超声引导下髂筋膜腔隙阻滞对全髋关节置换术患者术后镇痛的效果

目的 评价超声引导下髂筋膜腔隙阻滞对全髋关节置换术患者术后镇痛的效果.方法 择期行全髋关节置换术患者36例,年龄54～82岁,体重48～72 kg,ASA分级Ⅰ～Ⅲ级,采用随机数字表法,将其随机分为2组(n=18):生理盐水组(NS组)和罗哌卡因组(R组).手术结束后30 min内行患侧超声引导下髂筋膜腔隙阻滞.R组髂筋膜腔隙注射0.25％罗哌卡因30 ml;NS组注射等容量生理盐水.阻滞完成后,采用0.01 mg/ml芬太尼行PCIA,无背景输注,PCA量2ml,锁定时间15 min.于阻滞前即刻(T0)、阻滞后3 h(T1)、6 h(T2)、8 h(T3)、12 h(T4)、24 h(T5)、48 h(T6)和72 h(T7)时,记录静态VAS评分;于T4、T5、T6和T7时,记录被动运动VAS评分;于T5、T6和T7时,记录主动运动VAS评分.记录阻滞后0～12h、12～24 h、24～48 h、48～ 72 h各时段内芬太尼用量.记录术后不良反应的发生情况.结果 与NS组比较,R组T1～T7时静态VAS评分、T4～T7时被动运动VAS评分和T5～T7时主动运动VAS评分均降低,各时段芬太尼用量减少(P＜0.05).两组不良反应发生率差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 全髋关节置换术患者超声引导下髂筋膜腔隙阻滞的镇痛效果好,安全性良好.     

超声引导下腰方肌阻滞与髂筋膜间隙阻滞在老年髋关节术后镇痛的比较

目的比较腰方肌阻滞(quadratus lumborum block,QLB)和髂筋膜间隙阻滞(fasciailiaca compartment block,FICB)在老年髋关节置换术的镇痛效果。方法选择择期拟行腰麻下全髋关节置换术的老年患者55例,男22例,女33例,年龄65～85岁,ASAⅠ或Ⅱ级,随机分为QLB组(n=28)和FICB组(n=27)。术后分别于超声引导下行QLB和FICB,予0.375%罗哌卡因30ml。所有患者术后行舒芬太尼静脉自控镇痛。记录术后6、12、24、48h镇痛泵按压次数及舒芬太尼用量;记录静息及运动时VAS疼痛评分;记录术后恶心呕吐、眩晕等不良反应情况。结果术后12、24、48h QLB组镇痛泵按压次数及舒芬太尼用量明显少于FICB组(P0.05);术后12、24、48hQLB组运动时VAS评分明显低于FICB组(P0.05),两组不同时点静息时VAS评分差异无统计学意义;QLB组恶心呕吐发生率明显低于FICB组[2(7.1%)vs 9(33.3%),P0.05]。结论腰方肌阻滞较髂筋膜间隙阻滞更能明显减轻髋关节置换术后活动痛,减少阿片类药物的使用及不良反应发生率。     

超声引导下髂腰肌平面阻滞与髂筋膜间隙阻滞在髋关节置换围术期镇痛效果的比较

目的 比较超声引导下髂腰肌平面阻滞与髂筋膜间隙阻滞在髋关节置换围术期镇痛效果。方法 选择择期行单侧髋关节置换术患者50例,男28例,女22例,年龄18～95岁,BMI 17～35 kg/m²,ASAⅠ—Ⅲ级。采用随机数字表法将患者分为两组：髂腰肌平面阻滞组(Ⅰ组)和髂筋膜间隙阻滞组(S组),每组25例。Ⅰ组在髂股韧带和髂腰肌之间注射0.3%罗哌卡因10 ml, S组在腹股沟韧带上髂筋膜间隙注射0.3%罗哌卡因40 ml。术后采用舒芬太尼行患者自控静脉镇痛,VAS疼痛评分≥4分时,静脉注射氟比洛芬酯50 mg补救镇痛。记录神经阻滞操作时间、起效时间。记录术中丙泊酚、瑞芬太尼用量和舒芬太尼追加次数、术后2、6、8、12和24 h静息和活动(抬髋15°)时VAS疼痛评分、术后24 h镇痛泵有效按压次数和总按压次数、术后24 h舒芬太尼用量和补救镇痛情况。记录术后恶心呕吐、谵妄、感染、局麻药中毒和股四头肌无力发生情况。结果 与S组比较,Ⅰ组神经阻滞操作时间和起效时间明显缩短,术中舒芬太尼追加率、术后8 h活动时VAS疼痛评分、术后股四头肌无力发生率明显降低(P<0....     

