超声引导下筋膜外阻滞与斜角肌间阻滞对肩关节镜患者围手术期呼吸和镇痛的影响

Radwa Emad Eissa, W. Messbah, Mohammad Ali Abdullah, A. M. El-Sheikh, Nadia Hassan Fatouh
{"title":"超声引导下筋膜外阻滞与斜角肌间阻滞对肩关节镜患者围手术期呼吸和镇痛的影响","authors":"Radwa Emad Eissa, W. Messbah, Mohammad Ali Abdullah, A. M. El-Sheikh, Nadia Hassan Fatouh","doi":"10.33545/26643766.2023.v6.i3a.406","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: It has been shown that placing local Anesthetics (LA) as far as 4 mm laterally from the sheath of the brachial plexus throughout US-guided ISBPB can result in beneficial analgesia for shoulder surgeries, demonstrating the significance of needle-nerve proximity in the context of ISBPB. The distance to the phrenic nerve is increased by this extrafascial injection, which may lessen the possibility that the local anesthetic spread would block it. The purpose of this work is to compare the effects of extrafascial and intrafascial (ISBPB) on the diaphragmatic excursion (phrenic nerve blockade). Methods: This work was performed on 50 adult individuals, their age ranges between 21-60 years of both sexes with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical state classification I-II who were planned for shoulder arthroscopic surgery under general anaesthesia. Patients were allocated into two groups at random (25 patients each) according to the US-guided method of interscalene block: Group I (Intrafascial injection group): 10 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine were given to the individuals for intrafascial (conventional) ISBPB. Group E (Extrafascial injection group): 10 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine were given to the individuals for extrafascial ISBPB. Results: In group I, at PACU, the diaphragmatic excursions were significantly lower when compared to pre-block values. In group E, At PACU, the diaphragmatic excursions were comparable to pre-block values ( P value = 0.062). After 30 minutes of block, the extrafascial block (group E) had a significantly ( P value = 0.005) lower effect on diaphragmatic excursion than intrafascial block (group I). The same effect was observed at PACU. Extrafascial block had a significantly ( P value <0.001) lower effect on a diaphragmatic excursion to intrafascial block. No difference between both groups was observed regarding the analgesic properties. Conclusions: Given the increased incidence of partial hemi-diaphragmatic paralysis (HDP) with an intrafascial approach, extrafascial method to interscalene brachial plexus block is likely a more appropriate choice.","PeriodicalId":14146,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Medical Anesthesiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perioperative respiratory and analgesic effects of ultrasound-guided extrafascial versus interfacial interscalene brachial plexus block in patients undergoing shoulder arthroscopy\",\"authors\":\"Radwa Emad Eissa, W. Messbah, Mohammad Ali Abdullah, A. M. El-Sheikh, Nadia Hassan Fatouh\",\"doi\":\"10.33545/26643766.2023.v6.i3a.406\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: It has been shown that placing local Anesthetics (LA) as far as 4 mm laterally from the sheath of the brachial plexus throughout US-guided ISBPB can result in beneficial analgesia for shoulder surgeries, demonstrating the significance of needle-nerve proximity in the context of ISBPB. The distance to the phrenic nerve is increased by this extrafascial injection, which may lessen the possibility that the local anesthetic spread would block it. The purpose of this work is to compare the effects of extrafascial and intrafascial (ISBPB) on the diaphragmatic excursion (phrenic nerve blockade). Methods: This work was performed on 50 adult individuals, their age ranges between 21-60 years of both sexes with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical state classification I-II who were planned for shoulder arthroscopic surgery under general anaesthesia. Patients were allocated into two groups at random (25 patients each) according to the US-guided method of interscalene block: Group I (Intrafascial injection group): 10 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine were given to the individuals for intrafascial (conventional) ISBPB. Group E (Extrafascial injection group): 10 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine were given to the individuals for extrafascial ISBPB. Results: In group I, at PACU, the diaphragmatic excursions were significantly lower when compared to pre-block values. In group E, At PACU, the diaphragmatic excursions were comparable to pre-block values ( P value = 0.062). After 30 minutes of block, the extrafascial block (group E) had a significantly ( P value = 0.005) lower effect on diaphragmatic excursion than intrafascial block (group I). The same effect was