鞘内药物输注系统永久植入术治疗顽固性疼痛病人18例

鞘内药物输注系统(IDDS)永久植入术治疗顽固性疼痛病人18例,其中晚期癌痛病人13例,非癌痛病人5例.首先行筛选试验,随后行IDDS永久植入术.癌痛病人采用视觉模拟评分(VAS评分)及QLQ-C30生活质量评分(QLQ-C30)法,非癌痛病人采用VAS评分法,评价疼痛程度,记录副作用及并发症的发生情况,癌痛病人随访至死亡,非癌痛病人均获得随访至今.术后所有病人经短期鞘内给药量调整后,VAS评分降低,癌痛病人QLQ-C30评分升高.部分病人出现恶心呕吐、便秘、尿潴留、皮肤瘙痒、镇静过度等,约1周均明显缓解,无持续残留症状.术中拔除穿刺针时误割断鞘内导管1例;导管与泵的金属接口过度磨擦至导管破裂,出现渗液1例;术后出现低颅压2例,脑脊液渗漏1例,右小腿后外侧持续性神经病理性疼痛1例,无伤口感染、裂开、愈合不良,无导管渗漏、破裂、异位、折叠、被结扎或肉芽肿形成,无泵翻转、位置异常等,设备本身无故障出现.     

鞘内药物输注系统永久植入术治疗顽固性疼痛病人18例

鞘内药物输注系统(IDDS)永久植入术治疗顽固性疼痛病人18例,其中晚期癌痛病人13例,非癌痛病人5例.首先行筛选试验,随后行IDDS永久植入术.癌痛病人采用视觉模拟评分(VAS评分)及QLQ-C30生活质量评分(QLQ-C30)法,非癌痛病人采用VAS评分法,评价疼痛程度,记录副作用及并发症的发生情况,癌痛病人随访至死亡,非癌痛病人均获得随访至今.术后所有病人经短期鞘内给药量调整后,VAS评分降低,癌痛病人QLQ-C30评分升高.部分病人出现恶心呕吐、便秘、尿潴留、皮肤瘙痒、镇静过度等,约1周均明显缓解,无持续残留症状.术中拔除穿刺针时误割断鞘内导管1例;导管与泵的金属接口过度磨擦至导管破裂,出现渗液1例;术后出现低颅压2例,脑脊液渗漏1例,右小腿后外侧持续性神经病理性疼痛1例,无伤口感染、裂开、愈合不良,无导管渗漏、破裂、异位、折叠、被结扎或肉芽肿形成,无泵翻转、位置异常等,设备本身无故障出现.

Abstract：

From November 2003 to May 2010, intrathecal drug delivery system (IDDS) was implanted in 18 patients with chronic intractable pain. Analgesia was provided with morphine. Thirteen patients suffered from late stage cancer and 5 from diseases other than cancer. VAS score was used to measure intensity of pain in all 18patients. QLQ-C30 score was used to evaluate quality of life in cancer patients. The patients were followed up for 3-62 months in 5 non-cancer patients. All 13 cancer patients died at 57 days-10 months after operation. VAS scores were significantly decreased and QLQ-C30 scores increased by intrathecal administration of morphine. Side effects developed in all patients to some extent including nausea, vomiting, constipation, urinary retention, pruritus and over-sedation and vanished in a week. Intrathecal catheter was cut while being pulled out of the needle in 1 patient. Two patients developed low intracranial pressure after operation. Cerebrospinal fluid leakage occurred in 1 patient. One patient developed neuropathic pain in the posterolateral side of right leg.     

持续鞘内吗啡联合布比卡因用于中重度晚期癌痛患者的疗效和安全性

目的评估持续鞘内吗啡联合布比卡因用于中重度晚期癌痛患者的疗效和安全性。方法 42例中重度晚期癌痛患者,随机分为单纯鞘内吗啡组(A组)与吗啡联合布比卡因组(B组),每组21例。植入鞘内导管外接电子PCA泵实施持续鞘内镇痛,分别给予A组0.2mg/ml吗啡,B组0.2mg/ml吗啡+0.75mg/ml布比卡因混合液起始按口服吗啡转换剂量持续鞘内泵入+单次冲击量(24h背景量的1/10,锁定时间1h);记录患者术前、术后1周、2周、1月的静息及运动VSA疼痛评分、吗啡用量、便秘症状评分及WHOQOL-BREF生活质量评分,并观察镇痛后头痛、恶心呕吐、尿潴留、皮肤瘙痒、下肢麻木、运动阻滞不良反应的发生率。结果两组患者鞘内镇痛后静息VAS评分及便秘症状评分均显著下降(P<0.01),两组间差异无统计学意义。B组鞘内镇痛后运动VAS评分低于A组(P<0.05),每日吗啡用量低于A组(P<0.01),WHOQOL-BREF生理领域评分高于A组(P<0.05)。两组均有少数患者出现恶心呕吐、皮肤瘙痒、尿潴留、下肢麻木及运动阻滞,但差异无统计学意义。结论持续鞘内吗啡联合布比卡因用于中重度癌痛效果确切,运动痛及生活质量改善优于单纯鞘内吗啡。     