腰方肌联合髂筋膜阻滞对老年髋关节置换术后镇痛作用的分析

目的研究分析不同阻滞方法在髋关节置换术后的应用价值。方法选取2018年1月至2020年1月本院收治的160例髋关节骨折患者,根据数字表法将患者分为两组。其中L组80例,行腰方肌、髂筋膜联合阻滞,D组80例,行单纯髂筋膜阻滞。结果 L组患者在手术治疗后不同时间、不同状态下的VAS评分均明显小于D组患者(P0.05);L组患者在术后0～12小时、12～24小时、24～48小时按压PICA的次数均少于D组。L组患者在T4、T5时的髋关节屈曲度、外展度均大于D组(P0.05);L组患者在T4、T5时的CRP、IL-6指标水平均明显小于D组患者(P0.05)。结论在老年患者行髋关节置换术中,应用腰方肌、髂筋膜联合阻滞可以从不同位点对神经传导通路起到干扰作用,术后镇痛效果更佳。     

氟比洛芬酯联合髂筋膜间隙阻滞对全髋关节置换术后炎症反应及疼痛的影响

目的探讨氟比洛芬酯联合髂筋膜间隙阻滞对全髋关节置换术后炎症反应及疼痛的影响。方法选取2016年3月至2018年9月在郑州市第三人民医院骨科择期行全髋关节置换术患者168例,随机分为氟比洛芬酯组(56例)、阻滞组(56例)和联合组(56例)。氟比洛芬酯组患者于麻醉诱导前5 min静脉注射氟比洛芬酯,术毕行经静脉患者自控镇痛(PCIA)(氟比洛芬酯、舒芬太尼、昂丹司琼和生理盐水混合液),持续用药48 h。阻滞组术前行髂筋膜间隙阻滞,术后留置导管与自控镇痛泵连接(舒芬太尼、昂丹司琼及生理盐水混合液),持续用药48 h。联合组患者接受髂筋膜间隙阻滞方法同阻滞组,术毕行PCIA,方法同氟比洛芬酯组。评价指标包括:术后6 h(T 1)、12 h(T 2)、24 h(T 3)、48 h(T 4)和72 h(T 5)时患者静息状态的疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)及T 3、T 4和T 5时活动状态的VAS评分。T 4和T 5时患者肌力评级及睡眠质量评分。术前(T 0)、T 3、T 4和T 5时患者血浆白细胞介素(IL)-1β、IL-6和肿瘤坏死因子(TNF)-α水平。各组患者不良事件发生情况。结果联合组患者T 2、T 3、T 4和T 5时静息状态VAS评分及T 4和T 5时活动状态VAS评分均低于阻滞组和氟比洛芬酯组,且阻滞组低于氟比洛芬酯组(P均<0.05)。联合组患者T 3、T 4和T 5时血浆IL-1β、IL-6和TNF-α水平均低于阻滞组和氟比洛芬酯组,且阻滞组低于氟比洛芬酯组(P均<0.05)。联合组和阻滞组患者恶心呕吐、嗜睡和排尿困难发生率均低于氟比洛芬酯组(P均<0.05)。结论氟比洛芬酯联合髂筋膜间隙阻滞应用于全髋关节置换术后镇痛,可降低患者术后VAS评分,改善患者睡眠质量,减轻炎症反应,并减少患者术后不良反应发生。     

