Posterior quadratus lumborum block versus intrathecal morphine analgesia after scheduled cesarean section: a prospective, randomized, controlled study.

IF 5.1 2区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine Pub Date : 2024-09-04 DOI:10.1136/rapm-2024-105454
Thomas Giral, Bernard Victor Delvaux, Davy Huynh, Bertrand Morel, Nabil Zanoun, Franck Ehooman, Thierry Garnier, Olivier Maupain
{"title":"Posterior quadratus lumborum block versus intrathecal morphine analgesia after scheduled cesarean section: a prospective, randomized, controlled study.","authors":"Thomas Giral, Bernard Victor Delvaux, Davy Huynh, Bertrand Morel, Nabil Zanoun, Franck Ehooman, Thierry Garnier, Olivier Maupain","doi":"10.1136/rapm-2024-105454","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>During the postoperative period of elective cesarean section, intrathecal morphine is effective in the multimodal analgesic regimen, but can cause significant adverse effects. Bilateral posterior quadratus lumborum block could be alternatively used. The aim of this study was to compare efficacy and safety of both strategies as part of a multimodal analgesic regimen.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a prospective, randomized, blinded, controlled study. 104 parturients were randomly selected to receive intrathecal morphine or posterior quadratus lumborum block during cesarean section under spinal anesthesia. The primary endpoint was patient-controlled 24-hour cumulative intravenous morphine use. Secondary endpoints were 48-hour cumulative morphine use, static/dynamic pain scores, functional recovery (ObsQoR-11 questionnaire) and adverse effects.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no statistical difference in the mean cumulative morphine dose at 24-hour between groups (posterior quadratus lumborum block group, 13.7 (97.5% CI 10.4 to 16.9) mg; intrathecal morphine group, 11.1 (97.5% CI 8.4 to 13.8) mg, p=0.111). Pain scores did not show any difference between groups, excepted at 6 hours for the pain at cough/movement in favor of the posterior quadratus lumborum block group (p=0.013). A better recovery quality was observed at 24 hours in the posterior quadratus lumborum block group (p=0.009). Pruritus was more frequent in intrathecal morphine group parturients (35% vs 2%) CONCLUSIONS: No difference in cumulative morphine dose at 24 hours was observed in posterior quadratus lumborum block group compared with intrathecal morphine group. Posterior quadratus lumborum block can be considered an alternative to intrathecal morphine in cesarean postoperative analgesia, especially in cases of intolerance to morphine.</p><p><strong>Trial registration number: </strong>NCT04755712.</p>","PeriodicalId":54503,"journal":{"name":"Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/rapm-2024-105454","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: During the postoperative period of elective cesarean section, intrathecal morphine is effective in the multimodal analgesic regimen, but can cause significant adverse effects. Bilateral posterior quadratus lumborum block could be alternatively used. The aim of this study was to compare efficacy and safety of both strategies as part of a multimodal analgesic regimen.

Methods: This was a prospective, randomized, blinded, controlled study. 104 parturients were randomly selected to receive intrathecal morphine or posterior quadratus lumborum block during cesarean section under spinal anesthesia. The primary endpoint was patient-controlled 24-hour cumulative intravenous morphine use. Secondary endpoints were 48-hour cumulative morphine use, static/dynamic pain scores, functional recovery (ObsQoR-11 questionnaire) and adverse effects.

Results: There was no statistical difference in the mean cumulative morphine dose at 24-hour between groups (posterior quadratus lumborum block group, 13.7 (97.5% CI 10.4 to 16.9) mg; intrathecal morphine group, 11.1 (97.5% CI 8.4 to 13.8) mg, p=0.111). Pain scores did not show any difference between groups, excepted at 6 hours for the pain at cough/movement in favor of the posterior quadratus lumborum block group (p=0.013). A better recovery quality was observed at 24 hours in the posterior quadratus lumborum block group (p=0.009). Pruritus was more frequent in intrathecal morphine group parturients (35% vs 2%) CONCLUSIONS: No difference in cumulative morphine dose at 24 hours was observed in posterior quadratus lumborum block group compared with intrathecal morphine group. Posterior quadratus lumborum block can be considered an alternative to intrathecal morphine in cesarean postoperative analgesia, especially in cases of intolerance to morphine.

Trial registration number: NCT04755712.

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
计划剖腹产后腰后肌阻滞与鞘内吗啡镇痛:一项前瞻性随机对照研究。
背景:在择期剖宫产术后,鞘内吗啡在多模式镇痛方案中是有效的,但会引起明显的不良反应。双侧腰后部阻滞可作为替代方法。本研究旨在比较这两种策略作为多模式镇痛方案一部分的有效性和安全性:这是一项前瞻性、随机、盲法对照研究。随机选取了104名产妇,让她们在脊髓麻醉下进行剖宫产手术时接受鞘内吗啡或腰后四肌阻滞。主要终点是由患者控制的 24 小时累积静脉注射吗啡用量。次要终点是48小时累积吗啡用量、静态/动态疼痛评分、功能恢复(ObsQoR-11问卷)和不良反应:各组 24 小时平均累积吗啡剂量无统计学差异(腰后区阻滞组,13.7(97.5% CI 10.4 至 16.9)毫克;鞘内吗啡组,11.1(97.5% CI 8.4 至 13.8)毫克,P=0.111)。疼痛评分在各组之间没有显示出任何差异,只有在6小时时,咳嗽/活动时的疼痛评分有利于后腰方肌阻滞组(P=0.013)。在 24 小时时,观察到腰后肌阻滞组的恢复质量更好(P=0.009)。鞘内吗啡组产妇瘙痒的发生率更高(35% 对 2% ):与鞘内吗啡组相比,腰后区阻滞组在 24 小时内的累积吗啡剂量没有差异。在剖宫产术后镇痛中,尤其是在对吗啡不耐受的情况下,腰后区阻滞可被视为鞘内吗啡的替代品:试验注册号:NCT04755712。
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
8.50
自引率
11.80%
发文量
175
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine, the official publication of the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine (ASRA), is a monthly journal that publishes peer-reviewed scientific and clinical studies to advance the understanding and clinical application of regional techniques for surgical anesthesia and postoperative analgesia. Coverage includes intraoperative regional techniques, perioperative pain, chronic pain, obstetric anesthesia, pediatric anesthesia, outcome studies, and complications. Published for over thirty years, this respected journal also serves as the official publication of the European Society of Regional Anaesthesia and Pain Therapy (ESRA), the Asian and Oceanic Society of Regional Anesthesia (AOSRA), the Latin American Society of Regional Anesthesia (LASRA), the African Society for Regional Anesthesia (AFSRA), and the Academy of Regional Anaesthesia of India (AORA).
期刊最新文献
End-tidal carbon dioxide monitoring in spontaneously breathing patients: a low-cost strategy. Comparing modalities of opioid education in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty: a randomized pilot trial. Peripheral nerve microanatomy: new insights into possible mechanisms for block success. Evolving Regional Anesthesiology and Acute Pain Medicine fellowship application process: a program director survey. Mortality in patients undergoing thoracotomy with continuous neuraxial analgesia.
×
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