Surgical Department, Medical Research Educational Centre, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russian Federation.
Department of Coloproctology, Clinic of Colorectal and Minimally Invasive Surgery of the Sechenov University Hospital №2, Moscow, Russian Federation.
ANZ J Surg. 2024 Oct;94(10):1835-1840. doi: 10.1111/ans.19136. Epub 2024 Jul 29.
Haemorrhoidectomy is associated with severe postoperative pain, a long rehabilitation, and QoL worsening for months. Most patients experience mild-to-moderate postoperative pain. We aimed to evaluate the intraoperative perineal block role for patients undergoing haemorrhoidectomy.
In this prospective randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, eligible patients with III-IV stage haemorrhoids were randomized to the experimental group (EG) with intraoperative perineal block and spinal anaesthesia and the control one (CG) only with spinal anaesthesia. During the postoperative period, the opioid consumption rate was evaluated as a primary endpoint, and the postoperative pain level according to VAS, systemic analgesics consumption, readmission, and complication rate, the timing of returning to work, patients' QoL, and overall satisfaction according to SF-36 were evaluated as secondary endpoints.
One hundred patients completed the study (48 in EG and 52 in CG). Patients of the EG had less postoperative pain intensity (P < 0.0001), required less opioid analgesia (P = 0.03), and had longer pain-free postoperative periods (P = 0.0002). 90% of patients in the CG required additional NSAID injections for adequate analgesia compared with only 58% in the EG. The average hospital stays, complication rate, and average operation duration didn't reach clinical significance. General health evaluation according to the SF-36 score and the median satisfaction rate was better in the EG (P < 0.001 and P = 0.012, respectively).
The administration of the perianal block is safe and effective and should be administered to appropriate patients undergoing anorectal surgery.
痔切除术与严重的术后疼痛、长时间的康复以及数月内 QoL 恶化有关。大多数患者经历轻度至中度术后疼痛。我们旨在评估行痔切除术患者术中会阴阻滞的作用。
在这项前瞻性随机、双盲、安慰剂对照研究中,符合条件的 III-IV 期痔患者被随机分配至接受术中会阴阻滞和脊髓麻醉的实验组 (EG) 和仅接受脊髓麻醉的对照组 (CG)。在术后期间,评估阿片类药物消耗率作为主要终点,并根据 VAS 评估术后疼痛程度、全身镇痛药消耗、再入院和并发症发生率、重返工作的时间、患者的 QoL 和 SF-36 评估的总体满意度作为次要终点。
100 名患者完成了研究(EG 组 48 名,CG 组 52 名)。EG 组患者的术后疼痛强度较低(P<0.0001),需要的阿片类镇痛药较少(P=0.03),并且术后无疼痛期较长(P=0.0002)。CG 组 90%的患者需要额外的 NSAID 注射以获得足够的镇痛,而 EG 组只有 58%的患者需要。平均住院时间、并发症发生率和平均手术时间没有达到临床意义。根据 SF-36 评分的一般健康评估和中位数满意度在 EG 组更好(P<0.001 和 P=0.012,分别)。
会阴阻滞的给药是安全有效的,应给予适当的接受肛肠手术的患者。