observed at PACU. Extrafascial block had a significantly ( P value <0.001) lower effect on a diaphragmatic excursion to intrafascial block. No difference between both groups was observed regarding the analgesic properties. Conclusions: Given the increased incidence of partial hemi-diaphragmatic paralysis (HDP) with an intrafascial approach, extrafascial method to interscalene brachial plexus block is likely a more appropriate choice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":14146,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Medical Anesthesiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Medical Anesthesiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33545/26643766.2023.v6.i3a.406\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Medical Anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33545/26643766.2023.v6.i3a.406","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:有研究表明,在美国引导的ISBPB中,将局麻药(LA)放置在离臂丛鞘外侧4mm的地方,可以在肩关节手术中产生有益的镇痛效果,这证明了针-神经邻近在ISBPB中的重要性。筋膜外注射增加了到膈神经的距离,这可以减少局部麻醉扩散阻塞膈神经的可能性。本研究的目的是比较筋膜外和筋膜内(ISBPB)对膈神经移位(膈神经阻滞)的影响。方法:50名年龄在21-60岁之间的男性和女性,美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)身体状态分类为I-II,计划在全身麻醉下进行肩关节镜手术。根据美国指导的斜角肌间阻滞法,将患者随机分为两组(每组25例):第一组(筋膜内注射组):给予0.5%布比卡因10 ml进行筋膜内(常规)ISBPB治疗。E组(筋膜外注射组):给予个体0.5%布比卡因10 ml进行筋膜外ISBPB。结果:在第一组,在PACU时,与阻滞前值相比,膈移位明显降低。在E组,在PACU时,膈肌偏移与阻滞前值相当(P值= 0.062)。阻滞30分钟后,筋膜外阻滞(E组)对膈移位的影响显著(P值= 0.005)低于筋膜内阻滞(I组)。PACU也有同样的效果。筋膜外阻滞对膈肌移位到筋膜内阻滞的影响显著(P值<0.001)较低。两组在镇痛特性方面无差异。结论:考虑到筋膜内入路增加了部分半膈肌麻痹(HDP)的发生率,筋膜外入路进行斜角肌间臂丛阻滞可能是一个更合适的选择。
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
Perioperative respiratory and analgesic effects of ultrasound-guided extrafascial versus interfacial interscalene brachial plexus block in patients undergoing shoulder arthroscopy
Background: It has been shown that placing local Anesthetics (LA) as far as 4 mm laterally from the sheath of the brachial plexus throughout US-guided ISBPB can result in beneficial analgesia for shoulder surgeries, demonstrating the significance of needle-nerve proximity in the context of ISBPB. The distance to the phrenic nerve is increased by this extrafascial injection, which may lessen the possibility that the local anesthetic spread would block it. The purpose of this work is to compare the effects of extrafascial and intrafascial (ISBPB) on the diaphragmatic excursion (phrenic nerve blockade). Methods: This work was performed on 50 adult individuals, their age ranges between 21-60 years of both sexes with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical state classification I-II who were planned for shoulder arthroscopic surgery under general anaesthesia. Patients were allocated into two groups at random (25 patients each) according to the US-guided method of interscalene block: Group I (Intrafascial injection group): 10 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine were given to the individuals for intrafascial (conventional) ISBPB. Group E (Extrafascial injection group): 10 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine were given to the individuals for extrafascial ISBPB. Results: In group I, at PACU, the diaphragmatic excursions were significantly lower when compared to pre-block values. In group E, At PACU, the diaphragmatic excursions were comparable to pre-block values ( P value = 0.062). After 30 minutes of block, the extrafascial block (group E) had a significantly ( P value = 0.005) lower effect on diaphragmatic excursion than intrafascial block (group I). The same effect was observed at PACU. Extrafascial block had a significantly ( P value <0.001) lower effect on a diaphragmatic excursion to intrafascial block. No difference between both groups was observed regarding the analgesic properties. Conclusions: Given the increased incidence of partial hemi-diaphragmatic paralysis (HDP) with an intrafascial approach, extrafascial method to interscalene brachial plexus block is likely a more appropriate choice.
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
Retrospective study: The impact of BUHE positioning and video laryngoscopy on intubation success rates in the emergency department Neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio versus lactate-albumin ratio as a predictor of morbidity and mortality in patients with sepsis and septic shock Prediction of spinal anesthesia-induced hypotension in cesarian section with focus on carotid doppler ultrasound and cardiometry to study the effectiveness of dexamethasone as an adjuvant with levobupivacaine 0.5% in USG guided interscalene brachial plexus block for shoulder surgeries The effect of ultrasound-guided bilateral single shot pecto-intercostal plane block on recovery after on-pump coronary bypass graft surgery, randomized controlled trial
×
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