Suppr超能文献

腘动脉与后膝关节囊之间(IPACK)浸润联合收肌管阻滞和局部浸润镇痛在全膝关节置换术中的疗效:一项回顾性队列研究。

Efficacy of adding infiltration between the popliteal artery and the capsule of the posterior knee (IPACK) to adductor canal block and local infiltration analgesia in total knee arthroplasty: A retrospective cohort study.

机构信息

Sports Medicine Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.

Department of Orthopedics and Orthopedic Research Institute West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.

出版信息

J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2024 May-Aug;32(2):10225536241265445. doi: 10.1177/10225536241265445.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Local infiltration analgesia (LIA), adductor canal block (ACB), and infiltration between the popliteal artery and the capsule of the posterior knee (IPACK) are popular multimodal analgesia techniques used during total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This study aimed to explore the efficacy of adding the IPACK technique to ACB and LIA in patients undergoing TKA.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, patients who underwent primary unilateral TKA were divided into two groups based on their date of admission. Sixty-three patients underwent IPACK, ACB and LIA (IPACK group) during surgery, while 60 patients underwent ACB and LIA (control group). The primary outcome was the postoperative administration of morphine hydrochloride as a rescue analgesic. Secondary outcomes included time to first rescue analgesia, postoperative pain assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS), functional recovery assessed by knee range of motion and ambulation distance, time until hospital discharge, and complication rates.

RESULTS

The two groups were similar in average postoperative 0-to-24-h morphine consumption (11.8 mg for the control group vs 12.7 mg for the IPACK group, = .428) and average total morphine consumption (18.2 mg vs 18.0 mg, = .983) during hospitalization. There were also no significant differences in the secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of IPACK to ACB and LIA did not provide any clinical analgesic benefits. Orthopedic surgeons and anesthesiologists are justified in using ACB and LIA without IPACK for TKA.

摘要

目的

局部浸润镇痛(LIA)、收肌管阻滞(ACB)和膝关节后囊下隐窝(IPACK)内浸润是全膝关节置换术(TKA)中常用的多模式镇痛技术。本研究旨在探讨在 TKA 中加入 IPACK 技术对 ACB 和 LIA 的疗效。

方法

在这项回顾性队列研究中,根据入院日期将接受初次单侧 TKA 的患者分为两组。63 例患者在手术中接受了 IPACK、ACB 和 LIA(IPACK 组),而 60 例患者接受了 ACB 和 LIA(对照组)。主要结局是术后盐酸吗啡的使用作为解救性镇痛。次要结局包括首次解救性镇痛的时间、使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)评估的术后疼痛、通过膝关节活动范围和步行距离评估的功能恢复、直至出院的时间和并发症发生率。

结果

两组在平均术后 0 至 24 小时吗啡消耗量(对照组为 11.8mg,IPACK 组为 12.7mg, =.428)和平均住院期间总吗啡消耗量(对照组为 18.2mg,IPACK 组为 18.0mg, =.983)方面相似。在次要结局方面也没有显著差异。

结论

将 IPACK 加入 ACB 和 LIA 并没有提供任何临床镇痛益处。骨科医生和麻醉师有理由在 TKA 中使用 ACB 和 LIA 而不使用 IPACK。

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