鞘内药物输注系统用于癌痛治疗时患者和药物的选择

背景 应用鞘内药物输注系统(intrathecal drug delivery systems,IDDS)是目前癌痛介入治疗的有效方法之一.选择合适的患者和镇痛药物,以及有效的管理是获得良好效果的基础.虽然国际上有相关共识和指南,但关于癌痛患者和药物的选择尚无定论. 目的 通过文献检索和阅读,综述最新关于晚期癌痛患者IDDS镇痛治疗时患者和药物的选择的观点,旨在为临床实践提供新的方法和思路. 内容 随着鞘内镇痛药物和管理的进展,目前认为预期寿命小于3个月的患者也可应用IDDS;植入前测试在癌痛患者并非必须；药物的选择主要取决于病因是神经病理性、伤害性或者混合性疼痛；加强鞘内镇痛初期和换药时的监测. 趋向 肿瘤的日趋高发及其治疗后生存率的提升使得癌痛发生日趋增多,WHO癌痛三阶梯指南不能完全有效镇痛,而应用IDDS将是顽固性癌痛治疗的不可替代的方法之一.     

放射性125I粒子植入治疗癌痛

目的探讨放射性~(125)I粒子植入治疗癌痛的有效性。方法收集33例肿瘤患者,采用CT引导放射性~(125)I粒子植入术对引起患者疼痛的责任病灶进行治疗。术前利用放射性粒子源植入治疗计划系统(TPS)制定粒子植入计划,术中实时调整手术方案,术后即刻利用TPS进行植入后验证。对所有患者随访6个月,采用CT扫描评价肿瘤局部控制率。采用视觉模拟评分法(VAS)于术前及术后3天、1个月对患者进行疼痛评估,比较VAS评分的变化。分析术中及术后手术相关并发症。结果对33例患者均成功完成手术,患者第2、4、6个月局部控制率分别为27.27%(9/33)、72.72%(24/33)、84.85%(28/33)。33例患者术后VAS评分均有不同程度改善,术后3天VAS评分3.80±1.25,术后1个月为2.25±1.00,二者差异有统计学意义(t=3.53,P0.05)。手术相关并发症主要为疼痛、发热、软组织肿胀、气胸、局部出血。结论对肿瘤患者癌痛责任病灶行放射性~(125)I粒子植入,可有效缓解疼痛,是一种安全、有效的方法。     

不同麻醉方式下胃癌根治术后患者疼痛程度的比较

目的 比较不同麻醉方式下胃癌根治术后患者的疼痛程度.方法 择期拟行胃癌根治术患者102例,性别不限,ASA分级Ⅰ或Ⅱ级,年龄50～75岁,体重45～70 ks,采用随机数字表法,将患者随机分为3组(n=34):单纯全麻组(GA组)、全麻联合肋缘下腹横肌平面阻滞组(CGTA组)和全麻联合硬膜外阻滞组(CGEA组).术后拔除气管导管后送至麻醉后恢复室(CPACU),患者入室时记录VAS评分.PACU期间评价疼痛程度,VAS评分＞3分的患者接受静脉吗啡滴定,VAS评分≤3分时停止吗啡滴定,接静脉自控镇痛泵和/或硬膜外镇痛泵.滴定结束时记录吗啡总用量,观察不良反应的发生情况.结果 与GA组和CGTA组比较,CGEA组术后中重度痛发生率降低(P＜0.01);GA组、CGTA组和CGEA组患者术后重度痛发生率、入室时VAS评分及吗啡总用量依次降低(P＜0.01);CGEA组镇静发生率低于GA组(P＜0.01),三组其余不良反应发生率比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 全麻、全麻联合肋缘下腹横肌平面阻滞和全麻联合硬膜外阻滞下胃癌根治术后患者的疼痛程度依次降低.     

