脊柱侧凸手术中双侧双水平直立者脊柱平面阻滞:回顾性比较研究。

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS Acta orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica Pub Date : 2022-09-01 DOI:10.5152/j.aott.2022.22019
Selcan Akesen, Saltuk Buğra Güler, Burak Akesen
{"title":"脊柱侧凸手术中双侧双水平直立者脊柱平面阻滞:回顾性比较研究。","authors":"Selcan Akesen,&nbsp;Saltuk Buğra Güler,&nbsp;Burak Akesen","doi":"10.5152/j.aott.2022.22019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to compare the effect of the ultrasound (US) guided erector spinae plane block (ESPB) on pain scores, opioid requirement, patient satisfaction, and the length of hospital stay with standard analgesia methods following scoliosis surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty-seven patients (17 females, 10 males; mean age=15.59 ± 3.24 years) who underwent scoliosis surgery with preoperative bilateral bilevel US-guided ESPB were the sample group, and the remaining 30 patients (20 females, 10 males; mean age = 15.57 ± 2.75 years) without ESPB were the control group. Bilateral bilevel injection ESPB was performed at two levels (T4 and T10). Postoperative pain scores, morphine consumption, patient satisfaction scores, and the number of patients requiring rescue analgesia were recorded. A visual analog scale (VAS) was used to score postoperative pain.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>VAS at rest and when mobile, as well as postoperative cumulative morphine consumption in the first postoperative 24 h, was significantly lower in the ESPB group. Thirteen patients in the control group but no in the ESPB group required rescue analgesics in the postoperative period. Both the time to the requirement of the initial dose of PCA and patient satisfaction scores were significantly higher in the ESPB group (P < 0.001 for both).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Given the need for improved recovery of the patients, ESPB seems to be an essential analgesic technique that may reduce both opioid consumption and the severity of the pain, thus increasing the satisfaction of the patients and decreasing the length of hospital stay.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level IV, Therapeutic Study.</p>","PeriodicalId":7097,"journal":{"name":"Acta orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/56/14/aott-56-5-327.PMC9682554.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bilateral bi-level erector spinae plane blocks in scoliosis surgery: a retrospective comparative study.\",\"authors\":\"Selcan Akesen,&nbsp;Saltuk Buğra Güler,&nbsp;Burak Akesen\",\"doi\":\"10.5152/j.aott.2022.22019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to compare the effect of the ultrasound (US) guided erector spinae plane block (ESPB) on pain scores, opioid requirement, patient satisfaction, and the length of hospital stay with standard analgesia methods following scoliosis surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty-seven patients (17 females, 10 males; mean age=15.59 ± 3.24 years) who underwent scoliosis surgery with preoperative bilateral bilevel US-guided ESPB were the sample group, and the remaining 30 patients (20 females, 10 males; mean age = 15.57 ± 2.75 years) without ESPB were the control group. Bilateral bilevel injection ESPB was performed at two levels (T4 and T10). Postoperative pain scores, morphine consumption, patient satisfaction scores, and the number of patients requiring rescue analgesia were recorded. A visual analog scale (VAS) was used to score postoperative pain.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>VAS at rest and when mobile, as well as postoperative cumulative morphine consumption in the first postoperative 24 h, was significantly lower in the ESPB group. Thirteen patients in the control group but no in the ESPB group required rescue analgesics in the postoperative period. Both the time to the requirement of the initial dose of PCA and patient satisfaction scores were significantly higher in the ESPB group (P < 0.001 for both).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Given the need for improved recovery of the patients, ESPB seems to be an essential analgesic technique that may reduce both opioid consumption and the severity of the pain, thus increasing the satisfaction of the patients and decreasing the length of hospital stay.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level IV, Therapeutic Study.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7097,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/56/14/aott-56-5-327.PMC9682554.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5152/j.aott.2022.22019\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5152/j.aott.2022.22019","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

