竖脊平面阻滞在经皮肾镜取石术中的疗效观察。

Mehmet Uğur Bilgin, Zeki Tuncel Tekgül, Tansu Değirmenci
{"title":"竖脊平面阻滞在经皮肾镜取石术中的疗效观察。","authors":"Mehmet Uğur Bilgin,&nbsp;Zeki Tuncel Tekgül,&nbsp;Tansu Değirmenci","doi":"10.4274/TJAR.2022.22981","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is accompanied by somatic and visceral pain intraoperatively and postoperatively. However, pain management strategies lack a decisive consensus. Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is a novel paraspinal fascial block that can be used in PCNL patients, and we aimed to investigate whether ESPB will reduce intraoperative and postoperative opioid consumption and postoperative pain scores in PCNL patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study was randomized, controlled, and open-label. Two groups were formed as the control group (GCont) and block group (Gblock), and patients received total intravenous anaesthesia. GBlock received an ESPB catheter in addition in the prone position. Intraoperative parameters and infusion doses, postoperative rescue analgesic doses, and pain scores were recorded. The primary endpoint was intraoperative analgesic consumption, and the secondary endpoints were postoperative pain scores and analgesic consumption.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty-four patients were analyzed. Remifentanil consumption of GCont was found to be significantly higher (GBlock: 0.0865 ± 0.030 vs GCont: 0.1398 ± 0.034, μg kg<sup>-1</sup> min<sup>-1</sup>, <i>P</i> < 0.001). The control group reported higher pain scores between the 30<sup>th</sup> min and 24<sup>th</sup> hours and needed more analgesics between the 1<sup>st</sup> and 6<sup>th</sup> hours postoperatively. GBlock received local anaesthetics via ESPB catheter before nephrostomy tube removal and fewer patients needed analgesics [5 patients (15.6%) vs. 28 patients (87.5%), <i>P</i> < 0.001]. GCont consumed more tramadol postoperatively (262.5 mg vs. 75 mg, <i>P</i> < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We found that ESPB reduced intraoperative opioid consumption. It also reduced the need for rescue analgesia and postoperative pain scores during nephrostomy tube removal. We concluded that the ESPB catheter may effectively be used in analgesia management during and after PCNL operations.</p>","PeriodicalId":23353,"journal":{"name":"Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10339747/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Efficacy of Erector Spinae Plane Block for Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy.\",\"authors\":\"Mehmet Uğur Bilgin,&nbsp;Zeki Tuncel Tekgül,&nbsp;Tansu Değirmenci\",\"doi\":\"10.4274/TJAR.2022.22981\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is accompanied by somatic and visceral pain intraoperatively and postoperatively. However, pain management strategies lack a decisive consensus. Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is a novel paraspinal fascial block that can be used in PCNL patients, and we aimed to investigate whether ESPB will reduce intraoperative and postoperative opioid consumption and postoperative pain scores in PCNL patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study was randomized, controlled, and open-label. Two groups were formed as the control group (GCont) and block group (Gblock), and patients received total intravenous anaesthesia. GBlock received an ESPB catheter in addition in the prone position. Intraoperative parameters and infusion doses, postoperative rescue analgesic doses, and pain scores were recorded. The primary endpoint was intraoperative analgesic consumption, and the secondary endpoints were postoperative pain scores and analgesic consumption.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty-four patients were analyzed. Remifentanil consumption of GCont was found to be significantly higher (GBlock: 0.0865 ± 0.030 vs GCont: 0.1398 ± 0.034, μg kg<sup>-1</sup> min<sup>-1</sup>, <i>P</i> < 0.001). The control group reported higher pain scores between the 30<sup>th</sup> min and 24<sup>th</sup> hours and needed more analgesics between the 1<sup>st</sup> and 6<sup>th</sup> hours postoperatively. GBlock received local anaesthetics via ESPB catheter before nephrostomy tube removal and fewer patients needed analgesics [5 patients (15.6%) vs. 28 patients (87.5%), <i>P</i> < 0.001]. GCont consumed more tramadol postoperatively (262.5 mg vs. 75 mg, <i>P</i> < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We found that ESPB reduced intraoperative opioid consumption. It also reduced the need for rescue analgesia and postoperative pain scores during nephrostomy tube removal. We concluded that the ESPB catheter may effectively be used in analgesia management during and after PCNL operations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23353,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10339747/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4274/TJAR.2022.22981\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4274/TJAR.2022.22981","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的:经皮肾镜取石术(PCNL)术中及术后伴有躯体及内脏疼痛。然而,疼痛管理策略缺乏决定性的共识。直立脊柱平面阻滞(Erector spinae plane block, ESPB)是一种可用于PCNL患者的新型椎旁筋膜阻滞,我们旨在探讨ESPB是否会减少PCNL患者术中和术后阿片类药物的消耗和术后疼痛评分。方法:随机、对照、开放标签研究。分为对照组(GCont)和阻滞组(Gblock)两组,均给予全静脉麻醉。GBlock在俯卧位上另外放置了ESPB导管。记录术中参数及输注剂量、术后抢救镇痛剂量、疼痛评分。主要终点是术中镇痛消耗,次要终点是术后疼痛评分和镇痛消耗。结果:共分析64例患者。GCont的瑞芬太尼消耗量显著高于GCont (GBlock: 0.0865±0.030 vs GCont: 0.1398±0.034,μ kg-1 min-1, P < 0.001)。对照组患者术后30 ~ 24小时疼痛评分较高,术后1 ~ 6小时需要较多镇痛药。GBlock在取肾造口管前通过ESPB导管局部麻醉,需要镇痛的患者较少[5例(15.6%)比28例(87.5%),P < 0.001]。GCont术后消耗更多曲马多(262.5 mg vs 75 mg, P < 0.001)。结论:我们发现ESPB减少了术中阿片类药物的消耗。它还减少了肾造口管拔除过程中抢救镇痛和术后疼痛评分的需要。我们的结论是ESPB导管可以有效地用于PCNL手术期间和之后的镇痛管理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
The Efficacy of Erector Spinae Plane Block for Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy.

