Suppr超能文献

比较基于体表标志的髂筋膜间隙阻滞与关节周围神经组阻滞在髋部骨折手术患者术前定位及术后镇痛中的疗效:一项随机对照试验

Comparing the Efficacy of Landmark-Based Fascia Iliaca Compartment Block and Pericapsular Nerve Group Block for Preoperative Positioning and Postoperative Analgesia in Patients Undergoing Surgery for Hip Fractures: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

作者信息

Pavithra Balachandran, Balaji Ramamurthy, Kumaran Dheepak, Gayathri Balasubramaniam

机构信息

Anaesthesiology, SRM Medical College Hospital and Research Centre, Chennai, IND.

出版信息

Cureus. 2024 Aug 19;16(8):e67196. doi: 10.7759/cureus.67196. eCollection 2024 Aug.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Subarachnoid block is the most common anesthetic technique for patients having corrective hip surgeries. However, adequate positioning for a successful subarachnoid block is a major challenge in this particular population of patients, owing to the site of fracture. Regional anesthesia, in the form of nerve blocks, is an effective means of alleviating such constraints and gives an added benefit of prolonged postoperative analgesia. The pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block and the fascia iliaca compartment block (FICB), under ultrasonography guidance, are a few examples of the commonly performed peripheral nerve blocks in such settings. However, the landmark-based techniques of nerve blockade still hold good in many resource poor settings, given the lack of ultrasonography facilities.

AIM

To compare the ease of spinal positioning using the patient sitting satisfaction score between the landmark-guided FICB and PENG block.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was done on 80 patients of the American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) grade I or II with intertrochanteric fractures of the hip joint scheduled for proximal femoral nailing. Patients were allocated into two groups of 40 each through computer generated random numbers, to receive 30 ml of 0.5% ropivacaine via the landmark-guided technique of FICB in Group F and peripheral nerve stimulator assisted landmark-guided PENG block in Group P, 30 minutes prior to spinal positioning. Time to passive leg raise (PLR) to 15 degrees and time to PLR to 30 degrees with a standard goniometer guidance at visual analogue scale (VAS) score < 4 and ease of spinal positioning through the sitting satisfaction score at the 30th minute were assessed. Any adverse effects and events of failure were noted. The duration of postoperative analgesia was measured through the time to the first dose of paracetamol on arrival at the post-anesthesia care unit.

RESULTS

Statistical analysis was done using JASP version (0.18.3.0) using the independent samples t-test and significance was taken when p value was < 0.001. The time to PLR to 15 degrees and 30 degrees were achieved faster in the patients who received the PENG block in comparison to the patients who received the FICB, and the average patient sitting satisfaction score was significantly higher in Group P as compared to Group F (p < 0.001). While the overall amount of analgesics used in both groups was similar, the overall period of postoperative analgesia was prolonged in Group F compared to Group P (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The landmark guided PENG block is feasible and superior to the landmark-guided FICB for preoperative positioning and analgesia. The FICB provides a longer duration of postoperative analgesia for patients with intertrochanteric fractures.

摘要

背景

蛛网膜下腔阻滞是髋关节矫正手术患者最常用的麻醉技术。然而,由于骨折部位的原因,在这类特殊患者群体中,为成功实施蛛网膜下腔阻滞进行充分的体位摆放是一项重大挑战。神经阻滞形式的区域麻醉是缓解此类限制的有效手段,并且具有延长术后镇痛时间的额外益处。在超声引导下的关节囊周围神经组(PENG)阻滞和髂筋膜间隙阻滞(FICB)是此类情况下常用的外周神经阻滞的一些例子。然而,鉴于缺乏超声设备,在许多资源匮乏的地区,基于体表标志的神经阻滞技术仍然适用。

目的

通过患者坐位满意度评分比较体表标志引导下的FICB和PENG阻滞在脊柱定位方面的难易程度。

材料与方法

本研究纳入了80例美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)分级为I或II级、计划行股骨近端髓内钉固定术治疗髋关节粗隆间骨折的患者。通过计算机生成随机数将患者分为两组,每组40例,在脊柱定位前30分钟,F组通过体表标志引导技术给予30ml 0.5%罗哌卡因行FICB,P组通过外周神经刺激器辅助体表标志引导行PENG阻滞。使用标准测角仪在视觉模拟评分(VAS)<4分时评估被动抬腿(PLR)至15度和30度的时间,以及在第30分钟时通过坐位满意度评分评估脊柱定位的难易程度。记录任何不良反应和失败事件。通过到达麻醉后护理单元时首次使用对乙酰氨基酚的时间来测量术后镇痛的持续时间。

结果

使用JASP版本(0.18.3.0)进行统计分析,采用独立样本t检验,当p值<0.001时具有统计学意义。与接受FICB的患者相比,接受PENG阻滞的患者达到PLR至15度和30度的时间更快,P组的平均患者坐位满意度评分显著高于F组(p<0.001)。虽然两组使用的镇痛药物总量相似,但与P组相比,F组术后镇痛的总时长延长(p<0.001)。

结论

体表标志引导的PENG阻滞在术前定位和镇痛方面可行且优于体表标志引导的FICB。FICB为粗隆间骨折患者提供更长时间的术后镇痛。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3bbe/11409903/6cb445021dfb/cureus-0016-00000067196-i01.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