异丙酚注射痛预测人工流产术后疼痛程度的准确性

目的 评价异丙酚注射痛预测术后疼痛程度的准确性.方法 拟行无痛人工流产手术的患者7l例,年龄20～40岁,ASA Ⅰ或Ⅱ级.以0.5 ml/s的速率静脉输注1%异丙酚2 mg/kg,当异丙酚给药量达1/3时暂停给药,采用口语等级量表评分法(VRS)评价异丙酚注射痛,VRS评分≥1分为发生注射痛,之后再给予剩余量异丙酚完成麻醉诱导.术后20 min时采用VAS评分法评价患者静卧以及下床站立时的疼痛程度,静卧时VAS评分≥30分为发生术后疼痛.计算异丙酚注射痛预测术后疼痛程度的灵敏度和特异度.结果 异丙酚注射痛发生率为66%,VRS评分与术后静卧以及活动时VAS评分呈正相关(r=0.561,P<0.01;r=0.608,P<0.01).异丙酚注射痛预测术后疼痛的灵敏度为96%,特异度为52%.结论 术前异丙酚注射痛是预测人工流产术后患者疼痛程度的可靠指标.     

QQ群的建立对提高癌痛自控镇痛泵患者生活质量的临床观察

目的探讨建立QQ群来提高居家癌痛自控镇痛泵患者生活质量的效果。方法选择2012年6月至2014年9月来本科住院安装吗啡自控镇痛泵的患者60例,按照数字表法随机分2组,实验组30例,对照30例,对实验组患者由责任护士利用QQ群建立医患QQ群每天向群内发送健康宣教知识,回答患者的提问,辅助癌痛自控镇痛泵患者出院后的健康教育,以提高癌痛患者的生活质量。对照组沿用原来的电话随访制度,每周给病人1次电话进行随访指导。比较两组患者的疼痛VAS评分、镇痛泵使用维护正确性及疼痛相关知识掌握率、并发症发生频次(伤口感染、尿潴留等)、患者的满意度及生活质量。结果实验组患者并发症的发生率、疼痛VAS评分明显低于对照组(P0.01),患者的镇痛泵使用及疼痛相关知识掌握率、患者满意度及生活质量高于对照组(P0.05)。结论 QQ群的建立辅助癌痛自控镇痛泵患者进行健康教育对提高患者的生活质量有较好的效果。     

病人自控鞘内输注吗啡、布比卡因和可乐定治疗重度癌痛

少数严重癌痛病人口服或注射镇痛药不解决问题。作者报道一骶脊索瘤(sacral chordoma)病人,虽经手术、化疗和放疗,但骶部和双下肢仍疼痛异常,视觉模拟评分(VAS)8/10。曾于腰硬膜外间隙注阿片类、布比卡因和可乐定,但疼痛仍进行性加剧。只好采用鞘内留管给药。将导管置入蛛网膜下腔达T_(12)平面,开始用     

家庭护理模式应用于自控镇痛泵治疗顽固性癌痛的临床护理研究

目的分析吗啡鞘内镇痛泵治疗顽固性癌痛患者居家自我管理的现况,探索促进患者日常生活质量提高的护理模式。方法采用随机数字表法选择安装吗啡鞘内泵患者40例,对照组20例采用常规护理,实验组20例采用家庭护理模式护理,应用评价工具VAS疼痛评分、日常生活质量评分及《医院感染诊断标准(试行)》来研究两组患者的感染率、脱管率、不良反应发生率、日常生活质量及镇痛疗效的差异。结果家庭护理模式护理组感染率、脱管率、不良反应发生率明显小于常规护理组,其日常生活质量及镇痛疗效提高,两组比较差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论通过采用家庭护理模式护理吗啡鞘内自控镇痛泵治疗顽固性癌痛的患者,减少了感染率、脱管率、药物不良反应发生率,提高了患者日常生活质量及镇痛效果。     

Efficacy of subcutaneous and topical local anaesthesia for pain relief after resection of malignant breast tumours.

OBJECTIVE: Infiltration and topical application of local anaesthetics close to the surgical wound may be used to prevent postoperative pain. We evaluated the efficacy of these treatments after breast surgery for cancer. DESIGN: Double-blind randomised trial with two treatment groups and one control group. SETTING: University hospital, Sweden. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were allocated to treatment with bupivacaine infiltration (n = 29), topical application of lignocaine/prilocaine (n = 31), or no local treatment (n = 30). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Difference and time related patterns in pain scores measured on a visual analogue scale (VAS), and morphine consumption. RESULTS. None of the local anaesthetics significantly reduced the VAS score or morphine consumption. However, fewer patients in the anaesthetic groups had high VAS scores than controls, the 75 centile for the mean score after operation being 2.7, 2.0 and 2.1 for the controls, infiltration, and topical anaesthetic groups, respectively. The controls had higher scores from 6 hours postoperatively onwards. The corresponding median morphine consumption was 24.5, 18.5, and 16.2 mg. CONCLUSIONS. Local anaesthesia slightly reduced the overall pain scores and the morphine consumption, but was of potential clinical value only in the patients who had the highest pain scores.     

