Ultrasound-guided suprainguinal fascia iliaca block to position the patient for neuraxial anaesthesia in acetabular surgery - a randomized controlled pilot study.

IF 1.6 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY Anaesthesiology intensive therapy Pub Date : 2024-01-01 DOI:10.5114/ait.2024.138554
Fathima Mohammed Ali, Arshad Ayub, Vanlal Darlong, Ravinder Kumar Pandey, Jyotsana Punj, Vijay Sharma
{"title":"Ultrasound-guided suprainguinal fascia iliaca block to position the patient for neuraxial anaesthesia in acetabular surgery - a randomized controlled pilot study.","authors":"Fathima Mohammed Ali, Arshad Ayub, Vanlal Darlong, Ravinder Kumar Pandey, Jyotsana Punj, Vijay Sharma","doi":"10.5114/ait.2024.138554","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Neuraxial anaesthesia is a common choice for most hip and lower limb operations. Pain associated with positioning is often a deterrent, and the vast literature suggests different regional blocks and opioids for these patients. Patients with acetabular fractures may experience increased pain, and thus are more difficult to position for the neuraxial block. We conducted a randomized controlled pilot study to assess and compare the analgesic efficacy of ultrasound-guided suprainguinal fascia iliaca block (SFICB) versus systemic fentanyl to facilitate positioning for combined spinal epidural (CSE) anaesthesia in patients undergoing acetabular fracture surgery.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Twenty patients referred for surgical repair of acetabular fractures were randomly assigned to receive either ultrasound-guided SFICB (group B) or intravenous fentanyl (group F). Changes in visual analogue scale (VAS) scores in supine and sitting position, improvement in sitting angle (SA), positioning quality, rescue analgesic requirement, total opioid consumption, comfort VAS scores, and complications were noted to compare both groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The post-intervention VAS score in the sitting position was significantly lower in group B than in group F (5.9 ± 2.1 vs. 3.5 ± 1.5, P = 0.01). Group B also had more significant improvement in SA (27.5° (20.75-36.5°), in comparison to group F (10 (5-18.75), P = 0.006). The positioning quality was better in group B, with 70% of patients achieving an optimal position compared to only 10% in group F ( P = 0.02).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Ultrasound-guided SFICB, as compared to systemic fentanyl, provided better analgesia and helped to achieve a better and more comfortable position to perform the neuraxial block.</p>","PeriodicalId":7750,"journal":{"name":"Anaesthesiology intensive therapy","volume":"56 1","pages":"54-60"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11022634/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anaesthesiology intensive therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5114/ait.2024.138554","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Neuraxial anaesthesia is a common choice for most hip and lower limb operations. Pain associated with positioning is often a deterrent, and the vast literature suggests different regional blocks and opioids for these patients. Patients with acetabular fractures may experience increased pain, and thus are more difficult to position for the neuraxial block. We conducted a randomized controlled pilot study to assess and compare the analgesic efficacy of ultrasound-guided suprainguinal fascia iliaca block (SFICB) versus systemic fentanyl to facilitate positioning for combined spinal epidural (CSE) anaesthesia in patients undergoing acetabular fracture surgery.

Material and methods: Twenty patients referred for surgical repair of acetabular fractures were randomly assigned to receive either ultrasound-guided SFICB (group B) or intravenous fentanyl (group F). Changes in visual analogue scale (VAS) scores in supine and sitting position, improvement in sitting angle (SA), positioning quality, rescue analgesic requirement, total opioid consumption, comfort VAS scores, and complications were noted to compare both groups.

Results: The post-intervention VAS score in the sitting position was significantly lower in group B than in group F (5.9 ± 2.1 vs. 3.5 ± 1.5, P = 0.01). Group B also had more significant improvement in SA (27.5° (20.75-36.5°), in comparison to group F (10 (5-18.75), P = 0.006). The positioning quality was better in group B, with 70% of patients achieving an optimal position compared to only 10% in group F ( P = 0.02).

Conclusions: Ultrasound-guided SFICB, as compared to systemic fentanyl, provided better analgesia and helped to achieve a better and more comfortable position to perform the neuraxial block.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
超声引导下髂腹股沟上筋膜阻滞,为髋臼手术中的神经麻醉患者定位--随机对照试验研究。
简介神经麻醉是大多数髋关节和下肢手术的常见选择。与体位相关的疼痛通常会阻碍手术的进行,大量文献建议对这些患者采用不同的区域阻滞和阿片类药物。髋臼骨折患者的疼痛可能会加剧,因此更难进行神经阻滞定位。我们进行了一项随机对照试验研究,以评估和比较超声引导下髂腹股沟上筋膜阻滞(SFICB)与全身使用芬太尼以促进髋臼骨折手术患者脊髓硬膜外联合麻醉(CSE)定位的镇痛效果:20名接受髋臼骨折手术修复的患者被随机分配至超声引导下的SFICB(B组)或静脉注射芬太尼(F组)。比较两组患者在仰卧位和坐位的视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分、坐位角度(SA)的改善、定位质量、抢救镇痛剂需求、阿片类药物总用量、舒适度VAS评分和并发症等方面的变化:结果:B 组干预后的坐位 VAS 评分明显低于 F 组(5.9 ± 2.1 vs. 3.5 ± 1.5,P = 0.01)。与 F 组(10(5-18.75),P = 0.006)相比,B 组在 SA(27.5°(20.75-36.5°))方面也有更明显的改善。B 组的定位质量更好,70% 的患者达到了最佳位置,而 F 组只有 10%(P = 0.02):结论:超声引导 SFICB 与全身使用芬太尼相比,能提供更好的镇痛效果,并有助于获得更好、更舒适的体位来进行神经阻滞。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
5.90%
发文量
48
审稿时长
25 weeks
期刊最新文献
A randomised controlled trial to compare blind intubation success through LMA Blockbuster® and I-Gel® LMA. Can't intubate, can't oxygenate? What is the preferred surgical strategy? A retrospective analysis. Measures of preoperative anxiety: Part two. Navigating through the paradox of choice: prediction of outcome in aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. Nutritional management in critically ill patients with COVID-19: a retrospective multicentre study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1