超声引导下不同入路持续髂筋膜间隙阻滞在全髋关节置换术中的应用

目的探讨超声引导下髂筋膜间隙阻滞在全髋关节置换术中应用的效果,同时比较内侧入路和传统外侧入路平面内穿刺置管法的不同。方法选择2017年3月至9月择期行单侧全髋关节置换术患者90例,男47例,女43例,年龄35～92岁,ASAⅠ—Ⅲ级。使用计算机随机分为三组:内侧入路组(N组)、外侧入路组(W组)和对照组(C组),每组30例。N组气管插管全麻后,在超声引导下行内侧入路平面内穿刺置管持续髂筋膜阻滞;W组气管插管全麻后,在超声引导下行传统外侧入路平面内穿刺置管持续髂筋膜阻滞;C组常规采用气管插管全麻。记录三组术中舒芬太尼用量,术后拔管时间,PACU停留时间,第1次下床活动时间,48 h内患者自控镇痛(PCA)的按压次数,使用附加镇痛药物情况和48 h镇痛满意度评分。记录三组患者术后24、48 h的静息和活动时VAS评分。记录N组和W组导管重新固定情况、超声准备和成像时间、穿刺注药时间、置管时间、置管深度和术后48 h罗哌卡因用量。记录N组和W组术后24、48 h股神经和股外侧皮神经阻滞满意率,记录三组患者术后恶心呕吐发生情况。结果 N组和W组术中舒芬太尼用量和使用附加镇痛药物率明显低于C组(P0.05),术后拔管时间、PACU停留时间和第1次下床活动时间明显短于C组(P0.05),48 h PCA按压次数明显少于C组(P0.05),48 h镇痛满意度评分明显高于C组(P0.05)。N组48 h PCA按压次数明显低于W组(P0.05)。术后24、48 h N组和W组静息和活动时VAS评分明显低于C组(P0.05)。N组导管重新固定率和术后48 h罗哌卡因总用量明显低于W组(P0.05)、置管时间明显短于、置管深度明显深于W组(P0.05);术后24、48 h股外侧皮神经阻滞满意率明显高于W组(P0.05);两组超声准备和成像时间,穿刺注药时间差异无统计学意义。N组和W组恶心呕吐发生率明显低于C组(P0.05)。结论内外侧入路持续髂筋膜间隙阻滞均能为全髋关节置换术患者提供良好的术后镇痛,减少镇痛药物的使用,促进患者术后恢复。内侧入路法能提高术后股外侧皮神经阻滞满意率,减少罗哌卡因用量,并且置管操作更具优势。     

超声引导下髂筋膜间隙阻滞在行髋关节置换术老年患者中的临床应用效果研究

目的评估超声引导下髂筋膜间隙阻滞在髋关节置换术老年患者中的临床应用效果。方法择期行单侧髋关节置换术的高龄患者80例,年龄65~79岁,ASA分级Ⅰ~Ⅱ级。患者采用计算机随机软件随机分为髂筋膜间隙阻滞组(F组)和空白对照组(C组),每组各40例。记录两组患者麻醉前(T_0)、麻醉后30分钟(T_1)、麻醉后60分钟(T_2)及拔管即刻(T_3)的平均动脉压(MAP)和心率(HR)。评估患者术后6、12、24、48小时静止和活动状态下视觉模拟评分(VAS)。记录术后48小时内PCIA泵有效按压次数、总按压次数及术后恶心呕吐(PONV)、嗜睡、皮肤瘙痒等并发症发生情况。结果 F组患者T_1~T_3时点MAP和HR均显著低于C组患者,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。F组患者术后6、12、24小时VAS评分显著低于C组患者,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。F组患者PCIA有效按压次数和总按压次数均显著少于C组患者,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。F组患者术后嗜睡、PONV、皮肤瘙痒发生率均显著低于C组患者,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论髂筋膜间隙阻滞能够在行髋关节置换术的老年患者中发挥良好的术后镇痛效果,同时还能维持术中血流动力学稳定,降低术后阿片类药物用量。     

超声引导腰方肌阻滞对全髋关节置换术后老年患者炎症应激和认知功能的影响

目的观察超声引导腰方肌阻滞镇痛在全髋关节置换术后的应用效果,探讨其对老年患者术后炎症应激和认知功能的影响。方法纳入自2018-01—2019-12完成的115例全髋关节置换术,观察组57例采用超声引导腰方肌阻滞进行镇痛,在超声引导下采用平面内技术将穿刺针由腰方肌入路置于腰方肌和腰大肌间的筋膜内,按1.25 mg/kg注入0.25%罗哌卡因,对照组58例仅注射生理盐水。结果 115例顺利完成手术并获得至少6个月随访。观察组术后48 h内镇痛泵按压次数、舒芬太尼用量少于对照组,术后6、12、24、48、72 h静息时与咳嗽时疼痛VAS评分均低于对照组,观察组术后24、72 h血清Cor、E、NE、CRP、IL-6、TNF-α水平低于对照组,观察组术后24、72 h的MMSE评分高于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论超声引导腰方肌阻滞应用于老年全髋关节置换术后镇痛的效果良好,可减轻患者应激和炎症反应,改善术后认知功能,值得在临床推广应用。     