目的:本研究旨在比较超声(US)引导下直立脊柱平面阻滞(ESPB)对脊柱侧凸手术后疼痛评分、阿片类药物需求、患者满意度和住院时间的影响。方法:27例患者(女性17例,男性10例;平均年龄=15.59±3.24岁),术前行双侧双水平us引导ESPB手术的患者为样本组,其余30例患者(女性20例,男性10例;平均年龄= 15.57±2.75岁),无ESPB者为对照组。双侧双水平注射ESPB在T4和T10两个水平进行。记录术后疼痛评分、吗啡用量、患者满意度评分和需要抢救镇痛的患者人数。采用视觉模拟评分法(VAS)对术后疼痛进行评分。结果:ESPB组静息时和活动时VAS及术后第24 h吗啡累积用量均明显降低。对照组13例,ESPB组无一例患者术后需要紧急镇痛。ESPB组达到PCA初始剂量要求的时间和患者满意度得分均显著高于ESPB组(P < 0.001)。结论:考虑到提高患者康复的需要,ESPB似乎是一种必要的镇痛技术,可以减少阿片类药物的消耗和疼痛的严重程度,从而提高患者的满意度,缩短住院时间。证据等级:IV级,治疗性研究。
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
Bilateral bi-level erector spinae plane blocks in scoliosis surgery: a retrospective comparative study.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the effect of the ultrasound (US) guided erector spinae plane block (ESPB) on pain scores, opioid requirement, patient satisfaction, and the length of hospital stay with standard analgesia methods following scoliosis surgery.

Methods: Twenty-seven patients (17 females, 10 males; mean age=15.59 ± 3.24 years) who underwent scoliosis surgery with preoperative bilateral bilevel US-guided ESPB were the sample group, and the remaining 30 patients (20 females, 10 males; mean age = 15.57 ± 2.75 years) without ESPB were the control group. Bilateral bilevel injection ESPB was performed at two levels (T4 and T10). Postoperative pain scores, morphine consumption, patient satisfaction scores, and the number of patients requiring rescue analgesia were recorded. A visual analog scale (VAS) was used to score postoperative pain.

Results: VAS at rest and when mobile, as well as postoperative cumulative morphine consumption in the first postoperative 24 h, was significantly lower in the ESPB group. Thirteen patients in the control group but no in the ESPB group required rescue analgesics in the postoperative period. Both the time to the requirement of the initial dose of PCA and patient satisfaction scores were significantly higher in the ESPB group (P < 0.001 for both).

Conclusion: Given the need for improved recovery of the patients, ESPB seems to be an essential analgesic technique that may reduce both opioid consumption and the severity of the pain, thus increasing the satisfaction of the patients and decreasing the length of hospital stay.

Level of evidence: Level IV, Therapeutic Study.

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
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
66
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica (AOTT) is an international, scientific, open access periodical published in accordance with independent, unbiased, and double-blinded peer-review principles. The journal is the official publication of the Turkish Association of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, and Turkish Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology. It is published bimonthly in January, March, May, July, September, and November. The publication language of the journal is English. The aim of the journal is to publish original studies of the highest scientific and clinical value in orthopedics, traumatology, and related disciplines. The scope of the journal includes but not limited to diagnostic, treatment, and prevention methods related to orthopedics and traumatology. Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica publishes clinical and basic research articles, case reports, personal clinical and technical notes, systematic reviews and meta-analyses and letters to the Editor. Proceedings of scientific meetings are also considered for publication. The target audience of the journal includes healthcare professionals, physicians, and researchers who are interested or working in orthopedics and traumatology field, and related disciplines.
期刊最新文献
An investigation into the frequency and risk factors of low back pain following surgical treatment of isolated calcaneal fractures Comparison of artificial intelligence algorithm for the diagnosis of hip fracture on plain radiography with decision-making physicians: a validation study Peculiar reaction of oxidized zirconium from a total knee arthroplasty prosthesis: A case report An investigation into the frequency and risk factors of low back pain following surgical treatment of isolated calcaneal fractures Comparison of artificial intelligence algorithm for the diagnosis of hip fracture on plain radiography with decision-making physicians: a validation study
×
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