超声引导腰骶丛神经阻滞和脊椎麻醉应用于老年膝关节置换术的效果比较

摘要
图/表
参考文献(23)
相关文章 (15)

全文: PDF (452 KB) HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要目的比较超声引导腰骶丛神经阻滞和脊椎麻醉应用于老年膝关节置换术的效果。方法选取2020 年9 月至2022 年3 月昭通市第一人民医院收治的76 例行全膝关节置换术患者作为研究对象，按照随机数字表法将其分为腰骶丛神经阻滞（LSPB）组（38 例）与脊椎麻醉（SA）组（38 例）。LSPB 组患者采用超声引导腰骶丛神经阻滞方法，SA 组患者采用脊椎麻醉方法。比较两组患者入手术室（T1）、麻醉后5 min（T2）、麻醉后15 min（T3）、切皮时（T4）、切皮后60 min（T5）的平均动脉压（MAP），比较两组患者的麻醉持续时间、手术时间、术中出血量和输液量，比较两组患者术后4、8、12、24 h 的疼痛视觉模拟评分法（VAS）评分，比较两组患者的术中舒芬太尼、麻黄碱、去甲肾上腺素的用量，比较两组患者术后72 h 的尿潴留、头痛和恶心呕吐发生率。结果 LSPB 组T2、T3、T4、T5 时点的MAP 均高于SA 组，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；LSPB 组术后4、8、12、24 h 的VAS 评分低于SA 组，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；两组患者的手术时间和术中出血量比较，差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）；LSPB 组的麻醉持续时间长于SA 组，输液量少于SA 组，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；LSPB 组术中使用麻黄碱、去甲肾上腺素和输液量低于SA 组，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；LSPB 组术后72 h 的头痛、恶心呕吐和尿潴留发生率均低于SA 组，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；两组患者的舒芬太尼用量比较，差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。结论超声引导腰骶丛神经阻滞应用于老年膝关节置换术麻醉效果好，较少影响患者术中的血压，且提供更好的术后镇痛，减少术后并发症。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章

关键词 ：超声引导, 腰骶丛阻滞, 脊椎麻醉, 老年人

Abstract：Objective To compare the effect of ultrasound-guided lumbosacral plexus block and spinal anesthesia in elderly patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty.Methods A total of 76 patients who underwent total knee arthroplasty in the First People's Hospital of Zhaotong from September 2020 to March 2022 were selected as the research objects.According to the random number table method,they were divided into lumbosacral plexus block(LSPB)group(38 cases)and spinal anesthesia(SA)group(38 cases).The LSPB group was treated with ultrasound-guided lumbosacral plexus block,and the SA group was treated with spinal anesthesia.The mean arterial pressure(MAP)at admission(T1),5 min after anesthesia(T2),15 min after anesthesia (T3),skin incision (T4) and 60 min after skin incision (T5) were compared between the two groups.The duration of anesthesia,operation time,intraoperative blood loss and infusion volume were compared between the two groups.The visual analogue scale (VAS)scores of pain at 4,8,12 and 24 h after operation were compared between the two groups.The intraoperative consumption of Sufentanil,Ephedrine and Norepinephrine were compared between the two groups.The incidences of urinary retention,headache,nausea and vomiting at 72 h after operation were compared between the two groups.Results The MAP of LSPB group at T2,T3,T4 and T5 were higher than those of SA group,and the differences were statistically significant (P＜0.05).The VAS scores at 4,8,12 and 24 h after operation in LSPB group were lower than those in SA group,and the differences were statistically significant (P＜0.05).There were no significant differences in operation time and intraoperative blood loss between the two groups(P＞0.05).The duration of anesthesia in the LSPB group was longer than that in the SA group,and the infusion volume was less than that in the SA group,and the differences were statistically significant (P＜0.05).The intraoperative use of Ephedrine,Norepinephrine and infusion volume in LSPB group were lower than those in SA group,and the differences were statistically significant (P＜0.05).The incidence of headache,nausea and vomiting and urinary retention in the LSPB group were lower than those in the SA group 72 h after operation,with statistically significant differences (P＜0.05).There was no significant difference in the dosage of Sufentanil between the two groups (P＞0.05).Conclusion Ultrasound-guided lumbosacral plexus block has a good anesthetic effect in elderly patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty,with less influence on intraoperative blood pressure,better postoperative analgesia and fewer postoperative complications.

Key words： Ultrasound-guided Lumbosacral plexus block Spinal anesthesia Elderly

引用本文:

王熙；陈俊；李华；常遇春；张力；周仕波. 超声引导腰骶丛神经阻滞和脊椎麻醉应用于老年膝关节置换术的效果比较[J]. 中国当代医药, 2023, 30(21): 88-92.
WANG Xi1 CHEN Jun1▲ LI Hua1 CHANG Yuchun1 ZHANG Li1 ZHOU Shibo2. Comparison of the effect of ultrasound-guided lumbosacral plexus block and spinal anesthesia in elderly patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty. 中国当代医药, 2023, 30(21): 88-92.