Objective: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is accompanied by somatic and visceral pain intraoperatively and postoperatively. However, pain management strategies lack a decisive consensus. Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is a novel paraspinal fascial block that can be used in PCNL patients, and we aimed to investigate whether ESPB will reduce intraoperative and postoperative opioid consumption and postoperative pain scores in PCNL patients.

Methods: The study was randomized, controlled, and open-label. Two groups were formed as the control group (GCont) and block group (Gblock), and patients received total intravenous anaesthesia. GBlock received an ESPB catheter in addition in the prone position. Intraoperative parameters and infusion doses, postoperative rescue analgesic doses, and pain scores were recorded. The primary endpoint was intraoperative analgesic consumption, and the secondary endpoints were postoperative pain scores and analgesic consumption.

Results: Sixty-four patients were analyzed. Remifentanil consumption of GCont was found to be significantly higher (GBlock: 0.0865 ± 0.030 vs GCont: 0.1398 ± 0.034, μg kg-1 min-1, P < 0.001). The control group reported higher pain scores between the 30th min and 24th hours and needed more analgesics between the 1st and 6th hours postoperatively. GBlock received local anaesthetics via ESPB catheter before nephrostomy tube removal and fewer patients needed analgesics [5 patients (15.6%) vs. 28 patients (87.5%), P < 0.001]. GCont consumed more tramadol postoperatively (262.5 mg vs. 75 mg, P < 0.001).

Conclusion: We found that ESPB reduced intraoperative opioid consumption. It also reduced the need for rescue analgesia and postoperative pain scores during nephrostomy tube removal. We concluded that the ESPB catheter may effectively be used in analgesia management during and after PCNL operations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Cesarean Sections Under Spinal Anaesthesia: Comparison of Varying Doses of Dexmedetomidine Combined with 0.75% Hyperbaric Ropivacaine: A Double-Blind Randomized Trial. Comparative Efficacy of Intraoperative Patient State Index vs. Bi-Spectral Index in Patients Undergoing Elective Spine Surgery with Neuromonitoring Under General Anaesthesia: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Comparison of Tracheal Intubation Using the Air-Q ILA and LMA Blockbuster Among Adults Undergoing Elective Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Evaluation of Operating Room Staff Awareness of Environmental Sustainability and Medical Waste Management. Exploring Heart Rate Variability Biofeedback as a Nonpharmacological Intervention for Enhancing Perioperative Care: A Narrative Review.
×
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