在比较门诊膝关节镜检查中鞘内注射1%氯普鲁卡因与2%高压布比卡因的效果。我们假设氯普鲁卡因能使感觉阻滞更快完全消退。

方法

本前瞻性随机双盲研究纳入了80例计划进行膝关节镜检查的患者。采用氯普鲁卡因(50mg)或高压布比卡因(50mg)进行脊髓麻醉。记录感觉和运动阻滞的特征及副作用。

结果

氯普鲁卡因组感觉阻滞完全恢复的平均时间较短(169(56.1)分钟 vs 248(59.4)分钟)。两组在T12皮节水平的感觉阻滞特征相似。在T10水平出现差异:高压布比卡因组感觉阻滞的患者百分比更高、起效更快且持续时间更长。两组在T4皮节水平有感觉阻滞的患者数量极少。两组完全运动恢复的时间相同(85(70 - 99)分钟 vs 86(76 - 111)分钟)。氯普鲁卡因组自主排尿时间更短(203(57.6)分钟 vs 287.3(47.2)分钟)。两组副作用发生率均较低。

结论

考虑到感觉阻滞的特征,使用氯普鲁卡因可能使患者更早出院。高压布比卡因导致头端阻滞达到更高的皮节水平,且T10水平的感觉阻滞持续时间延长,这表明两种药物的选择还应根据手术所需的感觉阻滞水平来进行。本研究已在美国国家临床试验注册中心注册,注册号:NCT030389,于2017年2月1日追溯注册。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d1ca/7905001/17b7a3fd99a1/40634_2021_332_Fig1_HTML.jpg

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