静脉注射地塞米松与硬膜外地塞米松作为下肢周围神经阻滞的局部麻醉辅助药物的比较:荟萃分析和系统综述。

IF 4.2 2区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY European Journal of Anaesthesiology Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-10 DOI:10.1097/EJA.0000000000002038
Neel Desai, Suji Pararajasingham, Desire Onwochei, Eric Albrecht
{"title":"静脉注射地塞米松与硬膜外地塞米松作为下肢周围神经阻滞的局部麻醉辅助药物的比较:荟萃分析和系统综述。","authors":"Neel Desai, Suji Pararajasingham, Desire Onwochei, Eric Albrecht","doi":"10.1097/EJA.0000000000002038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As a local anaesthetic adjunct, the systemic absorption of perineural dexamethasone in the lower limb could be restricted because of decreased vascularity when compared with the upper limb.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare the pharmacodynamic characteristics of intravenous and perineural dexamethasone in the lower limb.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Systematic review of randomised controlled trials with meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Systematic search of Central, Google Scholar, Ovid Embase and Ovid Medline to 18 July 2023.</p><p><strong>Eligibility criteria: </strong>Randomised controlled trials, which compared the intravenous with perineural administration of dexamethasone as a local anaesthetic adjunct in peripheral nerve blocks for surgery of the lower limb.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The most common peripheral nerve blocks were femoral, sciatic and ankle block. The local anaesthetic was long acting in all trials and the dose of dexamethasone was 8 mg in most trials. The primary outcome, the duration of analgesia, was investigated by all nine trials ( n  = 546 patients). Overall, compared with intravenous dexamethasone, perineural dexamethasone increased the duration of analgesia from 19.54 to 22.27 h, a mean difference [95% confidence interval (CI) of 2.73 (1.07 to 4.38) h; P  = 0.001, I2  = 87]. The quality of evidence was moderate owing to serious inconsistency. However, analysis based on the location of the peripheral nerve block, the type of local anaesthetic or the use of perineural adrenaline showed no difference in duration between intravenous and perineural dexamethasone. No differences were shown for any of the secondary outcomes related to efficacy and side effects.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In summary, moderate evidence supports the superiority of perineural dexamethasone over intravenous dexamethasone in prolonging the duration of analgesia. However, this difference is unlikely to be clinically relevant. Consideration of the perineural use of dexamethasone should recognise that this route of administration remains off label.</p>","PeriodicalId":11920,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Anaesthesiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11377050/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of intravenous versus perineural dexamethasone as a local anaesthetic adjunct for peripheral nerve blocks in the lower limb: A meta-analysis and systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Neel Desai, Suji Pararajasingham, Desire Onwochei, Eric Albrecht\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/EJA.0000000000002038\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As a local anaesthetic adjunct, the systemic absorption of perineural dexamethasone in the lower limb could be restricted because of decreased vascularity when compared with the upper limb.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare the pharmacodynamic characteristics of intravenous and perineural dexamethasone in the lower limb.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Systematic review of randomised controlled trials with meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Systematic search of Central, Google Scholar, Ovid Embase and Ovid Medline to 18 July 2023.</p><p><strong>Eligibility criteria: </strong>Randomised controlled trials, which compared the intravenous with perineural administration of dexamethasone as a local anaesthetic adjunct in peripheral nerve blocks for surgery of the lower limb.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The most common peripheral nerve blocks were femoral, sciatic and ankle block. The local anaesthetic was long acting in all trials and the dose of dexamethasone was 8 mg in most trials. The primary outcome, the duration of analgesia, was investigated by all nine trials ( n  = 546 patients). Overall, compared with intravenous dexamethasone, perineural dexamethasone increased the duration of analgesia from 19.54 to 22.27 h, a mean difference [95% confidence interval (CI) of 2.73 (1.07 to 4.38) h; P  = 0.001, I2  = 87]. The quality of evidence was moderate owing to serious inconsistency. However, analysis based on the location of the peripheral nerve block, the type of local anaesthetic or the use of perineural adrenaline showed no difference in duration between intravenous and perineural dexamethasone. No differences were shown for any of the secondary outcomes related to efficacy and side effects.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In summary, moderate evidence supports the superiority of perineural dexamethasone over intravenous dexamethasone in prolonging the duration of analgesia. However, this difference is unlikely to be clinically relevant. Consideration of the perineural use of dexamethasone should recognise that this route of administration remains off label.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11920,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Anaesthesiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11377050/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Anaesthesiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/EJA.0000000000002038\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/10 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Anaesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/EJA.0000000000002038","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:作为局麻药的辅助用药,下肢硬膜外地塞米松的全身吸收可能会受到限制,因为与上肢相比,下肢血管较少:比较下肢静脉注射和硬膜外注射地塞米松的药效学特征:设计:对随机对照试验进行系统回顾和荟萃分析:截至2023年7月18日,对Central、Google Scholar、Ovid Embase和Ovid Medline进行了系统检索:随机对照试验,比较静脉注射地塞米松和硬膜外注射地塞米松作为下肢手术周围神经阻滞的局麻药辅助用药:最常见的周围神经阻滞是股神经、坐骨神经和踝关节阻滞。所有试验中的局麻药都是长效的,大多数试验中的地塞米松剂量为 8 毫克。所有九项试验(n = 546 名患者)都对主要结果--镇痛持续时间进行了调查。总体而言,与静脉注射地塞米松相比,硬膜外地塞米松可将镇痛持续时间从19.54小时延长至22.27小时,平均差异[95%置信区间(CI)为2.73(1.07至4.38)小时;P = 0.001,I2 = 87]。由于严重不一致,证据质量为中等。然而,根据周围神经阻滞的位置、局麻药的类型或硬膜外肾上腺素的使用情况进行的分析表明,静脉注射地塞米松和硬膜外地塞米松在持续时间上没有差异。在与疗效和副作用相关的次要结果中也未显示出差异:总之,中等程度的证据表明,在延长镇痛持续时间方面,硬膜外地塞米松优于静脉注射地塞米松。不过,这种差异不太可能与临床相关。在考虑经皮使用地塞米松时,应认识到这种给药途径仍未列入标签。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Comparison of intravenous versus perineural dexamethasone as a local anaesthetic adjunct for peripheral nerve blocks in the lower limb: A meta-analysis and systematic review.