超声引导下罗哌卡因复合地塞米松腰方肌阻滞对全髋关节置换术患者术后镇痛的影响

目的 研究超声引导下腰方肌阻滞中罗哌卡因复合地塞米松对全髋关节置换术后镇痛的疗效。
方法 选择2019年12月至2020年12月行全髋关节置换术的患者90例,男40例,女50例,年龄65～78岁,ASA Ⅰ或Ⅱ级。采用随机分组的方法分成罗哌卡因复合地塞米松组（D组）,罗哌卡因组（Y组）和单纯静脉自控镇痛（PCIA）组（R组）,每组30例。D组术后以罗哌卡因100 mg复合地塞米松0.1 mg/kg为药液行腰方肌阻滞同时联合PCIA作为术后镇痛,Y组术后以单纯罗哌卡因100 mg为药液行腰方肌阻滞并联合PCIA为术后镇痛,R组则采用单纯PCIA作为对照。记录三组术后4、6、12、24和48 h静息和活动时VAS疼痛评分以及术后48 h内镇痛泵按压次数及曲马多补救例数。同时记录术后48 h内恶心呕吐、呼吸抑制和术后谵妄等不良反应发生情况,记录患者对术后镇痛的满意度。
结果 术后4、6、12、24和48 h D组和Y组静息和活动时VAS疼痛评分明显低于R组（P<0.05）,术后12、24 h D组的静息和活动时VAS疼痛评分明显低于Y组（P<0.05）。术后48 h D组和Y组内镇痛泵按压次数和曲马多补救例数明显少于R组（P<0.05）,且D组明显少于Y组（P<0.05）。术后48 h内D组和Y组恶心呕吐发生率明显低于R组（P<0.05）,且D组明显低于Y组（P<0.05）。三组均未发生呼吸抑制和术后谵妄。D组术后镇痛的满意度评分明显高于Y组和R组（P<0.05）。
结论 超声引导下罗哌卡因复合地塞米松腰方肌阻滞对全髋关节置换术患者术后镇痛的效果好,不良反应少,提高患者对术后镇痛的满意度。     

超声引导下连续改良腹股沟韧带上髂筋膜阻滞对全髋关节置换术后镇痛效果的影响

目的观察超声引导下连续改良腹股沟韧带上髂筋膜阻滞在全髋关节置换术后的镇痛效果。方法择期全麻下行单侧全髋关节置换术患者60例,男33例,女27例,年龄60～86岁,体重44～82 kg,ASAⅠ或Ⅱ级,采用随机数字表法将患者随机分为两组:超声引导下连续改良腹股沟韧带上髂筋膜阻滞组(E组)和静脉自控镇痛组(C组)。E组在全麻诱导前行改良腹股沟韧带上髂筋膜阻滞后留置导管,术后导管接电子泵行连续阻滞镇痛;C组术后使用PCIA。记录术后2、4、6、12、24、36、48 h静息和活动时VAS疼痛评分、曲马多补救镇痛情况、首次下床活动时间、术后镇痛满意度评分和不良反应的发生情况。结果术后1～48 h E组活动时VAS疼痛评分明显低于C组(P0.05),术后1～36 h E组静息时VAS疼痛评分明显低于C组(P0.05)。E组使用曲马多补救镇痛例数明显少于C组[4例(13%) vs 14例(47%),P0.05],首次下床活动时间明显短于C组[(24.2±1.8) h vs (39.7±1.7) h,P0.05],术后镇痛满意度评分明显高于C组[(9.0±0.6)分vs (6.1±0.8)分,P0.05],恶心呕吐发生率明显低于C组[3例(10%) vs 11例(37%),P0.05]。结论超声引导下连续改良腹股沟韧带上髂筋膜阻滞能提供良好的镇痛,促进患者早期功能锻炼和康复,可作为一种新型的镇痛方式应用于全髋关节置换术后患者的镇痛。     

硬膜外分娩镇痛的研究进展

硬膜外分娩镇痛对分娩的影响一直存在争议.新近资料不仅提供了硬膜外分娩镇痛对产程、剖宫产率、阴道器械助产率、及新生儿影响的进展,而且它与持续性枕后位和产妇发烧的关系也受到关注.改进硬膜外分娩镇痛技术的关键是减小对分娩不利影响并保证产妇满意镇痛的重要手段.研究表明采用低浓度局麻药复合阿片类药硬膜外镇痛,设置大容量PCEA和长锁定时间的输注模式对分娩的影响最小.     

