• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

脂质体布比卡因与速释布比卡因用于术后疼痛控制的比较。

Liposomal Bupivacaine Versus Immediate-Release Bupivacaine for Postoperative Pain Control.

作者信息

Dilawri Atul, Wyman Marcia, Shah Sneha

机构信息

Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.

出版信息

Ann Pharmacother. 2022 Jun;56(6):664-670. doi: 10.1177/10600280211043554. Epub 2021 Sep 8.

DOI:10.1177/10600280211043554
PMID:34496675
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) is increasingly being used for postoperative pain control, but there are conflicting efficacy data when compared with immediate-release bupivacaine (IRB).

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the comparative efficacies of LB and IRB for postoperative pain control in order to assess the formulary status of LB at our institution.

METHODS

A single-center, retrospective, institutional review board-approved, noninferiority matched cohort study at a tertiary care academic medical center. Adult surgical patients admitted for >24 hours who received LB or IRB were included. The primary outcome was total opioid consumption within 24 hours postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included total opioid consumption within 72 hours postoperatively, nonopioid analgesic use within 24 and 72 hours postoperatively, time to rescue analgesic use, and postoperative length of stay (LOS).

RESULTS

A total of 326 patients were included in the matched cohort. Median 24-hour opioid consumption was significantly lower in the IRB group compared with the LB group (81 mg [30, 153] vs 103 mg [46, 241]; = 0.01). Patients receiving IRB compared with LB also had a decrease in total opioid consumption 72 hours postoperatively (110 mg [45, 258] vs 165 mg [68, 402]; = 0.005) and shorter postoperative LOS (2.8 days [1.7, 4] vs 3.3 days [2, 5.1]; < 0.001). There was no difference in time to rescue analgesic use.

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

Across a variety of surgical procedures, administration of IRB compared with LB was associated with a reduction in total opioid consumption within 24 and 72 hours postoperatively and shorter LOS in adult surgical patients.

摘要

背景

脂质体布比卡因(LB)越来越多地用于术后疼痛控制,但与速释布比卡因(IRB)相比,疗效数据存在冲突。

目的

评估LB和IRB在术后疼痛控制方面的比较疗效,以评估我院LB的处方情况。

方法

在一家三级医疗学术中心进行的单中心、回顾性、经机构审查委员会批准的非劣效性匹配队列研究。纳入住院超过24小时并接受LB或IRB的成年手术患者。主要结局是术后24小时内的总阿片类药物消耗量。次要结局包括术后72小时内的总阿片类药物消耗量、术后24小时和72小时内的非阿片类镇痛药使用情况、补救性镇痛药使用时间以及术后住院时间(LOS)。

结果

匹配队列中共纳入326例患者。IRB组术后24小时阿片类药物消耗量中位数显著低于LB组(81 mg [30, 153] 对比103 mg [46, 241];P = 0.01)。与LB组相比,接受IRB的患者术后72小时的总阿片类药物消耗量也有所减少(110 mg [45, 258] 对比165 mg [68, 402];P = 0.005),且术后住院时间更短(2.8天 [1.7, 4] 对比3.3天 [2, 5.1];P < 0.001)。补救性镇痛药使用时间无差异。

结论及意义

在各种外科手术中,与LB相比,IRB给药与成年手术患者术后24小时和72小时内总阿片类药物消耗量减少及住院时间缩短相关。

相似文献

1
Liposomal Bupivacaine Versus Immediate-Release Bupivacaine for Postoperative Pain Control.脂质体布比卡因与速释布比卡因用于术后疼痛控制的比较。
Ann Pharmacother. 2022 Jun;56(6):664-670. doi: 10.1177/10600280211043554. Epub 2021 Sep 8.
2
Liposomal bupivacaine incisional injection in single-level lumbar spine surgery.脂质体布比卡因在单节段腰椎手术中的切口注射
Spine J. 2016 Nov;16(11):1305-1308. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2016.06.013. Epub 2016 Jun 24.
3
Interscalene block with liposomal bupivacaine versus continuous interscalene catheter in primary total shoulder arthroplasty.超声引导下锁骨下入路行局部浸润麻醉联合罗哌卡因脂质体与连续锁骨下入路置管用于初次全肩关节置换术的比较
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2022 Oct;31(10):e473-e479. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2022.03.013. Epub 2022 Apr 25.
4
Impact of treatment with liposomal bupivacaine on hospital costs, length of stay, and discharge status in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty at high-use institutions.在高使用率医疗机构行全膝关节置换术患者中,使用脂质体布比卡因对医院成本、住院时间和出院状态的影响。
J Med Econ. 2019 Jan;22(1):85-94. doi: 10.1080/13696998.2018.1543190. Epub 2018 Nov 30.
5
Retrospective Assessment of the Use of Liposomal Bupivacaine in Lumbar Fusions in Immediate Postoperative Hospital Care.脂质体布比卡因在腰椎融合术后即刻医院护理中的应用回顾性评估
World Neurosurg. 2020 Sep;141:e820-e828. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2020.06.049. Epub 2020 Jun 12.
6
Liposomal bupivacaine use in exploratory lingual nerve microsurgery: does liposomal bupivacaine use decrease postoperative pain and opioid consumption compared to bupivacaine hydrochloride? A pilot study.在探索性舌神经显微手术中使用脂质体布比卡因:与盐酸布比卡因相比,使用脂质体布比卡因是否会降低术后疼痛和阿片类药物的消耗?一项初步研究。
Quintessence Int. 2021 Sep 9;52(9):812-818. doi: 10.3290/j.qi.b1763651.
7
Efficacy of Liposomal Bupivacaine versus Ropivacaine in Adductor Canal Block for Total Knee Arthroplasty.脂质体布比卡因与罗哌卡因用于全膝关节置换术股内侧肌管阻滞的疗效比较
J Knee Surg. 2022 Jan;35(1):96-103. doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1713114. Epub 2020 Jun 24.
8
The Role of Liposomal Bupivacaine in Multimodal Pain Management Following Posterior Spinal Fusion for Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: Faster and Farther With Less Opioids.脂质体布比卡因在后路脊柱融合术治疗青少年特发性脊柱侧凸后多模式疼痛管理中的作用:更少的阿片类药物,更快更远。
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2024 Jan 15;49(2):E11-E16. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000004702. Epub 2023 May 1.
9
Reduced opioid utilization and post-operative pain in Asian vs. Caucasian populations after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery lobectomy with liposomal bupivacaine-based intercostal nerve blockade.与白人患者相比,行电视辅助胸腔镜肺叶切除术时采用脂质体布比卡因肋间神经阻滞,亚洲患者术后阿片类药物用量减少,疼痛减轻。
Ann Palliat Med. 2022 May;11(5):1635-1643. doi: 10.21037/apm-21-2269. Epub 2022 Jan 12.
10
Bupivacaine local anesthetic to decrease opioid requirements after radical cystectomy: Does formulation matter?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?
Urol Oncol. 2021 Jun;39(6):369.e1-369.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2020.11.008. Epub 2020 Dec 8.

引用本文的文献

1
Painless, Drainless Lipoabdominoplasty: A Retrospective Study of Pain Following Lipoabdominoplasty Utilizing Liposomal Bupivacaine and a Modified Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol.无痛、无引流腹部吸脂术:一项关于使用脂质体布比卡因及改良术后加速康复方案的腹部吸脂术后疼痛的回顾性研究
Aesthet Surg J Open Forum. 2022 May 26;4:ojac049. doi: 10.1093/asjof/ojac049. eCollection 2022.