Suppr超能文献

竖脊肌平面阻滞联合镇静在单侧双通道内镜脊柱手术中的疗效及与其他麻醉方法的比较。

Efficacy of the erector spinae plane block with sedation for unilateral biportal endoscopic spine surgery and comparison with other anesthetic methods.

机构信息

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, SMG-SNU Boramae Medical Center, 20 Boramae-Ro 5-Gil, Dongjak-Gu, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Synergy Orthopedic Clinic, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

出版信息

Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2023 Sep;165(9):2651-2663. doi: 10.1007/s00701-023-05643-1. Epub 2023 Jun 6.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is a new regional anesthesia. Unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) spine surgery, a minimal invasive technique, has been performed under not only general anesthesia (GA) but regional anesthesia including spinal anesthesia (SA). The aims of this study were to evaluate the efficacy of ESPB with sedation for UBE lumbar decompression and compare it with GA and SA.

METHOD

A retrospective age matched case-control study design was performed. Three groups (20 patients in each group) of patients who underwent UBE lumbar decompressions under each anesthetic method (GA, SA, or ESPB) were formed. The total anesthesia time excluding operation time, postoperative analgesia effects, hospital days, and complications related to anesthetic methods were evaluated.

RESULTS

In the ESPB group, all the operations were performed without change of anesthetic methods and without anesthetic complications. But there were no anesthetic effects in the epidural space, which resulted in additional intravenous fentanyl usage. The mean of time from initiation of anesthesia to completion of surgical preparation was 23.3 ± 4.7 min in the ESPB group, which was shorter than 32.3 ± 10.8 min in the GA (p value = 0.001) or 33.3 ± 6.7 min in the SA group (p < 0.001). The proportion of patients requiring first rescue analgesia within 30 min was 30% in the ESPB group, which was lower than 85% in the GA (p < 0.001), but no significant different with 10% in the SA (p = 0.11). The mean of total hospital days in the ESPB was 3.0 ± 0.8, shorter than 3.7 ± 1.8 in the GA (p = 0.02) or 3.8 ± 1.1 in the SA group (p = 0.01). There was no case of postoperative nausea and vomiting in the ESBB even without prophylactic antiemesis.

CONCLUSION

ESPB with sedation is a viable anesthetic option for UBE lumbar decompression.

摘要

背景

竖脊肌平面阻滞(ESPB)是一种新的区域麻醉技术。单侧双通道内镜(UBE)脊柱手术是一种微创技术,不仅可以在全身麻醉(GA)下进行,还可以在包括椎管内麻醉(SA)在内的区域麻醉下进行。本研究的目的是评估镇静下 ESPB 在 UBE 腰椎减压术中的效果,并将其与 GA 和 SA 进行比较。

方法

采用回顾性年龄匹配病例对照研究设计。形成三组(每组 20 例患者),分别在 GA、SA 或 ESPB 麻醉下进行 UBE 腰椎减压术。评估总麻醉时间(不包括手术时间)、术后镇痛效果、住院天数和与麻醉方法相关的并发症。

结果

在 ESPB 组,所有手术均无需改变麻醉方法且无麻醉并发症。但硬膜外腔无麻醉效果,需额外静脉注射芬太尼。ESP 组从麻醉开始到手术准备完成的平均时间为 23.3±4.7 分钟,短于 GA 组的 32.3±10.8 分钟(p 值=0.001)或 SA 组的 33.3±6.7 分钟(p<0.001)。30 分钟内需要首次解救镇痛的患者比例,ESP 组为 30%,低于 GA 组的 85%(p<0.001),但与 SA 组的 10%无显著差异(p=0.11)。ESP 组的总住院天数为 3.0±0.8,短于 GA 组的 3.7±1.8(p=0.02)或 SA 组的 3.8±1.1(p=0.01)。即使没有预防性止吐,ESPB 组也没有术后恶心和呕吐的病例。

结论

镇静下 ESPB 是 UBE 腰椎减压术的一种可行的麻醉选择。

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