Suppr超能文献

关节内收肌管阻滞与全膝关节置换术后传统超声引导下收肌管阻滞具有等效镇痛效果:一项前瞻性随机对照试验。

Intra-Articular Adductor Canal Block Has Equivalent Analgesic Effect to Traditional Ultrasound-Guided Adductor Canal Block after Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.

作者信息

Huang Deyong, Zhang Dazhi, Jiang Yi, Yi Jun, Sun Ke, Shao Hongyi

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Fourth Clinical College of Peking University, Beijing, China.

Department of Anesthesiology, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Fourth Clinical College of Peking University, Beijing, China.

出版信息

J Knee Surg. 2025 May;38(6):309-315. doi: 10.1055/a-2501-1143. Epub 2024 Dec 12.

Abstract

An adductor canal block (ACB) is widely accepted as a regional nerve block for pain management following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, no consensus exists concerning whether the analgesic effect is greater when joint surgeons perform intra-articular ACBs (IA-ACBs) or when anesthesiologists perform ultrasound-guided ACBs (UG-ACBs). We hypothesized that IA-ACBs performed by joint surgeons and UG-ACBs performed by anesthesiologists based on periarticular injections (PAIs) would yield equivalent analgesic effects. This prospective randomized controlled trial included 61 patients who underwent IA-ACBs and 56 patients who received UG-ACB with additional PAI for post-TKA pain management. The primary outcome was postoperative pain assessed using numeric rating scale scores at rest and during exercise. Secondary outcomes included opioid consumption and functional recovery. We also investigated local and systemic adverse events, including nausea, vomiting, and wound complications. Both groups of patients experienced comparable analgesic effects for both IA-ACB and UG-ACB pain management; however, those who received IA-ACBs were prescribed more opioid equivalents than those in the UG-ACB group on postoperative day 1 ( = 0.048). No differences between the groups were observed regarding local or systemic adverse events. IA-ACBs performed by joint surgeons provided equivalent analgesic effects to UG-ACBs performed by anesthesiologists. However, IA-ACBs may lead to a higher postoperative requirement for opioid analgesics.

摘要

内收肌管阻滞(ACB)作为全膝关节置换术(TKA)后疼痛管理的一种区域神经阻滞方法已被广泛接受。然而,对于关节外科医生进行关节内ACB(IA-ACB)还是麻醉医生进行超声引导下ACB(UG-ACB)时镇痛效果更佳,目前尚无共识。我们假设关节外科医生进行的IA-ACB和麻醉医生基于关节周围注射(PAI)进行的UG-ACB将产生等效的镇痛效果。这项前瞻性随机对照试验纳入了61例行IA-ACB的患者和56例接受UG-ACB并额外进行PAI以管理TKA后疼痛的患者。主要结局是使用静息和运动时的数字评分量表分数评估的术后疼痛。次要结局包括阿片类药物消耗量和功能恢复情况。我们还调查了局部和全身不良事件,包括恶心、呕吐和伤口并发症。两组患者在IA-ACB和UG-ACB疼痛管理方面均经历了相当的镇痛效果;然而,接受IA-ACB的患者在术后第1天比UG-ACB组的患者开具了更多的阿片类药物等效剂量(P = 0.048)。在局部或全身不良事件方面,两组之间未观察到差异。关节外科医生进行的IA-ACB与麻醉医生进行的UG-ACB具有等效的镇痛效果。然而,IA-ACB可能导致术后对阿片类镇痛药的需求更高。

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