超声引导下阴茎平面神经阻滞用于包皮环切术:一种新的改良技术,建议减少麻醉量和麻醉剂的使用。

M-Irfan Suleman, Anita N Akbar Ali, Valbona Kanarek, Ming Li, Ashay Patel
{"title":"超声引导下阴茎平面神经阻滞用于包皮环切术:一种新的改良技术,建议减少麻醉量和麻醉剂的使用。","authors":"M-Irfan Suleman,&nbsp;Anita N Akbar Ali,&nbsp;Valbona Kanarek,&nbsp;Ming Li,&nbsp;Ashay Patel","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Circumcision is one of the most common surgical procedures in pediatric males.\nAnesthesia is often the classic dorsal penile nerve block (DPNB), which is based on landmark\nidentification and tactile feel of tissue resistance during needle advancement. However, this\ntechnique is associated with technical failures and vascular complications.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We used an ultrasound-guided in-plane technique to avoid injury of penile\nvascular and neural tissues during DPNB. The aims of this retrospective study were to compare the\nsuccess rate and efficacy of these two penile block techniques.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Male pediatric patients undergoing circumcision received general anesthesia\nbefore the penis and surrounding area were prepared with 0.5% chlorhexidine in 70% alcohol.\nSixteen patients underwent classic DPNB, and 16 underwent the modified ultrasound-guided inplane\ntechnique. The ultrasound machine was adjusted to the musculoskeletal setting, and a linear\nultrasound probe with a frequency range of 5 to 10 MHz was placed transversely along the base of the penis, which received gentle traction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Though not statistically significant, patients who underwent the classic DPNB were\napproximately 1.8 times more likely to require rescue analgesia and approximately 2 times more\nlikely to have a complication than those in the ultrasound-guided group. Results also showed lower\nvolume requirements for local anesthetic and intraoperative narcotics, longer time until rescue\nanalgesic, and lower incidence of vomiting in the ultrasound-guided group than in the landmark-guided group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The ultrasound-guided DPNB technique appears to offer advantages over\nclassic DPNB and warrants a prospective controlled trial to confirm these findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":35975,"journal":{"name":"Middle East Journal of Anesthesiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ultrasound Guided In-Plane Penile Nerve Block for Circumcision: A New, Modified Technique Suggests Lower Anesthetic Volume and Narcotic Use.\",\"authors\":\"M-Irfan Suleman,&nbsp;Anita N Akbar Ali,&nbsp;Valbona Kanarek,&nbsp;Ming Li,&nbsp;Ashay Patel\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Circumcision is one of the most common surgical procedures in pediatric males.\\nAnesthesia is often the classic dorsal penile nerve block (DPNB), which is based on landmark\\nidentification and tactile feel of tissue resistance during needle advancement. However, this\\ntechnique is associated with technical failures and vascular complications.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We used an ultrasound-guided in-plane technique to avoid injury of penile\\nvascular and neural tissues during DPNB. The aims of this retrospective study were to compare the\\nsuccess rate and efficacy of these two penile block techniques.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Male pediatric patients undergoing circumcision received general anesthesia\\nbefore the penis and surrounding area were prepared with 0.5% chlorhexidine in 70% alcohol.\\nSixteen patients underwent classic DPNB, and 16 underwent the modified ultrasound-guided inplane\\ntechnique. The ultrasound machine was adjusted to the musculoskeletal setting, and a linear\\nultrasound probe with a frequency range of 5 to 10 MHz was placed transversely along the base of the penis, which received gentle traction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Though not statistically significant, patients who underwent the classic DPNB were\\napproximately 1.8 times more likely to require rescue analgesia and approximately 2 times more\\nlikely to have a complication than those in the ultrasound-guided group. Results also showed lower\\nvolume requirements for local anesthetic and intraoperative narcotics, longer time until rescue\\nanalgesic, and lower incidence of vomiting in the ultrasound-guided group than in the landmark-guided group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The ultrasound-guided DPNB technique appears to offer advantages over\\nclassic DPNB and warrants a prospective controlled trial to confirm these findings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":35975,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Middle East Journal of Anesthesiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Middle East Journal of Anesthesiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Middle East Journal of Anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","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

