Suppr超能文献

四级髂平面阻滞与竖脊肌平面阻滞用于单节段腰椎间盘切除术后镇痛管理的比较:一项随机、双盲、对照、前瞻性、多中心研究。

Comparison of quadro-iliac plane block and erector spinae plane block for postoperative analgesia management after single level lumbar discectomy surgery: a randomized, double-blind, controlled, prospective, multicenter study.

作者信息

Turan Engin İhsan, Bıyıkoğlu Büşra Otlu, Özen Volkan, Alver Selçuk, Umutoğlu Tarık, Cücü Oğuzhan, Çevik Serdar, Çiftçi Bahadır, Şahin Ayça Sultan

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Istanbul Health Science University Kanuni Sultan Süleyman Hospital, Atakent Mahallesi Turgut Özal Bulvarı No:46/1, 34303, Istanbul, Turkey.

Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Cemil Taşçıoğlu City Hospital, Prof. Dr, Istanbul, Turkey.

出版信息

J Anesth. 2025 Jul 21. doi: 10.1007/s00540-025-03556-0.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Effective postoperative analgesia management is critical for optimizing recovery and patient satisfaction following lumbar discectomy. Erector Spinae Plane Block (ESPB) is an established regional anesthesia technique with proven efficacy, while the novel Quadro-Iliac Plane Block (QIPB) has shown promise as an alternative approach. This study compares the analgesic efficacy, opioid-sparing potential, and safety of ESPB and QIPB in single-level lumbar discectomies.

METHOD

This multicenter, prospective, randomized, double-blind study included 60 patients aged 18-65 years undergoing single-level lumbar discectomy. Patients were randomized into ESPB (n = 30) and QIPB (n = 30) groups. Both blocks were performed at the end of surgery, before the extubation under ultrasound guidance using 40 ml (0.25%) bupivacaine bilaterally. The primary outcome was postoperative pain assessed by the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at 12 h. Secondary outcomes included tramadol consumption, rescue analgesia requirements, hemodynamic parameters, and adverse events.

RESULTS

The primary outcome, 12-h NRS scores, did not differ significantly between groups (p > 0.05), indicating similar analgesic efficacy. Secondary outcomes-including total tramadol consumption (54.00 ± 49.03 mg for ESPB vs. 44.67 ± 44.16 mg for QIPB, p = 0.476), need for rescue analgesia, and incidence of nausea and vomiting-were also comparable. No motor block was observed in either group.

CONCLUSION

Although QIPB did not demonstrate superiority over ESPB, it was found to be not inferior in analgesic effect and safety outcomes. These findings suggest that QIPB may be a reliable alternative to ESPB in lumbar discectomy procedures.

摘要

目的

有效的术后镇痛管理对于优化腰椎间盘切除术后的恢复及患者满意度至关重要。竖脊肌平面阻滞(ESPB)是一种已确立的区域麻醉技术,疗效已得到证实,而新型的四髂平面阻滞(QIPB)已显示出作为一种替代方法的前景。本研究比较了ESPB和QIPB在单节段腰椎间盘切除术中的镇痛效果、阿片类药物节省潜力及安全性。

方法

这项多中心、前瞻性、随机、双盲研究纳入了60例年龄在18至65岁之间接受单节段腰椎间盘切除术的患者。患者被随机分为ESPB组(n = 30)和QIPB组(n = 30)。两组阻滞均在手术结束时、拔管前,于超声引导下双侧使用40 ml(0.25%)布比卡因进行。主要结局是术后12小时采用数字评定量表(NRS)评估的疼痛情况。次要结局包括曲马多消耗量、补救性镇痛需求、血流动力学参数及不良事件。

结果

主要结局,即术后12小时的NRS评分,两组间无显著差异(p > 0.05),表明镇痛效果相似。次要结局,包括曲马多总消耗量(ESPB组为54.00±49.03 mg,QIPB组为44.67±44.16 mg,p = 0.476)、补救性镇痛需求以及恶心和呕吐的发生率,也具有可比性。两组均未观察到运动阻滞。

结论

尽管QIPB未显示出优于ESPB,但在镇痛效果和安全性结局方面并不逊色。这些发现表明,在腰椎间盘切除手术中,QIPB可能是ESPB的一种可靠替代方法。

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