链接本文:

https://www.dangdaiyiyao.com/CN/ 或 https://www.dangdaiyiyao.com/CN/Y2023/V30/I21/88

[1]	王娟茹，张彩芳.ERAS 在高龄患者全膝关节置换术围手术期的应用效果[J].临床医学研究与实践，2019，4（9）：149-151.
[2]	Feng B，Zhu W，Bian YY，et al.China artificial joint annual data report[J].Chin Med J（Engl），2020，134（6）：752-753.
[3]	倪蓉，王力甚.超声引导下的神经阻滞临床应用研究进展[J].国际麻醉学与复苏杂志，2012，33（8）：558-561.
[4]	陆小龙，梅斌，陈士寿，等.超声引导下腰骶丛神经阻滞联合全麻在高龄患者髋关节置换术的临床应用[J].临床麻醉学杂志，2016，32（3）：237-240.
[5]	Nielsen MV，Bendtsen TF，J.Superiority of ultrasound-guided Shamrock lumbar plexus block[J].Minerva Anestesiol，2018，84（1）：115-121.
[6]	Langley GB，Sheppeard H.The visual analogue scale：its use in pain measurement[J].Rheumatol Int，1985，5（6）：145-148.
[7]	Kacmaz M，Turhan ZY.Spinal anesthesia versus combined sciatic nerve/lumbar plexus nerve block in elderly patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty：a retrospective study[J].Ann Saudi Med，2022，42（3）：174-180.
[8]	刘颖，涂芸芸，黄冰.超声引导下神经阻滞复合全身麻醉对全膝关节置换术患者镇痛效果及血流动力学的影响[J].中国当代医药，2022，29（18）：115-118，122.
[9]	原卓敏，贾心连，刘悦.超声引导下连续隐神经阻滞联合多模式镇痛在膝关节置换术中的应用效果[J].中国当代医药，2021，28（2）：116-119.
[10]	Zaballos M，Varela O，Fernández I，et al.Assessment of cardiotoxicity and plasma ropivacaine concentrations after serratus intercostal fascial plane block in an experimental model[J].Sci Rep，2023，13（1）：47.
[11]	肖韦韦，董红启，李利敏.超声引导下不同浓度罗哌卡因腰丛神经阻滞在老年患者髋关节置换术中的应用[J].组织工程与重建外科杂志，2021，17（3）：255-258，261.
[12]	师雄，段炜.不同浓度罗哌卡因应用于腰丛坐骨神经联合阻滞对膝关节置换术患者术后镇痛及肌力恢复的影响[J].解放军医药杂志，2020，32（7）：100-104.
[13]	Saranteas T，Anagnostopoulos D，Kostroglou A，et al.The"Shamrock method" for ultrasound-guided lumbar plexus nerve block in the supine position[J].J Clin Anesth，2021，71：110249.
[14]	Xue J，Fu X，Hu Z.Continuous Lumbar Plexus Block under the Guidance of the "Shamrock Method" Ultrasound：Analgesic Effects and Hemodynamic Effects after Total Knee Arthroplasty in Elderly Patients[J].Evid Based Complement Alternat Med，2021，2021：3531236.
[15]	陈堃，李继，柯希建，等.髂嵴消失定位法用于超声引导后路腰丛神经阻滞的效果：与人工触诊法和旁矢状位法比较[J].中华麻醉学杂志，2018，38（6）：699-702.
[16]	邹锋，肖静，陈军，等.骶丛解剖与超声引导阻滞技术进展[J].国际麻醉学与复苏杂志，2021，42（5）：515-518.
[17]	魏滨，徐懋，李民，等.脊椎-硬膜外联合麻醉与腰丛联合坐骨神经阻滞用于老年患者髋部骨折内固定术麻醉效果的比较[J].中华麻醉学杂志，2018，38（2）：181-184.
[18]	Zhang J，Wang X，Zhang H，et al.Comparison of combined lumbar and sacral plexus block with sedation versus general anaesthesia on postoperative outcomes in elderly patients undergoing hip fracture surgery（CLSB-HIPELD）：study protocol for a prospective，multicentre，randomised controlled trial[J].BMJ Open，2019，9（3）：e022898.
[19]	Zhao J，Huang Y，Fu M，et al.Ultrasound-guided suprainguinal fascia iliaca block combined with a sacral plexus block for lower extremity surgery：A case report[J].Medicine（Baltimore），2020，99（35）：e21921.
[20]	Tran J，Peng PWH，Chan VWS，et al.Overview of Innervation of Knee Joint[J].Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am，2021，32（4）：767-778.
[21]	张永华，黄雪莲.右美托咪定或地塞米松复合罗哌卡因用于全膝关节置换术超声引导下股神经阻滞临床观察[J].南通大学学报（医学版），2021，41（6）：589-590.
[22]	Chassery C，Marty P，Rontes O，et al.Total knee arthroplasty under quadruple nerve block with ropivacaine 0.32%：effect of addition of intravenous dexmedetomidine to intravenous dexamethasoneonanalgesicduration[J].Reg Anesth Pain Med，2021，46（2）：104-110.
[23]	Tang L，Fang P，Fang Y，et al.Comparison of Effects between Combined Lumbar-Sacral Plexus Block plus General Anesthesia and Unilateral Spinal Anesthesia in Elderly Patients Undergoing Hip Fracture Surgery：A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial[J].Evid Based Complement Alternat Med，2021，2021：6685497.