Onset and offset of intrathecal morphine versus nalbuphine for postoperative pain relief after total hip replacement

BACKGROUND: We designed this study to compare the postoperative analgesic effects of intrathecal morphine and nalbuphine, the endpoints being onset and offset of action. METHODS: Geriatric patients scheduled for elective total hip replacement under continuous spinal anaesthesia were randomized to two double-blinded groups in the recovery room as soon as they experienced a pain score higher than 3 cm on the visual analogue scale (VAS, 0-10 cm). Either 160 microg morphine or 400 microg nalbuphine in 4 ml normal saline were administered intrathecally. Pain scores on VAS, rescue analgesia (diclofenac and morphine, not allowed during the first 60 min), and the adverse effects (respiratory depression, postoperative nausea and vomiting, itching) were recorded for 24 h after surgery. RESULTS: The study was stopped after inclusion of 2 x 12 patients due to slow onset of analgesia in the morphine patients. In the nalbuphine group, when compared to the morphine group, the time to a pain score <3 cm (8+/-6 vs. 31+/-32 min, P<0.001), the time to the lowest pain score (18+/-11 vs. 66+/-75 min, P<0.001) and the time to the first systemic analgesic intervention for a pain score >3 cm (218+/-256 vs. 1076+/-440 min, P<0.05) were significantly shorter. The analgesic requirements during the first 24 h were significantly lower in the morphine group (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: We conclude that after total hip replacement, administration of intrathecal nalbuphine resulted in a significantly faster onset of pain relief and shorter duration of analgesia than intrathecal morphine.     

Comparison of 0.25 mg and 0.1 mg intrathecal morphine for analgesia after Cesarean section

PURPOSE: To test the hypothesis that 0.1 mg intrathecal morphine plus NSAIDs provides satisfactory analgesia post-Cesarean section with fewer side effects than 0.25 mg intrathecal morphine. METHODS: Sixty women, scheduled for elective Cesarean section under spinal anesthesia, were randomized to receive either 0.1 mg or 0.25 mg intrathecal morphine combined with hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.75% and 20 microg fentanyl. All patients received a 100 mg indomethacin suppository at the end of surgery and 500 mg naproxen p.o. b.i.d. was started the evening of surgery and continued until discharge. A blinded researcher recorded the pain, pruritus, and nausea scores, the time to first request for additional analgesics, a visual analogue scale (VAS) satisfaction score, and the use of additional opioids, antipruritics, and/or antiemetics. RESULTS: Of the 60 patients enrolled, two were not included in the data analysis because of protocol violations leaving 30 patients in the 0.1 mg group and 28 in the 0.25 mg group. There were no differences in the VAS pain scores or the number of women requesting an opioid other than codeine between the two groups. The VAS pruritus scores in the 0.1 mg group were lower throughout the 24 hr (P < 0.001). Fewer women in the 0.1 mg group (4/30 vs 12/28) requested nalbuphine to treat itching (P = 0.018). Nausea scores were lower in the 0.1 mg group (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The use of 0.1 mg intrathecal morphine plus NSAIDs provides analgesia of similar quality to 0.25 mg but with fewer undesirable side effects following Cesarean section.     

Comparison of low-dose intrathecal and epidural morphine and bupivacaine infiltration for postoperative pain control after surgery for lumbar disc disease

This prospective, blinded, placebo-controlled study was performed to compare the postoperative analgesic efficacy of low-dose intrathecal and epidural morphine with paraspinal muscle infiltration of bupivacaine in lumbar discectomy cases. Eighty ASA I-III adult patients undergoing elective surgery for lumbar disc disease were enrolled in the study. Patients were randomized to four groups by envelopes. Study groups were as follows: group 1 (n = 20), intrathecal morphine 0.1 mg; group 2 (n = 20), epidural morphine 2 mg; group 3 (n = 20), 30 mL of bupivacaine 0.25% paraspinal muscle infiltration; group 4 (n = 20), 30 mL of saline paraspinal muscle infiltration before wound closure. Recorded parameters were time to response to painful and verbal stimuli and postoperative pain assessed at 30 minutes and 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hours by Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Numeric Pain Scale (NPS). Hemodynamic data, sedation scores, and side effects were also recorded. Meperidine and naproxen sodium were used for postoperative analgesia. Follow-up was performed by a blinded investigator. Mean VAS scores were lower in groups 1 and 2 at 30 minutes (P < 0.05). Mean VAS score of group 2 was lower than that of group 4 at 4 hours postoperatively (P < 0.05). Mean NPS scores were lower in groups 1 and 2 at 2, 4, and 6 hours (P < 0.05) and in group 2 at 8 hours compared with the other groups. The number of patients requiring meperidine at early postoperative phase (0-6 hours) was less in groups 1 and 2 compared with groups 3 and 4 (P < 0.05).There were no statistically significant differences in the late postoperative analgesic requirements, after correction for multiple testing. In conclusion, low-dose intrathecal and epidural morphine provide lower postoperative pain scores and a reduction in early postoperative analgesic requirement with insignificant side effects compared with paraspinal bupivacaine or saline infiltration.     

