Jorge Herrador-Benito, Javier Páramo-Zunzunegui, Gil Rodríguez-Caravaca, Manuel Durán-Poveda
{"title":"在腹腔镜胆囊切除术中使用左旋布比卡因进行切口前局部浸润:随机临床试验。","authors":"Jorge Herrador-Benito, Javier Páramo-Zunzunegui, Gil Rodríguez-Caravaca, Manuel Durán-Poveda","doi":"10.24875/CIRU.230000221","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), despite its minimally invasive nature, requires effective control of post-operative pain. The use of local anesthetics (LA) has been studied, but the level of evidence is low, and there is little information on important parameters such as health-related quality of life (HRQoL) or return to work. The objective of the study was to evaluate the efficacy of 0.50% levobupivacaine infiltration of incisional sites in reducing POP after LC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind study. Patients undergoing elective LC were randomized into two groups: no infiltration (control group) and port infiltration (intervention group). POP intensity (numerical rating scale, NRS), need for rescue with opioid drugs, PONV incidence, HRQoL, and return to work data, among others, were studied.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two hundred and twelve patients were randomized and analyzed: 105 (control group) and 107 (intervention group). A significant difference was observed in the NRS values (control group mean NRS score: 3.41 ± 1.82 vs. 2.56 ± 1.96) (p < 0.05) and in the incidence of PONV (31.4% vs. 19.6%) (p = 0.049).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Levobupivacaine infiltration is safe and effective in reducing POP, although this does not lead to a shorter hospital stay and does not influence HRQoL, return to work, or overall patient satisfaction.</p>","PeriodicalId":93936,"journal":{"name":"Cirugia y cirujanos","volume":"92 1","pages":"69-76"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pre-incisional local infiltration with levobupivacaine in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized and clinical trial.\",\"authors\":\"Jorge Herrador-Benito, Javier Páramo-Zunzunegui, Gil Rodríguez-Caravaca, Manuel Durán-Poveda\",\"doi\":\"10.24875/CIRU.230000221\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), despite its minimally invasive nature, requires effective control of post-operative pain. The use of local anesthetics (LA) has been studied, but the level of evidence is low, and there is little information on important parameters such as health-related quality of life (HRQoL) or return to work. The objective of the study was to evaluate the efficacy of 0.50% levobupivacaine infiltration of incisional sites in reducing POP after LC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind study. Patients undergoing elective LC were randomized into two groups: no infiltration (control group) and port infiltration (intervention group). POP intensity (numerical rating scale, NRS), need for rescue with opioid drugs, PONV incidence, HRQoL, and return to work data, among others, were studied.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two hundred and twelve patients were randomized and analyzed: 105 (control group) and 107 (intervention group). A significant difference was observed in the NRS values (control group mean NRS score: 3.41 ± 1.82 vs. 2.56 ± 1.96) (p < 0.05) and in the incidence of PONV (31.4% vs. 19.6%) (p = 0.049).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Levobupivacaine infiltration is safe and effective in reducing POP, although this does not lead to a shorter hospital stay and does not influence HRQoL, return to work, or overall patient satisfaction.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93936,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cirugia y cirujanos\",\"volume\":\"92 1\",\"pages\":\"69-76\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cirugia y cirujanos\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.24875/CIRU.230000221\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cirugia y cirujanos","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24875/CIRU.230000221","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)尽管是微创手术,但需要有效控制术后疼痛。目前已对局部麻醉剂(LA)的使用进行了研究,但证据水平较低,关于健康相关生活质量(HRQoL)或重返工作岗位等重要参数的信息也很少。本研究旨在评估 0.50% 左布比卡因浸润切口部位对减少 LC 后 POP 的疗效:这是一项前瞻性、随机、双盲研究。方法:这是一项前瞻性随机双盲研究,将接受择期 LC 的患者随机分为两组:无浸润组(对照组)和切口浸润组(干预组)。研究内容包括 POP 强度(数字评分量表,NRS)、使用阿片类药物抢救的需求、PONV 发生率、HRQoL 和重返工作岗位数据等:对 212 名患者进行了随机分组和分析:105 人(对照组)和 107 人(干预组)。在 NRS 值(对照组平均 NRS 得分:3.41 ± 1.82 vs. 2.56 ± 1.96)(p < 0.05)和 PONV 发生率(31.4% vs. 19.6%)(p = 0.049)方面观察到明显差异:左旋布比卡因浸润在减少 POP 方面安全有效,但这并不会缩短住院时间,也不会影响 HRQoL、重返工作岗位或患者总体满意度。
Pre-incisional local infiltration with levobupivacaine in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized and clinical trial.
Objective: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), despite its minimally invasive nature, requires effective control of post-operative pain. The use of local anesthetics (LA) has been studied, but the level of evidence is low, and there is little information on important parameters such as health-related quality of life (HRQoL) or return to work. The objective of the study was to evaluate the efficacy of 0.50% levobupivacaine infiltration of incisional sites in reducing POP after LC.
Methods: This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind study. Patients undergoing elective LC were randomized into two groups: no infiltration (control group) and port infiltration (intervention group). POP intensity (numerical rating scale, NRS), need for rescue with opioid drugs, PONV incidence, HRQoL, and return to work data, among others, were studied.
Results: Two hundred and twelve patients were randomized and analyzed: 105 (control group) and 107 (intervention group). A significant difference was observed in the NRS values (control group mean NRS score: 3.41 ± 1.82 vs. 2.56 ± 1.96) (p < 0.05) and in the incidence of PONV (31.4% vs. 19.6%) (p = 0.049).
Conclusions: Levobupivacaine infiltration is safe and effective in reducing POP, although this does not lead to a shorter hospital stay and does not influence HRQoL, return to work, or overall patient satisfaction.