...
首页> 外文期刊>European journal of anaesthesiology >The effect of transversus abdominis plane block or local anaesthetic infiltration in inguinal hernia repair: A randomised clinical trial
【24h】

The effect of transversus abdominis plane block or local anaesthetic infiltration in inguinal hernia repair: A randomised clinical trial

机译:腹横肌平面阻滞或局麻药在腹股沟疝修补术中的作用:一项随机临床试验

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

CONTEXT The analgesic effect of transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block after inguinal hernia repair is unclear. OBJECTIVE The aim of this randomised and double-blind study was to evaluate the analgesic effect of a TAP block in patients scheduled for primary inguinal hernia repair. The TAP block was evaluated versus placebo and versus an active comparator (ilioinguinal block and wound infiltration). DESIGN Randomised controlled trial. SETTING Single centre trial. Study period from June 2010 to November 2011. PATIENTS Adults (18 to 75 years) with American Society of Anesthesiologists' status 1-3 scheduled for primary inguinal hernia repair as day case surgery were included in the study. INTERVENTIONS Ninety patients were allocated to one of three groups: group TAP, group infiltration (ilioinguinal nerve block and wound infiltration) and group placebo. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary outcome measure was pain scores while coughing between group TAP and group placebo calculated as area under the curve for the first 24 h (AUC24 h). Secondary outcomes were pain scores while coughing and at rest, opioid consumption and side effects in groups TAP, infiltration and placebo. RESULTS Visual analogue pain scores while coughing and at rest demonstrated no difference between groups. Pain scores in groups infiltration, TAP and placebo were 19 versus 22 versus 15mm at rest (P=1.00) and 37 versus 41 versus 37mm while coughing (P=1.00). Pain scores at 6 h (AUC 6 h) were significantly lower in group infiltration than in group TAP (10 versus 25mm at rest, P0.001; 17 versus 40mm while coughing, P0.001), and than in group placebo (10 versus 20mm at rest, P=0.003; 17 versus 38mm while coughing, P0.001). Median morphine consumption was lower in group infiltration than in group placebo (0 versus 5 mg, P0.003). No differences among groups were demonstrated for ketobemidone consumption or side effects. CONCLUSION Ultrasound-guided TAP block did not reduce postoperative pain after inguinal hernia repair.
机译:腹股沟疝修补术后腹横肌平面(TAP)阻滞的镇痛作用尚不清楚。目的这项随机和双盲研究的目的是评估TAP阻断剂对计划进行腹股沟疝修补术的患者的镇痛效果。相对于安慰剂和活性比较剂评估了TAP阻滞剂(胰岛胶体阻滞剂和伤口浸润)。设计随机对照试验。设置单中心试用。研究期限为2010年6月至2011年11月。患者被安排为美国麻醉医师协会1-3年级的成年人(18至75岁),计划作为日间手术进行原位腹股沟疝修补术。干预措施将90例患者分为三组之一:TAP组,浸润(ili神经神经阻滞和伤口浸润)和安慰剂组。主要观察指标主要观察指标是TAP组和安慰剂组之间咳嗽时的疼痛评分,计算前24小时(AUC24 h)的曲线下面积。次要结果是在TAP,渗透和安慰剂组中咳嗽和休息时的疼痛评分,阿片类药物的消耗和副作用。结果咳嗽和休息时视觉模拟疼痛评分在两组之间无差异。入渗,TAP和安慰剂组在休息时的疼痛评分分别为19对比22对比15mm(P = 1.00),咳嗽时分别为37对比41对比37mm(P = 1.00)。渗透组在6 h(AUC 6 h)时的疼痛评分显着低于TAP组(静止时10 vs 25mm,P <0.001;咳嗽时17 mm vs 40mm,P <0.001),以及安慰剂组(10 vs. 10 mm)。静止时20mm,P = 0.003;咳嗽时17mm vs 38mm,P <0.001)。组浸润中的吗啡消耗量低于安慰剂组(0 vs 5 mg,P <0.003)。组间酮异米酮的摄入量或副作用没有差异。结论超声引导的TAP阻滞不能减轻腹股沟疝修补术后的疼痛。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号