腹部手术后镇痛药需求量的影响因素

目的：分析腹部手术后患者自控静脉镇痛用药量的影响因素。方法选取2012年4月至2013年8月全麻下行腹部手术,术后接受48 h自控静脉镇痛的患者。记录患者性别、年龄、身高、体重、体重指数、手术方式、手术部位。术后静脉镇痛期间,记录用药剂量、静止和运动疼痛评分、镇静评分、心率、血压、脉搏氧饱和度以及不良反应。采用多元线性回归分析多个变量与用药量的关系。结果共有2829例（男性1611例,女性1218例）患者纳入分析。性别、年龄、体重和手术部位显著影响术后镇痛用药量。其中,体重影响最大且与术后镇痛用药量正相关,年龄与术后镇痛用药量负相关,女性用药量少于男性。身高、体重指数和手术方式不是术后镇痛用药量的决定因素。结论腹部手术患者实施术后自控静脉镇痛时要考虑体重、年龄、性别以及手术部位的影响,为患者制定专科化和个体化的镇痛方案。     

开胸手术后伤口持续输注局麻药和PCIA的镇痛效果

目的比较开胸手术后伤口持续输注局麻药和PCIA的镇痛效果。方法择期开胸非心脏手术患者60例,ASAⅠ或Ⅱ级,随机均分为两组:伤口持续输注局麻药镇痛组(A组)和PCIA组(B组)。A组患者缝皮前在切口皮下处放置镇痛泵导管,继之通过导管快速给予0.5%罗哌卡因5ml,术毕48h内以2ml/h持续输注0.5%罗哌卡因。B组患者手术结束前30min缓慢静注舒芬太尼3μg,术毕接PCA泵以2ml/h(3μg/kg舒芬太尼配置成100ml)持续泵注。分别记录患者术后2、8、12、24、36、48h安静和活动时VAS评分、Ramsay镇静评分、术后需哌替啶镇痛例数、不良反应、住院时间及总体满意率等。结果两组患者术后不同时点安静时和活动时VAS评分差异无统计学意义。与A组比较,术后不同时点A组Ramsay镇静评分明显升高(P0.05)。术后A组无一例患者发生不良反应,明显低于B组嗜睡26例(87%)、头晕11例(37%)(P0.05)、呼吸抑制2例(6%)。A组满意率29例(97%),B组25例(83%),患者术后需哌替啶镇痛A组8例(26.7%),B组7例(23.3%),两组差异均无统计学意义。结论伤口持续输注局麻药镇痛和PCIA具有同样的镇痛效果,但伤口持续输注局麻药镇痛不良反应发生率低。     

Analgesia combinada epidural-intradural para el trabajo de parto: una revisión bibliográfica sistemática cuantitativa (metaanálisis)

ObjectiveTo perform a meta-analysis on the use of combined epidural-intrathecal analgesia during labor, including intrathecal fentanyl and/or morphine compared to usual epidural techniques.Material and methodA literature search was made looking for randomized clinical trials in MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library. The size of the effect for quantitative variables was analyzed by weighted mean difference; for qualitative variables, by odds ratio. Variables analyzed were: labor duration, type of delivery (spontaneous, instrumental and caesarean section), motor blockade, pain, and satisfaction. The analysis used in most cases was a random effects model.ResultsA total of 21 trials, which included 3.646 patients, were selected out of the 38 initially found. The type of delivery variable with its 3 subgroups was the only one to show uniformity (p > Q 0.1; I² < 50%). There were no differences in the variables analyzed except pain, which was advantageous for the group with intrathecal fentanyl or morphine by 0.55 points out of 10.ConclusionCombined analgesia including intrathecal fentanyl-morphine does not offer significant advantages compared to the standard epidural.     

