国际麻醉学与复苏杂志   2021, Issue (5): 0-0
    
腹股沟上髂筋膜间隙阻滞与腰丛阻滞对直接前入路全髋关节置换镇痛效果的影响比较
于双, 刘硕, 郑翔丽, 赵尧平, 杨占民1()
1.航天中心医院
Comparison of supra‑inguinal fascia iliaca compartment block and lumbar plexus block on analgesia in patients undergoing direct anterior total hip arthroplasty
 全文:
摘要:

目的 比较腹股沟上髂筋膜间隙阻滞(supra‑inguinal fascia iliaca compartment block, S‑FICB)和腰丛阻滞(lumbar plexus block, LPB)对直接前入路全髋关节置换术(total hip arthroplasty, THA)患者镇痛效果的影响。 方法 择期行直接前入路THA患者60例,采用随机数字表法分为腹股沟上髂筋膜间隙阻滞组(S组)和腰丛阻滞组(L组),每组30例。两组患者均在全身麻醉前实施神经阻滞,S组患者在超声引导下实施S‑FICB,L组患者在超声联合神经刺激仪下实施LPB。术毕两组患者均给予患者自控静脉镇痛(patient controlled intravenous analgesia, PCIA)。记录两种阻滞方法的超声成像时间、穿刺时间以及阻滞30 min后患者大腿前侧、外侧和内侧皮肤感觉阻滞情况;记录患者术后2、8、12、24、48 h静息VAS疼痛评分,术中瑞芬太尼用量,术后舒芬太尼用量,PCIA按压次数和补救镇痛率。 结果 S组超声成像时间、穿刺时间短于L组(P<0.05),L组患者大腿内侧皮肤感觉消失的患者例数多于S组(P<0.05),L组术中瑞芬太尼用量少于S组(P<0.05)。两组患者阻滞30 min后大腿前侧、外侧、内侧感觉阻滞率,术后各时间点VAS疼痛评分,术后舒芬太尼用量,PCIA按压次数和补救镇痛率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。 结论 S‑FICB对于直接前入路THA患者是一种安全、有效的术后镇痛方法,术后镇痛效果与LPB相似。

关键词: 腹股沟上髂筋膜间隙阻滞;腰丛阻滞;直接前入路全髋关节置换术;镇痛;超声引导
Abstract:

Objective To compare the effects of supra‑inguinal fascia iliaca compartment block (S‑FICB) and lumbar plexus block (LPB) on analgesia in patients undergoing direct anterior total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods SA total of 60 patients who were scheduled for direct anterior THA were enrolled. According to the random number table method, they were divided into two groups (n=30): a S‑FICB group (group S) and a LPB group (group L). Both groups underwent nerve blockage before general anesthesia, where patients in group S underwent ultrasound‑guided S‑FICB and those in group L received LPB through ultrasound and a nerve stimulator. After surgery, all the patients received patient‑controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA). The ultrasound imaging time and puncture time were recorded. The sensory blockade rate in the anterior, lateral and medial parts of the thigh was evaluated within 30 min after ropivacaine administration. The Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores at resting 2, 8, 12, 24 h and 48 h after surgery, the dose of remifentanil during surgery, the dose of sufentanil after surgery, the time of PCIA pressing, and the rate of rescue analgesia were recorded. Results Group S presented shorter ultrasound imaging time and puncture time than group L (P<0.05). There were more patients in group L without the sense in the medial part of the thigh than those in group S (P<0.05). The dose of remifentanil used by group L was less than that by group S (P<0.05). There were no statistical differences between the two groups in sensory blockade rate in the anterior, lateral and medial parts of the thigh within 30 min after blockade, VAS scores at each time points after surgery, the dose of sufentanil, the times of PCIA pressing, and the rate of rescue analgesia (P>0.05). Conclusions S‑FICB is safe and effective method for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing direct anterior THA, with similar postoperative analgesia with LPB.

Key words: Supra‑inguinal fascia iliaca compartment block; Lumbar plexus block; Direct anterior total hip arthroplasty; Analgesia; Ultrasound‑guided