Hadzić A, Vloka J D
St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital Center, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York 10025, USA.
Anesthesiology. 1998 Jun;88(6):1480-6. doi: 10.1097/00000542-199806000-00010.
The main disadvantage of the posterior approach to the block of the sciatic nerve in the popliteal fossa (popliteal block [PB]) is the need to place the patient in the prone position. In this study, the authors examined the clinical utility of a recently described lateral approach to PB that is performed with the patient in the supine position, and they compared its ability to provide reliable surgical anesthesia with that of the posterior approach.
Fifty patients undergoing surgery of a lower extremity were randomized to receive the PB using either the lateral (n=25) or the posterior approach (n=25). With both techniques, 40 ml 1.5% alkalinized mepivacaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine were injected on successful nerve localization using low current output nerve stimulation.
There were no differences in American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status or demographic data between the groups (ASA status, I-III; mean age, 50+/-15 yr; 27 men, 23 women). All patients had good intraoperative analgesia, except one in the lateral group, who reported pain outside the distribution of the sciatic nerve.
Although blockade using the lateral approach took longer to accomplish, both techniques resulted in clinically acceptable anesthesia in the distribution of the sciatic nerve.
在腘窝采用后路阻滞坐骨神经(腘窝阻滞[PB])的主要缺点是需要将患者置于俯卧位。在本研究中,作者研究了一种最近描述的在患者仰卧位下进行的PB外侧入路的临床实用性,并将其提供可靠手术麻醉的能力与后路入路进行了比较。
50例接受下肢手术的患者被随机分为两组,分别采用外侧入路(n = 25)或后路入路(n = 25)接受PB。两种技术均在使用低电流输出神经刺激成功定位神经后,注射40 ml含1:200,000肾上腺素的1.5%碱化甲哌卡因。
两组之间的美国麻醉医师协会身体状况或人口统计学数据无差异(ASA分级,I - III级;平均年龄,50±15岁;男性27例,女性23例)。除外侧组有1例患者报告坐骨神经分布区以外疼痛外,所有患者术中镇痛效果良好。
虽然外侧入路阻滞完成时间较长,但两种技术均能在坐骨神经分布区产生临床上可接受的麻醉效果。