全膝关节置换术中的腘窝神经丛阻滞:一项单中心随机对照双盲试验。

IF 5.1 2区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine Pub Date : 2024-12-20 DOI:10.1136/rapm-2024-105782
Kevin Stebler, Nadia Elia, Isabelle Zaccaria, Roxane Michelle Fournier
{"title":"全膝关节置换术中的腘窝神经丛阻滞:一项单中心随机对照双盲试验。","authors":"Kevin Stebler, Nadia Elia, Isabelle Zaccaria, Roxane Michelle Fournier","doi":"10.1136/rapm-2024-105782","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Whether a popliteal plexus block improves postoperative pain following total knee arthroplasty remains debated. This randomized trial tested if adding a popliteal plexus block to a continuous femoral nerve block decreases postoperative opioid requirement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We included 66 patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty. 32 received continuous femoral nerve block and popliteal plexus block (intervention), and 34 received continuous femoral nerve block alone (control). The primary endpoint was the 12-hour postoperative morphine-equivalent consumption (mg). Secondary outcomes included opioid consumption, Visual Analog Pain Score (0-10), and sensorimotor extension of the block in postanesthesia care unit, at 12 hours, 24 hours and 48 hours postoperatively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>66 patients with a median body mass index of 28.7 (IQR 26.3-33.8) were included in the study. In an intention-to-treat analysis, the median 12-hour morphine-equivalent consumption was lower in the intervention group (6.1 mg (0.5-14.5) vs 10 mg (5.0-17.3); one-sided Wilcoxon test (p=0.04)). The average pain intensity experienced in postanesthesia care unit was lower in the intervention group (median: 3.0 (3.0-5.0) vs 2.0 (1.0-4.0), two-sided Wilcoxon p=0.01) and fewer patients reported lateroposterior pain of the knee (11 (34.4%) vs 21 (61.8%) p=0.03). These benefits disappeared after 24 hours. The median duration of the popliteal plexus block procedure was 5.0 min (2.0-5.0).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Adding a popliteal plexus block to a continuous femoral nerve block decreases 12-hour opioid utilization, but the effect size is small, calling into question its clinical relevance.</p><p><strong>Trial registration number: </strong>NCT04048889.</p>","PeriodicalId":54503,"journal":{"name":"Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Popliteal plexus block in total knee arthroplasty: a single-center randomized controlled double-blinded trial.\",\"authors\":\"Kevin Stebler, Nadia Elia, Isabelle Zaccaria, Roxane Michelle Fournier\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/rapm-2024-105782\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Whether a popliteal plexus block improves postoperative pain following total knee arthroplasty remains debated. This randomized trial tested if adding a popliteal plexus block to a continuous femoral nerve block decreases postoperative opioid requirement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We included 66 patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty. 32 received continuous femoral nerve block and popliteal plexus block (intervention), and 34 received continuous femoral nerve block alone (control). The primary endpoint was the 12-hour postoperative morphine-equivalent consumption (mg). Secondary outcomes included opioid consumption, Visual Analog Pain Score (0-10), and sensorimotor extension of the block in postanesthesia care unit, at 12 hours, 24 hours and 48 hours postoperatively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>66 patients with a median body mass index of 28.7 (IQR 26.3-33.8) were included in the study. In an intention-to-treat analysis, the median 12-hour morphine-equivalent consumption was lower in the intervention group (6.1 mg (0.5-14.5) vs 10 mg (5.0-17.3); one-sided Wilcoxon test (p=0.04)). The average pain intensity experienced in postanesthesia care unit was lower in the intervention group (median: 3.0 (3.0-5.0) vs 2.0 (1.0-4.0), two-sided Wilcoxon p=0.01) and fewer patients reported lateroposterior pain of the knee (11 (34.4%) vs 21 (61.8%) p=0.03). These benefits disappeared after 24 hours. The median duration of the popliteal plexus block procedure was 5.0 min (2.0-5.0).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Adding a popliteal plexus block to a continuous femoral nerve block decreases 12-hour opioid utilization, but the effect size is small, calling into question its clinical relevance.</p><p><strong>Trial registration number: </strong>NCT04048889.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54503,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-20\",\"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-2024-105782\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/rapm-2024-105782","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

