Salgado-García Daniel, Díaz-Álvarez Agustín, González-Rodríguez José Luis, López-Iglesias María Rocío, Sánchez-López Eduardo, Sánchez-Ledesma Manuel Jesús, Martínez-Trufero María Isabel
Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Salamanca University Hospital, Gerencia Regional de Salud de Castilla y León (SACYL), Paseo de la Transición Española, 37007 Salamanca, Castilla y León, Spain.
Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Salamanca University, Calle Alfonso X el Sabio, 37007 Salamanca, Castilla y León, Spain.
J Clin Med. 2024 Jan 29;13(3):770. doi: 10.3390/jcm13030770.
Previous studies have compared levobupivacaine versus ropivacaine in various peripheral nerve blocks in terms of block duration, quality of analgesia, and onset time, but this has not occurred in the PENG block. Here, a single-center, randomized, and controlled clinical trial is presented. One hundred and twenty patients older than 65 years suffering from hip fractures and surgically treated at our institution under spinal anesthesia were eligible for participation; of them, one hundred and eight were analyzed. Patients were randomized to receive ultrasound-guided PENG blocks using 20 mL of either 0.25% levobupivacaine or 0.375% ropivacaine (both of which are equipotent concentrations). The primary endpoint was to compare the analgesic duration (time to first rescue) and analgesic quality (pain scores using the VAS, PAINAD, and AlgoPlus scales) between the groups. Secondary endpoints included comparing the onset time, describing the need for and type of rescue analgesics, and possible associated adverse effects. There were no statistically significant differences in analgesic duration between levobupivacaine (median 861.0, IQR 960) and ropivacaine (median 1205.0, IQR 1379; = 0.069). Likewise, the quality of analgesia and onset time were comparable among the groups. A small number of patients required opioids as rescue analgesics (4.6%). The possible associated adverse effects included postoperative infection (11.1%) and delirium (2.8%).
以往的研究比较了左旋布比卡因和罗哌卡因在各种外周神经阻滞中的阻滞持续时间、镇痛质量和起效时间,但在腰大肌-髂肌间隙阻滞(PENG阻滞)中尚未进行此类比较。在此,我们开展了一项单中心、随机对照临床试验。120例65岁以上因髋部骨折在我院接受脊髓麻醉下手术治疗的患者符合参与条件;其中108例患者接受了分析。患者被随机分为两组,分别接受超声引导下的PENG阻滞,一组使用20 mL 0.25%左旋布比卡因,另一组使用20 mL 0.375%罗哌卡因(二者为等效浓度)。主要终点是比较两组之间的镇痛持续时间(首次补救时间)和镇痛质量(使用视觉模拟评分法[VAS]、疼痛评估量表[PAINAD]和AlgoPlus量表进行疼痛评分)。次要终点包括比较起效时间、描述补救镇痛药的需求和类型以及可能的相关不良反应。左旋布比卡因组(中位数861.0,四分位间距960)和罗哌卡因组(中位数1205.0,四分位间距1379;P = 0.069)的镇痛持续时间在统计学上无显著差异。同样,两组之间的镇痛质量和起效时间相当。少数患者需要使用阿片类药物作为补救镇痛药(4.6%)。可能的相关不良反应包括术后感染(11.1%)和谵妄(2.8%)。