Postoperative analgesia after major abdominal surgery: Fentanyl–bupivacaine patient controlled epidural analgesia versus fentanyl patient controlled intravenous analgesia

BackgroundMajor abdominal surgeries induce neurohumoral changes responsible for postoperative pain, various organ dysfunctions and prolonged hospitalization. Inadequate pain control is harmful and costly to patients thus an appropriate pain therapy to those patients must be applicated.MethodsOne hundred patients (ASA I or II) of either sex aged from 20 to 60 years were scheduled for elective major abdominal surgery. Patients were allocated randomly into two groups (fifty patients each) to receive: patient-controlled epidural analgesia with bupivacaine 0.125% and fentanyl (PCEA group), or patient controlled intravenous analgesia with fentanyl (PCIA group). Postoperative pain was assessed over 24 h using Numerical Pain Rating scale (NPRS). The frequency of rescue analgesia, sedation score and overall patient satisfaction were recorded. Any concomitant events like nausea; vomiting, shivering, pruritus or respiratory complications were recorded postoperatively.ResultsThere was a significant less pain in PCEA group at 2, 8 and 12 h. postoperative but PCIA group had less pain at immediate postoperative time. As regard sedation scale, patients of the PCEA group were significantly less sedated than PCIA group at immediate postoperative only. Overall patient satisfaction was significantly more in PCEA group.ConclusionThis study concluded that both PCEA and PCIA were effective in pain relief after major abdominal surgery but PCEA was much better in pain relief, less sedating effect and overall patient satisfaction.     

Comparison of patient-controlled epidural analgesia with and without night-time infusion following gastrectomy

To assess the analgesic efficacy and side effects of a supplementalnight-time infusion in patient-controlled epidural analgesia(PCEA) after gastrectomy, we carried out a randomized, double-blindstudy. The number of requests were lower (P<0.005) in thePCEA plus night-time infusion group than in the PCEA alone groupduring the postoperative nights. Patients who had a PCEA plusnight-time continuous infusion, slept with fewer interruptionsthan those who had only the PCEA. VAS pain scores on coughingwere significantly lower (P<0.05) in the PCEA plus infusiongroup than in the PCEA alone group during the night followingpostoperative day 1. In conclusion, a night-time infusion inPCEA following gastrectomy decreases the incidence of postoperativepain, provides a better sleep pattern, and reduces the degreeof the pain associated with coughing during the night. Br J Anaesth 2001; 87: 633–5     

瑞芬太尼静脉自控镇痛与腰-硬联合镇痛用于分娩镇痛的比较

目的比较瑞芬太尼静脉自控镇痛(PCIA)与罗哌卡因复合芬太尼腰-硬联合自控镇痛(CSEA)在分娩镇痛中的安全性和有效性。方法选择单胎足月初产妇60例,年龄22～32岁,身高156～170cm,体重60～75kg,ASAⅠ级,依据产妇自愿原则分为两组:瑞芬太尼静脉自控镇痛组(R组)和罗哌卡因复合芬太尼腰-硬联合自控镇痛组(E组),每组30例。R组瑞芬太尼背景剂量0.02μg·kg~(-1)·min~(-1),单次剂量10～20μg,锁定时间3min;E组蛛网膜下腔注射罗哌卡因2.5～3mg,然后连接硬膜外镇痛泵(0.1%罗哌卡因75ml+芬太尼2μg/ml),设置负荷剂量10ml,背景剂量8～10ml/h,单次剂量为5ml,锁定时间15min。记录产妇镇痛前、镇痛后30min的SBP、HR、SpO2;记录镇痛前、镇痛后30min和宫口开全时VAS疼痛评分、改良Bromage评分、Ramsay镇静评分;记录第一产程和第二产程时间、胎心率、新生儿Apgar评分及脐动脉血气;分析不良反应情况、产妇满意度。结果 R组VAS疼痛评分及Ramsay镇静评分明显高于E组(P0.05);R组头晕发生率明显高于E组(P0.05);两组产程时间、Bromage评分、恶心呕吐、嗜睡、皮肤瘙痒、尿潴留等不良反应情况、产妇满意度、胎心率、脐动脉血气分析及新生儿Apgar评分差异无统计学意义。结论与罗哌卡因复合芬太尼腰-硬联合自控镇痛比较,采用瑞芬太尼静脉自控镇痛有较好的镇痛效果。尽管产妇镇静深度更高,头晕发生率较多,但是对母婴无明显不良反应,可作为椎管内分娩镇痛的补充方法。     