摘要

摘要:腘神经丛阻滞是否能改善全膝关节置换术后的疼痛仍有争议。这项随机试验测试了在连续股神经阻滞的基础上增加腘丛阻滞是否会减少术后阿片类药物的需求。方法:66例全膝关节置换术患者。干预组32例行连续股神经阻滞联合腘窝神经丛阻滞,对照组34例行连续股神经阻滞。主要终点是术后12小时吗啡当量消耗量(mg)。次要结果包括术后12小时、24小时和48小时在麻醉后护理单元的阿片类药物消耗、视觉模拟疼痛评分(0-10)和感觉运动阻滞延伸。结果:66例中位体重指数为28.7 (IQR 26.3-33.8)的患者纳入研究。在意向治疗分析中,干预组12小时吗啡当量消耗量中位数较低(6.1 mg (0.5-14.5) vs 10 mg (5.0-17.3);单侧Wilcoxon检验(p=0.04)。干预组麻醉后护理病房的平均疼痛强度较低(中位数:3.0 (3.0-5.0)vs 2.0(1.0-4.0),双侧Wilcoxon p=0.01),较少患者报告膝关节后侧疼痛(11例(34.4%)vs 21例(61.8%)p=0.03)。这些益处在24小时后消失。腘神经丛阻滞术的中位持续时间为5.0 min(2.0-5.0)。结论:在连续股神经阻滞的基础上增加腘神经丛阻滞可减少12小时阿片类药物的使用,但效果较小,其临床相关性值得怀疑。试验注册号:NCT04048889。
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
Popliteal plexus block in total knee arthroplasty: a single-center randomized controlled double-blinded trial.

Introduction: Whether a popliteal plexus block improves postoperative pain following total knee arthroplasty remains debated. This randomized trial tested if adding a popliteal plexus block to a continuous femoral nerve block decreases postoperative opioid requirement.

Methods: We included 66 patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty. 32 received continuous femoral nerve block and popliteal plexus block (intervention), and 34 received continuous femoral nerve block alone (control). The primary endpoint was the 12-hour postoperative morphine-equivalent consumption (mg). Secondary outcomes included opioid consumption, Visual Analog Pain Score (0-10), and sensorimotor extension of the block in postanesthesia care unit, at 12 hours, 24 hours and 48 hours postoperatively.

Results: 66 patients with a median body mass index of 28.7 (IQR 26.3-33.8) were included in the study. In an intention-to-treat analysis, the median 12-hour morphine-equivalent consumption was lower in the intervention group (6.1 mg (0.5-14.5) vs 10 mg (5.0-17.3); one-sided Wilcoxon test (p=0.04)). The average pain intensity experienced in postanesthesia care unit was lower in the intervention group (median: 3.0 (3.0-5.0) vs 2.0 (1.0-4.0), two-sided Wilcoxon p=0.01) and fewer patients reported lateroposterior pain of the knee (11 (34.4%) vs 21 (61.8%) p=0.03). These benefits disappeared after 24 hours. The median duration of the popliteal plexus block procedure was 5.0 min (2.0-5.0).

Conclusions: Adding a popliteal plexus block to a continuous femoral nerve block decreases 12-hour opioid utilization, but the effect size is small, calling into question its clinical relevance.

Trial registration number: NCT04048889.

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
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
Unrestricted insurance coverage of buprenorphine formulations remains sparse in comparison to conventional opioids. Cadaveric study of the obturator nerve: frequency of skin innervation and the optimal site for blocking the cutaneous branch. Effect of stellate ganglion block on brain hemodynamics and the inflammatory response in moderate and severe traumatic brain injury: a pilot study. Letter to the editor: Is medetomidine the next perioperative substance of abuse? Perineuromal hydrodissection for acute postamputation pain? An observational study in a time of war.
×
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