Suppr超能文献

评估肋间神经阻滞镇痛在胸外科手术中的应用:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Assessment of Intercostal Nerve Block Analgesia for Thoracic Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, MD Anderson Cancer Center, University of Texas, Houston.

Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk.

出版信息

JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Nov 1;4(11):e2133394. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.33394.

Abstract

IMPORTANCE

The use of intercostal nerve block (ICNB) analgesia with local anesthesia is common in thoracic surgery. However, the benefits and safety of ICNB among adult patients undergoing surgery is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the analgesic benefits and safety of ICNB among adults undergoing thoracic surgery.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic search was performed in Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library databases using terms for ICNB and thoracic surgery (including thoracic surgery, thoracoscopy, thoracotomy, nerve block, intercostal nerves). The search and results were not limited by date, with the last search conducted on July 24, 2020.

STUDY SELECTION

Selected studies were experimental or observational and included adult patients undergoing cardiothoracic surgery in which ICNB was administered with local anesthesia via single injection, continuous infusion, or a combination of both techniques in at least 1 group of patients. For comparison with ICNB, studies that examined systemic analgesia and different forms of regional analgesia (such as thoracic epidural analgesia [TEA], paravertebral block [PVB], and other techniques) were included. These criteria were applied independently by 2 authors, and discrepancies were resolved by consensus. A total of 694 records were selected for screening.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. Data including patient characteristics, type of surgery, intervention analgesia, comparison analgesia, and primary and secondary outcomes were extracted independently by 3 authors. Synthesis was performed using a fixed-effects model.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The coprimary outcomes were postoperative pain intensity (measured as the worst static or dynamic pain using a validated 10-point scale, with 0 indicating no pain and 10 indicating severe pain) and opioid consumption (measured in morphine milligram equivalents [MMEs]) at prespecified intervals (0-6 hours, 7-24 hours, 25-48 hours, 49-72 hours, and >72 hours). Clinically relevant analgesia was defined as a 1-point or greater difference in pain intensity score at any interval. Secondary outcomes included 30-day postoperative complications and pulmonary function.

RESULTS

Of 694 records screened, 608 were excluded based on prespecified exclusion criteria. The remaining 86 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, and 20 of those articles were excluded. All of the 66 remaining studies (5184 patients; mean [SD] age, 53.9 [10.2] years; approximately 59% men and 41% women) were included in the qualitative analysis, and 59 studies (3325 patients) that provided data for at least 1 outcome were included in the quantitative meta-analysis. Experimental studies had a high risk of bias in multiple domains, including allocation concealment, blinding of participants and personnel, and blinding of outcome assessors. Marked differences (eg, crossover studies, timing of the intervention [intraoperative vs postoperative], blinding, and type of control group) were observed in the design and implementation of studies. The use of ICNB vs systemic analgesia was associated with lower static pain (0-6 hours after surgery: mean score difference, -1.40 points [95% CI, -1.46 to -1.33 points]; 7-24 hours after surgery: mean score difference, -1.27 points [95% CI, -1.40 to -1.13 points]) and lower dynamic pain (0-6 hours after surgery: mean score difference, -1.66 points [95% CI, -1.90 to -1.41 points]; 7-24 hours after surgery: mean score difference, -1.43 points [95% CI, -1.70 to -1.17 points]). Intercostal nerve block analgesia was noninferior to TEA (mean score difference in worst dynamic panic at 7-24 hours after surgery: 0.79 points; 95% CI, 0.28-1.29 points) and marginally inferior to PVB (mean score difference in worst dynamic pain at 7-24 hours after surgery: 1.29 points; 95% CI, 1.16 to 1.41 points). The largest opioid-sparing effect of ICNB vs systemic analgesia occurred at 48 hours after surgery (mean difference, -10.97 MMEs; 95% CI, -12.92 to -9.02 MMEs). The use of ICNB was associated with higher MME values compared with TEA (eg, 48 hours after surgery: mean difference, 48.31 MMEs; 95% CI, 36.11-60.52 MMEs) and PVB (eg, 48 hours after surgery: mean difference, 3.87 MMEs; 95% CI, 2.59-5.15 MMEs).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this study, single-injection ICNB was associated with a reduction in pain during the first 24 hours after thoracic surgery and was clinically noninferior to TEA or PVB. Intercostal nerve block analgesia had opioid-sparing effects; however, TEA and PVB were associated with larger decreases in postoperative MMEs, suggesting that ICNB may be most beneficial for cases in which TEA and PVB are not indicated.

