上消化道癌症患者经椎间盘与经皮质腹腔丛神经阻滞的比较研究。一项前瞻性随机对照研究

IF 0.1 Q4 ANESTHESIOLOGY Acta anaesthesiologica Belgica Pub Date : 2021-09-01 DOI:10.56126/72.3.3
A. Rath, Reena, A. Paswan, M. Tewari
{"title":"上消化道癌症患者经椎间盘与经皮质腹腔丛神经阻滞的比较研究。一项前瞻性随机对照研究","authors":"A. Rath, Reena, A. Paswan, M. Tewari","doi":"10.56126/72.3.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: To compare transdiscal and transaortic techniques of neurolytic celiac plexus block for upper gastrointestinal cancer patients.\n\nMethods: In this prospective randomized study 60 patients with upper gastrointestinal malignancies were included and randomly divided into two groups, group TD and group TA, receiving neurolytic celiac plexus blocks via transdiscal and transaortic techniques, respectively. The primary outcome was quality of life (QoL) as assessed by WHOQOL BREF questionnaire and secondary outcomes were pain relief using visual analogue scale (VAS), and occurrence of complications like hypotension, loose motion, bleeding and discitis.\n\nResult: QoL and VAS score were significantly improved in both groups post procedure. Transdiscal approach is more effective in improving VAS score than transaortic approach (1 vs 3) after 1 week and the relief of pain was better in TD group (3 vs 6) at the end of 2 months. Transdiscal approach was found to be more effective in improving QoL (227.00±28.85 vs 191.17±35.78) as compared to transaortic approach. However, post-procedural QoL improved in both groups when compared to pre-procedural QoL (p<0.05). Hypotension, diarrhea and bleeding from aorta were higher in TA group; however, no serious complications were seen in any of the groups.\n\nConclusion: Transdiscal technique is better in terms of adequate pain relief and improving QoL as compared to transaortic technique of NCPB in patients of upper GI malignancies and is associated with lesser incidences of complications.","PeriodicalId":7024,"journal":{"name":"Acta anaesthesiologica Belgica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparative study of transdiscal versus transaortic celiac plexus neurolytic block for upper gastrointestinal cancer patients. A prospective, randomized control study\",\"authors\":\"A. Rath, Reena, A. Paswan, M. Tewari\",\"doi\":\"10.56126/72.3.3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aim: To compare transdiscal and transaortic techniques of neurolytic celiac plexus block for upper gastrointestinal cancer patients.\\n\\nMethods: In this prospective randomized study 60 patients with upper gastrointestinal malignancies were included and randomly divided into two groups, group TD and group TA, receiving neurolytic celiac plexus blocks via transdiscal and transaortic techniques, respectively. The primary outcome was quality of life (QoL) as assessed by WHOQOL BREF questionnaire and secondary outcomes were pain relief using visual analogue scale (VAS), and occurrence of complications like hypotension, loose motion, bleeding and discitis.\\n\\nResult: QoL and VAS score were significantly improved in both groups post procedure. Transdiscal approach is more effective in improving VAS score than transaortic approach (1 vs 3) after 1 week and the relief of pain was better in TD group (3 vs 6) at the end of 2 months. Transdiscal approach was found to be more effective in improving QoL (227.00±28.85 vs 191.17±35.78) as compared to transaortic approach. However, post-procedural QoL improved in both groups when compared to pre-procedural QoL (p<0.05). Hypotension, diarrhea and bleeding from aorta were higher in TA group; however, no serious complications were seen in any of the groups.\\n\\nConclusion: Transdiscal technique is better in terms of adequate pain relief and improving QoL as compared to transaortic technique of NCPB in patients of upper GI malignancies and is associated with lesser incidences of complications.\",\"PeriodicalId\":7024,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta anaesthesiologica Belgica\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta anaesthesiologica Belgica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.56126/72.3.3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta anaesthesiologica Belgica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56126/72.3.3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较上消化道癌症患者腹腔神经丛阻滞的经椎间盘和经皮质技术。方法:在这项前瞻性随机研究中,60名上消化道恶性肿瘤患者被纳入并随机分为两组,TD组和TA组,分别通过经椎间和经皮质技术接受腹腔神经丛阻滞。主要结果是通过WHOQOL BREF问卷评估的生活质量(QoL),次要结果是使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)缓解疼痛,以及低血压、松动、出血和椎间盘炎等并发症的发生。结果:两组患者术后生活质量和VAS评分均有明显改善。1周后,经椎间盘入路在改善VAS评分方面比经皮质入路(1比3)更有效,并且在2个月结束时,TD组的疼痛缓解效果更好(3比6)。与经皮质入路相比,经椎间盘入路在改善生活质量方面更有效(227.00±28.85 vs 191.17±35.78)。但与术前相比,两组术后生活质量均有改善(p<0.05)。TA组低血压、腹泻和主动脉出血率较高;然而,在任何一组中都没有发现严重的并发症。结论:在上消化道恶性肿瘤患者中,与经皮质NCPB技术相比,经椎间盘技术在充分缓解疼痛和改善生活质量方面更好,并且并发症发生率更低。
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
A comparative study of transdiscal versus transaortic celiac plexus neurolytic block for upper gastrointestinal cancer patients. A prospective, randomized control study
Aim: To compare transdiscal and transaortic techniques of neurolytic celiac plexus block for upper gastrointestinal cancer patients. Methods: In this prospective randomized study 60 patients with upper gastrointestinal malignancies were included and randomly divided into two groups, group TD and group TA, receiving neurolytic celiac plexus blocks via transdiscal and transaortic techniques, respectively. The primary outcome was quality of life (QoL) as assessed by WHOQOL BREF questionnaire and secondary outcomes were pain relief using visual analogue scale (VAS), and occurrence of complications like hypotension, loose motion, bleeding and discitis. Result: QoL and VAS score were significantly improved in both groups post procedure. Transdiscal approach is more effective in improving VAS score than transaortic approach (1 vs 3) after 1 week and the relief of pain was better in TD group (3 vs 6) at the end of 2 months. Transdiscal approach was found to be more effective in improving QoL (227.00±28.85 vs 191.17±35.78) as compared to transaortic approach. However, post-procedural QoL improved in both groups when compared to pre-procedural QoL (p<0.05). Hypotension, diarrhea and bleeding from aorta were higher in TA group; however, no serious complications were seen in any of the groups. Conclusion: Transdiscal technique is better in terms of adequate pain relief and improving QoL as compared to transaortic technique of NCPB in patients of upper GI malignancies and is associated with lesser incidences of complications.
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
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
期刊介绍: L’Acta Anaesthesiologica Belgica est le journal de la SBAR, publié 4 fois par an. L’Acta a été publié pour la première fois en 1950. Depuis 1973 l’Acta est publié dans la langue Anglaise, ce qui a été résulté à un rayonnement plus internationaux. Depuis lors l’Acta est devenu un journal à ne pas manquer dans le domaine d’Anesthésie Belge, offrant e.a. les textes du congrès annuel, les Research Meetings, … Vous en trouvez aussi les dates des Research Meetings, du congrès annuel et des autres réunions.
期刊最新文献
Long-term cognitive dysfunction after COVID ARDS Trends in female authorship in Acta Anaesthesiologica Belgica from 2005 to 2021 General anesthesia for maternal surgery during pregnancy: dogmas, myths and evidence, a narrative review Clinical relevance of nocebo effects in anesthesia practice: a narrative review Gender equality and equity in anaesthesia research: Why are we still talking about numbers?
×
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