个体化镇痛时机对硬膜外分娩镇痛效果的影响

目的观察提前预置硬膜外导管,根据产妇需要开始镇痛的个体化镇痛模式对分娩镇痛效果的影响。方法这是一项标签开放的随机对照研究。选择单胎、足月、头位妊娠初产妇,年龄18~35岁,随机分为两组。个体化组产妇在产程开始(出现规律宫缩、宫颈接近消失)行硬膜外穿刺置管,当产妇有镇痛需求且NRS评分≥5分时给予硬膜外镇痛;对照组在宫口开大1 cm时行硬膜外镇痛。主要研究终点是分娩过程最严重疼痛NRS评分及分娩时NRS评分≥7分产妇比例。结果194例产妇完成研究,分娩过程中两组最严重疼痛程度NRS评分[个体化组9(8~10)分vs对照组9(8~10)分,P=0.201]及分娩时NRS评分≥7分产妇比例[个体化组94例(96.9%)vs对照组89例(91.8%),P=0.121]差异均无统计学意义。两组不良事件发生率差异无统计学意义。结论对于单胎、足月、头位且产科评估可试行阴道分娩的产妇,根据产妇需求实施硬膜外分娩镇痛的效果与传统的镇痛时机(宫口开放1 cm)相当。     

Comparison of patient-controlled analgesia with and without a background infusion after appendicectomy in children

BACKGROUND: There have been many studies using patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) and opioids for postoperative analgesia in children. In this study, we investigated the efficacy, usefulness and analgesic consumption of two different PCA programmes [bolus dose alone (BD) or bolus dose with background infusion (BD + BI)] to evaluate postoperative analgesia for children after emergency appendicectomy. METHODS: Forty children, aged between 6 and 15 years and ASA class I or II, undergoing emergency appendicectomy were randomly allocated into two groups. The children were given a loading dose of pethidine 0.3 mg.kg-1 and 150 micro g.kg-1 bolus intravenously in group BD (n = 20) and pethidine 0.3 mg.kg-1 loading dose, 75 micro g.kg-1 bolus and 15 micro g.kg-1.h-1 background infusion in group BD + BI (n = 20). The lockout interval was 20 min in both groups. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in pain, sedation and nausea scores during the 24-h postoperative period between the groups (P > 0.05). Pethidine consumption was significantly lower in group BD + BI than that in group BD for the first 24-h period (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that both these PCA programmes were effective and reliable for postoperative pain relief in children. We believe that giving information about PCA to the children and their parents is useful during the preoperative period. However, the background infusion with lower bolus dose in PCA did not increase pethidine consumption.     

Labour analgesia by single shot spinal for any parturient?—A retrospective one-year single centre audit

Background

Single shot spinal (SSS) provides effective analgesia for multiparous parturients during advanced labour. Its utility in early labour or primiparous parturients may be limited by the insufficient duration of action. Regardless, SSS may offer a reasonable labour analgesia option in certain clinical scenarios. In this retrospective study, we analyse the failure rate of SSS analgesia by assessing pain after the SSS and by determining the need for additional analgesic interventions in primiparous or early-stage multiparous parturients compared to multiparous parturients in advanced labour (cervix ≥6 cm).

Methods

Following institutional ethical board approval, the patient files of all parturients receiving SSS analgesia during a 12-month period in a single centre were analysed for any recorded notes regarding recurrent pain or subsequent analgesia interventions (a new SSS, epidural, pudendal or paracervical bloc) as a marker for insufficient analgesia.

Results

A total of 88 primiparous and 447 multiparous parturients (cervix <6 cm: N = 131; cervix ≥6 cm: N = 316) received SSS analgesia. The odds ratio for the insufficient duration of analgesia was 1.94 (1.08–3.48) in primiparous and 2.08 (1.25–3.46) in early-stage multiparous parturients compared to advanced multiparous labour (p < .01). Primiparous and early-stage multiparous parturients were also 2.20 (1.15–4.20) and 2.61 (1.50–4.55) times more likely, respectively, to receive new peripheral and/or neuraxial analgesic interventions during delivery (p < .01).

Conclusions

SSS appears to provide adequate labour analgesia for the majority of parturients in whom it is used, including nulliparous and early-stage multiparous parturients. It remains a reasonable option in certain clinical scenarios, including resource-limited settings where epidural analgesia is unavailable.