全麻与坐骨-股-闭孔阻滞对老年单侧全膝关节置换术患者镇痛及术后认知功能障碍发生率的比较研究

Ayman El Sayed, M. Soltan, M. Nabil
{"title":"全麻与坐骨-股-闭孔阻滞对老年单侧全膝关节置换术患者镇痛及术后认知功能障碍发生率的比较研究","authors":"Ayman El Sayed, M. Soltan, M. Nabil","doi":"10.4103/1687-7934.189566","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives The aim of this study was to compare the effect of sevoflurane general anesthesia (GA) and sciatic–femoral–obturator blockade as regards analgesia and incidence of postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) in elderly patients undergoing unilateral total knee replacement. Patients and methods The patients were divided in a randomized manner into two groups: the GA group (n=40) received maintenance of anesthesia with inhalational sevoflurane, and the peripheral nerve block (PNB) group (n=40) underwent sciatic nerve block (40 ml), femoral nerve block (20 ml), and obturator nerve block (10 ml) with 0.25% bupivacaine. The following time points were considered: baseline, immediately before induction of anesthesia (T-baseline), immediately after induction of anesthesia (T-induction), at the end of the operation (T-end) and then at 6, 12, 18, and 24 h postoperatively and were represented as T6, T12, T18, and T24, respectively. Results A total of 15 of 40 patients from the GA group developed POCD, whereas six of 38 patients in the PNB group developed POCD at T24. This difference was significant. Moreover, there was a significant decrease in Mini-Mental State Examination score in the GA group after 24 h in comparison with the preoperative value. There was a significantly higher value of Aβ (β-amyloid protein) in the GA group compared with the PNB group 24 h postoperatively. Visual analogue score was significantly lower at T-end, T6, T12, T18, and T24 in the PNB group compared with the GA group. Hemodynamics was significantly lower in the PNB group than in the GA group at T-end, T6, T12, T18, and T24. They were significantly higher in the PNB group than in the GA group at T-induction. Total opioid consumption within 24 h postoperatively and the incidence of nausea were lower in the PNB group compared with the GA group. Induction time was significantly longer in the PNB group than in the GA group. Conclusion The current study demonstrated that PNB with sciatic–femoral–obturator for total knee replacement was accompanied by less POCD, less pain, less nausea, and less opioid consumption within 24 h postoperatively compared with GA with sevoflurane.","PeriodicalId":7492,"journal":{"name":"Ain-Shams Journal of Anaesthesiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative study between general anesthesia and sciatic–femoral–obturator blockade as regards analgesia and incidence of postoperative cognitive dysfunction in elderly patients undergoing unilateral total knee replacement\",\"authors\":\"Ayman El Sayed, M. Soltan, M. Nabil\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/1687-7934.189566\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objectives The aim of this study was to compare the effect of sevoflurane general anesthesia (GA) and sciatic–femoral–obturator blockade as regards analgesia and incidence of postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) in elderly patients undergoing unilateral total knee replacement. Patients and methods The patients were divided in a randomized manner into two groups: the GA group (n=40) received maintenance of anesthesia with inhalational sevoflurane, and the peripheral nerve block (PNB) group (n=40) underwent sciatic nerve block (40 ml), femoral nerve block (20 ml), and obturator nerve block (10 ml) with 0.25% bupivacaine. The following time points were considered: baseline, immediately before induction of anesthesia (T-baseline), immediately after induction of anesthesia (T-induction), at the end of the operation (T-end) and then at 6, 12, 18, and 24 h postoperatively and were represented as T6, T12, T18, and T24, respectively. Results A total of 15 of 40 patients from the GA group developed POCD, whereas six of 38 patients in the PNB group developed POCD at T24. This difference was significant. Moreover, there was a significant decrease in Mini-Mental State Examination score in the GA group after 24 h in comparison with the preoperative value. There was a significantly higher value of Aβ (β-amyloid protein) in the GA group compared with the PNB group 24 h postoperatively. Visual analogue score was significantly lower at T-end, T6, T12, T18, and T24 in the PNB group compared with the GA group. Hemodynamics was significantly lower in the PNB group than in the GA group at T-end, T6, T12, T18, and T24. They were significantly higher in the PNB group than in the GA group at T-induction. Total opioid consumption within 24 h postoperatively and the incidence of nausea were lower in the PNB group compared with the GA group. Induction time was significantly longer in the PNB group than in the GA group. Conclusion The current study demonstrated that PNB with sciatic–femoral–obturator for total knee replacement was accompanied by less POCD, less pain, less nausea, and less opioid consumption within 24 h postoperatively compared with GA with sevoflurane.