摘要

重要性:在胸外科手术中,使用肋间神经阻滞(ICNB)联合局部麻醉进行镇痛较为常见。然而,目前尚不清楚这种方法在成人患者中的疗效和安全性。

目的:评估 ICNB 用于成人接受胸外科手术的镇痛效果和安全性。

数据来源:系统检索 Ovid MEDLINE、Ovid Embase、Scopus 和 Cochrane 图书馆数据库,检索词包括 ICNB 和胸外科手术(包括胸外科手术、胸腔镜检查、开胸手术、神经阻滞、肋间神经)。未对检索时间进行限制,最后一次检索时间为 2020 年 7 月 24 日。

研究选择:入选的研究为实验或观察性研究,纳入至少有 1 组患者接受 ICNB 联合局部麻醉的成人心胸外科手术患者,局部麻醉的给药方式为单次注射、连续输注或两者联合。为了与 ICNB 进行比较,还纳入了研究全身镇痛和不同形式的区域镇痛(如胸椎硬膜外镇痛[TEA]、椎旁阻滞[PVB]和其他技术)的研究。这两个标准由 2 位作者独立应用,意见不一致时通过共识解决。共筛选出 694 条记录。

数据提取和综合:本研究遵循系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)报告指南。数据包括患者特征、手术类型、干预镇痛、比较镇痛以及主要和次要结局,由 3 位作者独立提取。使用固定效应模型进行综合。

主要结局和测量指标:主要结局是术后疼痛强度(采用 10 分制测量,0 表示无痛,10 表示剧痛)和术后 0-6 小时、7-24 小时、25-48 小时、49-72 小时和>72 小时吗啡等效剂量(MME)的变化。临床相关镇痛定义为任何时间间隔的疼痛强度评分差异增加 1 分或以上。次要结局包括 30 天术后并发症和肺功能。

结果:在筛选出的 694 条记录中,有 608 条基于预设排除标准被排除。对其余 86 篇全文文章进行了资格评估,其中 20 篇被排除。所有 66 篇(5184 例患者;平均[SD]年龄 53.9[10.2]岁;约 59%为男性,41%为女性)符合定性分析的纳入标准,59 篇(3325 例患者)提供了至少 1 项结局数据的研究被纳入定量荟萃分析。实验性研究在多个领域存在高偏倚风险,包括分配隐匿、参与者和人员盲法以及结局评估者盲法。研究设计和实施存在明显差异(如交叉研究、干预时机[术中与术后]、盲法和对照组类型)。与全身镇痛相比,使用 ICNB 与静息时疼痛评分降低(术后 0-6 小时:平均差值,-1.40 分[95% CI,-1.46 至-1.33 分];术后 7-24 小时:平均差值,-1.27 分[95% CI,-1.40 至-1.13 分])和动态疼痛评分降低(术后 0-6 小时:平均差值,-1.66 分[95% CI,-1.90 至-1.41 分];术后 7-24 小时:平均差值,-1.43 分[95% CI,-1.70 至-1.17 分])有关。ICNB 镇痛与 TEA 相比非劣效(术后 7-24 小时最差动态恐慌时的疼痛评分差值,0.79 分;95% CI,0.28-1.29 分),与 PVB 相比略有劣势(术后 7-24 小时最差动态疼痛评分差值,1.29 分;95% CI,1.16-1.41 分)。与全身镇痛相比,ICNB 最大的减少阿片类药物用量效应发生在术后 48 小时(MME 差值,-10.97;95% CI,-12.92 至-9.02)。与 TEA(例如,术后 48 小时:MME 差值,48.31;95% CI,36.11-60.52)和 PVB(例如,术后 48 小时:MME 差值,3.87;95% CI,2.59-5.15)相比,使用 ICNB 时 MME 值更高。

结论和相关性:在这项研究中,单次注射 ICNB 与术后前 24 小时疼痛减轻有关,与 TEA 或 PVB 相比临床非劣效。ICNB 具有减少阿片类药物用量的作用;然而,TEA 和 PVB 与术后 MME 减少量更大有关,这表明在 TEA 和 PVB 不适用的情况下,ICNB 可能最有益。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8d0c/8593761/fb6fb82a724a/jamanetwopen-e2133394-g001.jpg

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