Suppr超能文献

股外侧皮神经阻滞或伤口浸润联合关节周围神经组(PENG)阻滞用于后入路全髋关节置换术后镇痛:一项随机对照试验

Lateral Femoral Cutaneous Nerve Block or Wound Infiltration Combined with Pericapsular Nerve Group (PENG) Block for Postoperative Analgesia following Total Hip Arthroplasty through Posterior Approach: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

作者信息

Pascarella Giuseppe, Costa Fabio, Strumia Alessandro, Ruggiero Alessandro, Remore Luigi Maria, Lanteri Tullio, Hazboun Anton, Longo Ferdinando, Gargano Francesca, Schiavoni Lorenzo, Mattei Alessia, Agrò Felice Eugenio, Carassiti Massimiliano, Cataldo Rita

机构信息

Unit of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, 00128 Rome, Italy.

Unit of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Department of Medicine, Università Campus Bio-Medico, 00128 Rome, Italy.

出版信息

J Clin Med. 2024 May 2;13(9):2674. doi: 10.3390/jcm13092674.

Abstract

Pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block, although effective for pain management following total hip arthroplasty (THA), does not cover skin analgesia. In this randomized controlled trial, we compared the effectiveness of PENG block combined with lateral femoral cutaneous nerve (LFCN) block or wound infiltration (WI) on postoperative analgesia and functional outcomes. Fifty patients undergoing posterior-approached THA under spinal anesthesia were randomly allocated to receive LFCN block with 10 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine or WI with 20 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine. In both groups, PENG block was performed by injecting 20 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine. Primary outcomes were static and dynamic pain scores (0-10 numeric rating scale) measured in the first 24 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes included postoperative opioid consumption, functional assessment and length of hospital stay. Postoperative static NRS of patients receiving LFCN was higher than that of patients receiving WI at 6 h but lower at 24 h, with a median (IQR) of 3 (2-4) vs. 2 (1-2) ( < 0.001) and 2 (2-3) vs. 3 (3-4) ( = 0.02), respectively. Static pain scores at 12 h did not show significant differences, with an NRS of 3 (2-4) for WI vs. 3 (3-4) for LFCN ( = 0.94). Dynamic pain and range of movement followed a similar trend. No significant differences were detected in other outcomes. LFCN block was not inferior to WI for postoperative analgesia and functional recovery in association with PENG block during the first postoperative day, although it had worse short-term pain scores. Based on these results, it is reasonable to consider LFCN block as a valid alternative to WI or even a complementary technique added to WI to enhance skin analgesia during the first 24 h after THA. Future studies are expected to confirm this hypothesis and find the best combination between PENG block and other techniques to enhance analgesia after THA.

摘要

关节囊周围神经组(PENG)阻滞虽然对全髋关节置换术(THA)后的疼痛管理有效,但并不覆盖皮肤镇痛。在这项随机对照试验中,我们比较了PENG阻滞联合股外侧皮神经(LFCN)阻滞或伤口浸润(WI)对术后镇痛和功能结局的有效性。50例在脊髓麻醉下接受后路THA的患者被随机分配,分别接受10 mL 0.5%罗哌卡因的LFCN阻滞或20 mL 0.5%罗哌卡因的WI。两组均通过注射20 mL 0.5%罗哌卡因进行PENG阻滞。主要结局是术后24小时内测量的静态和动态疼痛评分(0 - 10数字评分量表)。次要结局包括术后阿片类药物消耗、功能评估和住院时间。接受LFCN阻滞的患者术后6小时的静态数字评分量表(NRS)高于接受WI的患者,但在24小时时较低,中位数(四分位间距)分别为3(2 - 4)对2(1 - 2)(<0.001)和2(2 - 3)对3(3 - 4)(=0.02)。12小时时的静态疼痛评分无显著差异,WI组的NRS为3(2 - 4),LFCN组为3(3 - 4)(=0.94)。动态疼痛和活动范围遵循类似趋势。其他结局未检测到显著差异。尽管LFCN阻滞的短期疼痛评分较差,但在术后第一天与PENG阻滞联合应用时,其在术后镇痛和功能恢复方面并不劣于WI。基于这些结果,有理由将LFCN阻滞视为WI的有效替代方法,甚至是添加到WI中的一种补充技术,以增强THA后24小时内的皮肤镇痛。未来的研究有望证实这一假设,并找到PENG阻滞与其他技术之间增强THA后镇痛的最佳组合。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/14f2/11084625/f56ad6094fd0/jcm-13-02674-g001.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