Suppr超能文献

微创食管切除术后持续硬膜外镇痛与非硬膜外镇痛的比较:来自高病例量中心的真实临床经验

Continuous Epidural Versus Non-Epidural Pain Management After Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: A Real-Life, High-Case-Load Center Experience.

作者信息

Boehler Sebastian, Huber Markus, Wuethrich Patrick Y, Beilstein Christian M, Arigoni Stefano M, Furrer Marc A, Borbély Yves, Engel Dominique

机构信息

Department of Anaesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, CH-3010 Bern, Switzerland.

Department of Urology, Solothurner Spitäler AG, Kantonsspital Olten and Bürgerspital Solothurn, University of Bern, CH-4600 Olten, Switzerland.

出版信息

J Clin Med. 2024 Dec 16;13(24):7669. doi: 10.3390/jcm13247669.

Abstract

: Esophagectomy is a key component of esophageal cancer treatment, with minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) increasingly replacing open esophagectomy (OE). Effective postoperative pain management can be achieved through various analgesic modalities. This study compares the efficacy of thoracic epidural anesthesia (TEA) with non-TEA methods in managing postoperative pain following MIE. : A retrospective review was conducted on 110 patients who underwent MIE between 2018 and 2023. 1. TEA vs. 2. intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) alone vs. 3. transversus abdominis plane (TAP) catheter with PCA vs. 4. single-shot TAP block with paravertebral catheter (PVB) in combination with PCA were compared. The primary outcome was postoperative pain within the first 72 h, assessed using the numeric rating scale. Secondary outcomes included postoperative surgical complications (Clavien-Dindo classification (CDC)), patient satisfaction, and duration of induction and emergence, among others. : The incidence of an NRS > 3 during movement was 47.1%, 51%, 60.1%, and 48.3% for TEA, PCA alone, TAP + PCA, and PVB + PCA, respectively. For pain at rest, the rates were 8.3%, 4.3%, 11.2%, and 5%, respectively. High surgical complication rates were observed across all groups (CDC IIIa-V 31.6% overall), with patient satisfaction similarly high, regardless of the analgesic modality used (85% satisfied or very satisfied). No differences in the other secondary outcomes were observed. : PVB combined with PCA offered analgesic efficacy and patient satisfaction comparable to TEA in managing postoperative pain following MIE.

摘要

食管癌切除术是食管癌治疗的关键组成部分,微创食管癌切除术(MIE)正越来越多地取代开放食管癌切除术(OE)。通过各种镇痛方式可实现有效的术后疼痛管理。本研究比较了胸段硬膜外麻醉(TEA)与非TEA方法在MIE术后疼痛管理中的疗效。

对2018年至2023年间接受MIE的110例患者进行了回顾性研究。比较了1. TEA与2. 单纯静脉自控镇痛(PCA)、3. 腹横肌平面(TAP)导管联合PCA、4. 单次TAP阻滞联合椎旁导管(PVB)并联合PCA。主要结局是术后72小时内的疼痛,采用数字评分量表进行评估。次要结局包括术后手术并发症(Clavien-Dindo分类(CDC))、患者满意度以及诱导和苏醒时间等。

活动时数字评分量表(NRS)>3的发生率在TEA组、单纯PCA组、TAP + PCA组和PVB + PCA组分别为47.1%、51%、60.1%和48.3%。静息时疼痛发生率分别为8.3%、4.3%、11.2%和5%。所有组均观察到较高的手术并发症发生率(总体CDC IIIa-V级为31.6%),无论使用何种镇痛方式,患者满意度同样较高(85%满意或非常满意)。在其他次要结局方面未观察到差异。

PVB联合PCA在MIE术后疼痛管理中提供的镇痛效果和患者满意度与TEA相当。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3fd3/11676373/20e15682bc66/jcm-13-07669-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