背景:包皮环切术是儿科男性最常见的外科手术之一。麻醉通常是经典的阴茎背神经阻滞(DPNB),它是基于标记识别和针进过程中组织阻力的触感。然而,该技术与技术失败和血管并发症有关。目的:利用超声引导下的平面内技术避免DPNB对阴茎血管和神经组织的损伤。本回顾性研究的目的是比较这两种阴茎阻滞技术的成功率和疗效。方法:行包皮环切术的儿科男性患者在阴茎及周围全身麻醉前,用70%酒精配制0.5%氯己定。16例患者行经典DPNB, 16例行改良超声引导平面内技术。将超声机调至肌肉骨骼设置,将频率范围为5 ~ 10 MHz的线性超声探头沿阴茎基部横向放置,轻柔牵引。结果:虽然没有统计学意义,但与超声引导组相比,接受经典DPNB的患者需要抢救性镇痛的可能性约为1.8倍,发生并发症的可能性约为2倍。结果还显示,超声引导组的局麻药用量和术中麻醉药用量较低,直至恢复镇痛所需时间较长,呕吐发生率较地标引导组低。结论:超声引导下DPNB技术似乎比传统DPNB具有优势,需要前瞻性对照试验来证实这些发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Ultrasound Guided In-Plane Penile Nerve Block for Circumcision: A New, Modified Technique Suggests Lower Anesthetic Volume and Narcotic Use.

Context: Circumcision is one of the most common surgical procedures in pediatric males. Anesthesia is often the classic dorsal penile nerve block (DPNB), which is based on landmark identification and tactile feel of tissue resistance during needle advancement. However, this technique is associated with technical failures and vascular complications.

Objective: We used an ultrasound-guided in-plane technique to avoid injury of penile vascular and neural tissues during DPNB. The aims of this retrospective study were to compare the success rate and efficacy of these two penile block techniques.

Methods: Male pediatric patients undergoing circumcision received general anesthesia before the penis and surrounding area were prepared with 0.5% chlorhexidine in 70% alcohol. Sixteen patients underwent classic DPNB, and 16 underwent the modified ultrasound-guided inplane technique. The ultrasound machine was adjusted to the musculoskeletal setting, and a linear ultrasound probe with a frequency range of 5 to 10 MHz was placed transversely along the base of the penis, which received gentle traction.

Results: Though not statistically significant, patients who underwent the classic DPNB were approximately 1.8 times more likely to require rescue analgesia and approximately 2 times more likely to have a complication than those in the ultrasound-guided group. Results also showed lower volume requirements for local anesthetic and intraoperative narcotics, longer time until rescue analgesic, and lower incidence of vomiting in the ultrasound-guided group than in the landmark-guided group.

Conclusions: The ultrasound-guided DPNB technique appears to offer advantages over classic DPNB and warrants a prospective controlled trial to confirm these findings.

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
Middle East Journal of Anesthesiology
Middle East Journal of Anesthesiology Medicine-Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The journal is published three times a year (February, June, and October) and has an Editorial Executive Committee from the department and consultant editors from various Arab countries. A volume consists of six issues. Presently, it is in its 42nd year of publication and is currently in its 19th volume. It has a worldwide circulation and effective March 2008, the MEJA has become an electronic journal. The main objective of the journal is to act as a forum for publication, education, and exchange of opinions, and to promote research and publications of the Middle Eastern heritage of medicine and anesthesia.
期刊最新文献
Amniotic fluid embolism. THE EFFECT OF ETHNICITY ON THE INCIDENCE OF POSTOPERATIVE NAUSEA AND VOMITING IN MODERATE TO HIGH RISK PATIENTS UNDERGOING GENERAL ANESTHESIA IN SOUTH AFRICA: A CONTROLLED OBSERVATIONAL STUDY. Dose-Dependent Anti-Inflammatory Effect of Ketamine in Liver Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury. Effects of Circuit Leak Development Over Time and Response During Low-Flow Volume and Pressure-Controlled Ventilation. Post-Partum Malignant Hypertension in a Patient with Preeclampsia and Abruptio Placenta.
×
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