\",\"PeriodicalId\":7492,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ain-Shams Journal of Anaesthesiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ain-Shams Journal of Anaesthesiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/1687-7934.189566\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ain-Shams Journal of Anaesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/1687-7934.189566","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

目的:比较七氟醚全麻(GA)和坐骨-股-闭孔阻滞对老年单侧全膝关节置换术患者镇痛和术后认知功能障碍(POCD)发生率的影响。患者和方法将患者随机分为两组:GA组(n=40)采用吸入性七氟醚维持麻醉,周围神经阻滞(PNB)组(n=40)采用0.25%布比卡因坐骨神经阻滞(40 ml)、股神经阻滞(20 ml)和闭孔神经阻滞(10 ml)。考虑以下时间点:基线、麻醉诱导前(T-baseline)、麻醉诱导后(T-induction)、手术结束(T-end)和术后6、12、18、24 h,分别用T6、T12、T18、T24表示。结果GA组40例患者中有15例发生POCD,而PNB组38例患者中有6例在T24发生POCD。这种差异是显著的。此外,GA组24 h后精神状态检查评分较术前有显著下降。术后24 h GA组β-淀粉样蛋白含量明显高于PNB组。PNB组t端、T6、T12、T18、T24的视觉模拟评分明显低于GA组。PNB组在t端、T6、T12、T18、T24的血流动力学明显低于GA组。t诱导时,PNB组明显高于GA组。与GA组相比,PNB组术后24 h内阿片类药物总消耗量和恶心发生率均较低。PNB组诱导时间明显长于GA组。结论目前的研究表明,与加七氟醚的全膝关节置换术相比,经坐骨-股-闭孔的PNB术后24 h内POCD、疼痛、恶心和阿片类药物消耗更少。
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
Comparative study between general anesthesia and sciatic–femoral–obturator blockade as regards analgesia and incidence of postoperative cognitive dysfunction in elderly patients undergoing unilateral total knee replacement
Objectives The aim of this study was to compare the effect of sevoflurane general anesthesia (GA) and sciatic–femoral–obturator blockade as regards analgesia and incidence of postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) in elderly patients undergoing unilateral total knee replacement. Patients and methods The patients were divided in a randomized manner into two groups: the GA group (n=40) received maintenance of anesthesia with inhalational sevoflurane, and the peripheral nerve block (PNB) group (n=40) underwent sciatic nerve block (40 ml), femoral nerve block (20 ml), and obturator nerve block (10 ml) with 0.25% bupivacaine. The following time points were considered: baseline, immediately before induction of anesthesia (T-baseline), immediately after induction of anesthesia (T-induction), at the end of the operation (T-end) and then at 6, 12, 18, and 24 h postoperatively and were represented as T6, T12, T18, and T24, respectively. Results A total of 15 of 40 patients from the GA group developed POCD, whereas six of 38 patients in the PNB group developed POCD at T24. This difference was significant. Moreover, there was a significant decrease in Mini-Mental State Examination score in the GA group after 24 h in comparison with the preoperative value. There was a significantly higher value of Aβ (β-amyloid protein) in the GA group compared with the PNB group 24 h postoperatively. Visual analogue score was significantly lower at T-end, T6, T12, T18, and T24 in the PNB group compared with the GA group. Hemodynamics was significantly lower in the PNB group than in the GA group at T-end, T6, T12, T18, and T24. They were significantly higher in the PNB group than in the GA group at T-induction. Total opioid consumption within 24 h postoperatively and the incidence of nausea were lower in the PNB group compared with the GA group. Induction time was significantly longer in the PNB group than in the GA group. Conclusion The current study demonstrated that PNB with sciatic–femoral–obturator for total knee replacement was accompanied by less POCD, less pain, less nausea, and less opioid consumption within 24 h postoperatively compared with GA with sevoflurane.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Management of early postoperative hypoxemia: a comparative performance of Hudson face mask with nasal prongs Aprepitant for attenuation of postoperative nausea and vomiting with a decrease in postoperative analgesic needs after laparoscopic surgery Awake orotracheal intubation using fiberoptic bronchoscope versus Airtraq laryngoscope in morbidly obese patients Tramadol versus hyoscine-N-butylbromide as intrapartum analgesics during the first stage of labor Effect of dexmedetomidine infusion on desflurane requirement and perioperative hemodynamic changes during laparoscopic gastric sleeve operations: a study based on entropy
×
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