Background: As a local anaesthetic adjunct, the systemic absorption of perineural dexamethasone in the lower limb could be restricted because of decreased vascularity when compared with the upper limb.

Objectives: To compare the pharmacodynamic characteristics of intravenous and perineural dexamethasone in the lower limb.

Design: Systematic review of randomised controlled trials with meta-analysis.

Data sources: Systematic search of Central, Google Scholar, Ovid Embase and Ovid Medline to 18 July 2023.

Eligibility criteria: Randomised controlled trials, which compared the intravenous with perineural administration of dexamethasone as a local anaesthetic adjunct in peripheral nerve blocks for surgery of the lower limb.

Results: The most common peripheral nerve blocks were femoral, sciatic and ankle block. The local anaesthetic was long acting in all trials and the dose of dexamethasone was 8 mg in most trials. The primary outcome, the duration of analgesia, was investigated by all nine trials ( n  = 546 patients). Overall, compared with intravenous dexamethasone, perineural dexamethasone increased the duration of analgesia from 19.54 to 22.27 h, a mean difference [95% confidence interval (CI) of 2.73 (1.07 to 4.38) h; P  = 0.001, I2  = 87]. The quality of evidence was moderate owing to serious inconsistency. However, analysis based on the location of the peripheral nerve block, the type of local anaesthetic or the use of perineural adrenaline showed no difference in duration between intravenous and perineural dexamethasone. No differences were shown for any of the secondary outcomes related to efficacy and side effects.

Conclusion: In summary, moderate evidence supports the superiority of perineural dexamethasone over intravenous dexamethasone in prolonging the duration of analgesia. However, this difference is unlikely to be clinically relevant. Consideration of the perineural use of dexamethasone should recognise that this route of administration remains off label.

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
6.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
351
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Anaesthesiology (EJA) publishes original work of high scientific quality in the field of anaesthesiology, pain, emergency medicine and intensive care. Preference is given to experimental work or clinical observation in man, and to laboratory work of clinical relevance. The journal also publishes commissioned reviews by an authority, editorials, invited commentaries, special articles, pro and con debates, and short reports (correspondences, case reports, short reports of clinical studies).
期刊最新文献
A big little problem - postoperative nausea and vomiting incidences are too low! Is it time to add the letter E to the airway management guidelines? Is permissive hypercapnia really pneumoprotective? Reply to: importance of accounting for repeated measure designs when evaluating treatment effects at multiple postoperative days. Rethinking the utility of comparative studies between direct and video laryngoscopy in neonates and infants.
×
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