超声引导腰椎椎旁阻滞与罗哌卡因硬膜外阻滞对全髋关节置换术患者术后疼痛缓解的比较研究:一项前瞻性随机双盲研究。

Kavita Meena, Rajesh Kumar Meena, Aditya Prakash Nayak, Punyashree M, Neelesh Anand
{"title":"超声引导腰椎椎旁阻滞与罗哌卡因硬膜外阻滞对全髋关节置换术患者术后疼痛缓解的比较研究:一项前瞻性随机双盲研究。","authors":"Kavita Meena,&nbsp;Rajesh Kumar Meena,&nbsp;Aditya Prakash Nayak,&nbsp;Punyashree M,&nbsp;Neelesh Anand","doi":"10.2478/rjaic-2021-0013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Total hip replacement (THR) is mostly performed in patients above 65 years of age. Patients of this age group typically have comorbidities, therefore safe techniques for anaesthesia and analgesia with minimal side effects should be chosen and should allow early mobilisation. Lumbar paravertebral block is less explored in this domain. The primary objective of this study is to compare the efficacy of ultrasound-guided lumbar paravertebral and epidural block using ropivacaine (0.25%) with fentanyl as adjuvant for postoperative pain in patients undergoing unilateral THR.</p><p><strong>Settings and design: </strong>Randomised, controlled, double-blind, prospective study carried out in the Department of Anaesthesiology at Banaras Hindu University.</p><p><strong>Methods and material: </strong>After receiving institutional ethical committee clearance and written informed consent from patients, this study was carried out from February 2019 to February 2020. Sixty adult patients who required THR and fulfilled the inclusion criteria were randomised into two groups. The thirty patients in Group A received a continuous infusion of 5 ml/hr (0.25%) ropivacaine + 2 mcg/ml fentanyl via lumbar epidural catheter. The thirty patients in Group B received a continuous infusion of 5 ml/hr (0.25%) ropivacaine + 2 mcg/ml fentanyl via lumbar paravertebral catheter. Visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to evaluate pain scores. Rescue analgesia use and duration of hospital stay was calculated and compared in postoperative period. The statistical analysis of data was done by using software Statistical Package for Social Sciences SPSS for Windows (Version 23.0), and chi-square test was used for categorical variables. To compare the two groups of mean Student's t-test and for more than two groups one-way analysis of variance, the ANOVA test was used.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In Group A, 16.7% patients required rescue analgesic, and in Group B, 26.7% required rescue analgesia which is comparable and non-significant. The mean duration of hospital stay in Group A is 7.50 days. Compared to 6.47 days in Group B, this difference is statistically significant (p-0.000).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Analgesia provided by paravertebral block is not superior to epidural block, but paravertebral block did reduce the duration of hospital stay and provided better haemodynamic stability.</p>","PeriodicalId":21279,"journal":{"name":"Romanian journal of anaesthesia and intensive care","volume":"28 2","pages":"80-85"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/2a/b3/rjaic-28-080.PMC9949021.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Study Between Ultrasound-guided Lumbar Paravertebral Block and Lumbar Epidural Block with Ropivacaine for Postoperative Pain Relief in Patient Undergoing Total Hip Replacement Surgery: A Prospective Randomised, Double-blind Study.\",\"authors\":\"Kavita Meena,&nbsp;Rajesh Kumar Meena,&nbsp;Aditya Prakash Nayak,&nbsp;Punyashree M,&nbsp;Neelesh Anand\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/rjaic-2021-0013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Total hip replacement (THR) is mostly performed in patients above 65 years of age. Patients of this age group typically have comorbidities, therefore safe techniques for anaesthesia and analgesia with minimal side effects should be chosen and should allow early mobilisation. Lumbar paravertebral block is less explored in this domain. The primary objective of this study is to compare the efficacy of ultrasound-guided lumbar paravertebral and epidural block using ropivacaine (0.25%) with fentanyl as adjuvant for postoperative pain in patients undergoing unilateral THR.</p><p><strong>Settings and design: </strong>Randomised, controlled, double-blind, prospective study carried out in the Department of Anaesthesiology at Banaras Hindu University.</p><p><strong>Methods and material: </strong>After receiving institutional ethical committee clearance and written informed consent from patients, this study was carried out from February 2019 to February 2020. Sixty adult patients who required THR and fulfilled the inclusion criteria were randomised into two groups. The thirty patients in Group A received a continuous infusion of 5 ml/hr (0.25%) ropivacaine + 2 mcg/ml fentanyl via lumbar epidural catheter. The thirty patients in Group B received a continuous infusion of 5 ml/hr (0.25%) ropivacaine + 2 mcg/ml fentanyl via lumbar paravertebral catheter. Visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to evaluate pain scores. Rescue analgesia use and duration of hospital stay was calculated and compared in postoperative period. The statistical analysis of data was done by using software Statistical Package for Social Sciences SPSS for Windows (Version 23.0), and chi-square test was used for categorical variables. To compare the two groups of mean Student's t-test and for more than two groups one-way analysis of variance, the ANOVA test was used.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In Group A, 16.7% patients required rescue analgesic, and in Group B, 26.7% required rescue analgesia which is comparable and non-significant. The mean duration of hospital stay in Group A is 7.50 days. Compared to 6.47 days in Group B, this difference is statistically significant (p-0.000).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Analgesia provided by paravertebral block is not superior to epidural block, but paravertebral block did reduce the duration of hospital stay and provided better haemodynamic stability.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21279,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Romanian journal of anaesthesia and intensive care\",\"volume\":\"28 2\",\"pages\":\"80-85\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/2a/b3/rjaic-28-080.PMC9949021.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Romanian journal of anaesthesia and intensive care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/rjaic-2021-0013\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Romanian journal of anaesthesia and intensive care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/rjaic-2021-0013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:全髋关节置换术(THR)主要在65岁以上的患者中进行。这一年龄组的患者通常有合并症,因此应选择副作用最小的安全麻醉和镇痛技术,并应允许早期活动。腰椎椎旁阻滞在这一领域较少被探讨。本研究的主要目的是比较超声引导下使用罗哌卡因(0.25%)和芬太尼作为辅助治疗单侧THR患者术后疼痛的腰椎旁和硬膜外阻滞的疗效。环境和设计:随机、对照、双盲、前瞻性研究在巴纳拉斯印度大学麻醉系进行。方法和材料:在获得机构伦理委员会的批准和患者的书面知情同意后,本研究于2019年2月至2020年2月进行。60名需要THR并符合纳入标准的成年患者随机分为两组。A组30例患者经腰硬膜外导管连续输注5 ml/hr(0.25%)罗哌卡因+ 2 mcg/ml芬太尼。B组30例患者经腰椎旁导管连续输注5 ml/hr(0.25%)罗哌卡因+ 2 mcg/ml芬太尼。采用视觉模拟评分法(VAS)对疼痛进行评分。计算两组患者术后镇痛药的使用情况和住院时间,并进行比较。数据的统计分析采用statistical Package for Social Sciences SPSS for Windows (Version 23.0)软件,分类变量采用卡方检验。比较两组均数的学生t检验和对两组以上的单因素方差分析,采用方差分析检验。结果:A组有16.7%的患者需要抢救性镇痛,B组有26.7%的患者需要抢救性镇痛,两组间差异无统计学意义。A组患者平均住院时间为7.50天。与B组的6.47天相比,差异有统计学意义(p-0.000)。结论:椎旁阻滞的镇痛效果并不优于硬膜外阻滞,但椎旁阻滞确实缩短了住院时间,并提供了更好的血流动力学稳定性。
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
Comparative Study Between Ultrasound-guided Lumbar Paravertebral Block and Lumbar Epidural Block with Ropivacaine for Postoperative Pain Relief in Patient Undergoing Total Hip Replacement Surgery: A Prospective Randomised, Double-blind Study.

Background: Total hip replacement (THR) is mostly performed in patients above 65 years of age. Patients of this age group typically have comorbidities, therefore safe techniques for anaesthesia and analgesia with minimal side effects should be chosen and should allow early mobilisation. Lumbar paravertebral block is less explored in this domain. The primary objective of this study is to compare the efficacy of ultrasound-guided lumbar paravertebral and epidural block using ropivacaine (0.25%) with fentanyl as adjuvant for postoperative pain in patients undergoing unilateral THR.

Settings and design: Randomised, controlled, double-blind, prospective study carried out in the Department of Anaesthesiology at Banaras Hindu University.

Methods and material: After receiving institutional ethical committee clearance and written informed consent from patients, this study was carried out from February 2019 to February 2020. Sixty adult patients who required THR and fulfilled the inclusion criteria were randomised into two groups. The thirty patients in Group A received a continuous infusion of 5 ml/hr (0.25%) ropivacaine + 2 mcg/ml fentanyl via lumbar epidural catheter. The thirty patients in Group B received a continuous infusion of 5 ml/hr (0.25%) ropivacaine + 2 mcg/ml fentanyl via lumbar paravertebral catheter. Visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to evaluate pain scores. Rescue analgesia use and duration of hospital stay was calculated and compared in postoperative period. The statistical analysis of data was done by using software Statistical Package for Social Sciences SPSS for Windows (Version 23.0), and chi-square test was used for categorical variables. To compare the two groups of mean Student's t-test and for more than two groups one-way analysis of variance, the ANOVA test was used.

Results: In Group A, 16.7% patients required rescue analgesic, and in Group B, 26.7% required rescue analgesia which is comparable and non-significant. The mean duration of hospital stay in Group A is 7.50 days. Compared to 6.47 days in Group B, this difference is statistically significant (p-0.000).

Conclusions: Analgesia provided by paravertebral block is not superior to epidural block, but paravertebral block did reduce the duration of hospital stay and provided better haemodynamic stability.

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
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Romanian Journal of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care is the official journal of the Romanian Society of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care and has been published continuously since 1994. It is intended mainly for anaesthesia and intensive care providers, but it is also aimed at specialists in emergency medical care and in pain research and management. The Journal is indexed in Scopus, Embase, PubMed Central as well as the databases of the Romanian Ministry of Education and Research (CNCSIS) B+ category. The Journal publishes two issues per year, the first one in April and the second one in October, and contains original articles, reviews, case reports, letters to the editor, book reviews and commentaries. The Journal is distributed free of charge to the members of the Romanian Society of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care.
期刊最新文献
The Impact of Anaesthesia on Hyperalgesia, Testosterone, Cortisol, C-Reactive Protein, and Glucose Levels After Spine Surgery: Prospective Randomised Controlled Trial A Randomised Controlled Study Comparing Pulse Pressure Variation (PPV) and Pleth Variability Index (PVI) for Goal-Directed Fluid Therapy Intraoperatively in Patients Undergoing Intracranial (Supratentorial ICSOLs) Surgeries. Rectus Sheath Block in Abdominal Surgery: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis. Prevention of Pneumonia due to Ventilator in Critical Patients with U Shape Oral Hygiene Model: A Systematic Review. Pyroglutamic Acidosis - An Underrecognised Entity Associated with Acetaminophen Use.
×
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