Does pre-incisional thoracic extradural block combined with diclofenac reduce postoperative pain after abdominal hysterectomy?

In a double-blind, randomized study, we investigated 40 patients undergoing abdominal hysterectomy; patients received 0.5% plain bupivacaine 20 ml via a low thoracic extradural catheter and a diclofenac suppository (100 mg), either 30 min before incision (group 1) or 30 min after incision (group 2). All patients received a standard general anaesthetic and no opioid was used before or during operation. Postoperative analgesic requirements were measured using a patient- controlled analgesia (PCA) system. Pain was assessed using a visual analogue scale (VAS) and a verbal pain score (VPS) on movement up to 48 h after operation. There was no significant difference in the time to first request for morphine but consumption of morphine was significantly greater in group 1 at all times except 24 h. There were no significant differences in VAS and VPS pain scores, although both scores were consistently higher in group 1. Patient satisfaction with the quality of analgesia, at 24 h, demonstrated no significant difference between the two groups. The combination of extradural block and diclofenac suppository given before operation did not appear to produce a clinically effective pre-emptive analgesic effect.      

术前应用帕瑞昔布钠对乳腺癌患者术后疼痛的影响

目的观察术前应用帕瑞昔布钠对乳腺癌患者术后疼痛的影响。方法乳腺癌择期手术患者62例随机分为观察组和对照组各31例。所有患者均采用静脉麻醉,观察组于术前30 min给予帕瑞昔布钠40 mg静注;对照组于手术结束后给予帕瑞昔布钠40 mg静注。比较2组术后12、24、48 h疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)、术后24 h内吗啡使用情况、手术时间、苏醒时间、拔管时间及不良反应发生情况。结果观察组术后12、24、48 h VAS评分均低于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。术后24 h内观察组使用吗啡量平均为(11.8±1.3)mg,低于对照组使用吗啡量的(30.6±5.8)mg,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。2组手术时间、苏醒时间、拔管时间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。观察组不良反应发生率低于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。2组均无肾功能损害。结论术前应用帕瑞昔布钠较术后应用更能有效缓解术后疼痛,且不影响患者苏醒,能减少不良反应。     

Use of intrathecal morphine for postoperative pain relief after elective laparoscopic colorectal surgery

Laparoscopic surgery has become popular in recent years, but few studies have addressed analgesia for this type of surgery. We conducted a prospective double-blind randomised trial on 36 cases of laparoscopic colorectal surgery to determine the influence of intrathecal morphine on postoperative pain relief. All patients received a subarachnoid block with local anaesthetic in addition to general anaesthesia. One group also received intrathecal morphine. A patient-controlled analgesic (PCA) device was prescribed for pain control postoperatively and the visual analogue score (VAS) was used for pain assessment. The group who received intrathecal morphine used significantly less morphine. There were no adverse cardiovascular effects of the combined anaesthetic technique. Nausea and vomiting remained the main side-effect of intrathecal morphine but this was easily treated with anti-emetics.     

后路脊柱显微内镜下髓核摘除类固醇激素神经根鞘内注射的临床疗效观察

目的探讨后路脊柱显微内镜下腰椎椎间盘髓核摘除术（microendoscopydiscectomy,MED）中类固醇激素神经根鞘内注射的临床应用效果。方法2006年3月～201t年3月收治的360例腰椎椎间盘突出患者随机分为2组,MED神经根鞘内注射组治疗180例,后路脊柱显微内镜下摘除突出的髓核组织并在神经根鞘内注入5mg地塞米松;MED组180例,手术方法相同,但不注射地塞米松。记录2组手术前后疼痛视觉模拟量表（visualanaloguescale,VAS）评分、直腿抬高角度及恢复正常工作的时间。结果MED神经根鞘内注射组术前VAS评分为6．8±0．8,术后VAS评分为2．1±0．4;MED组术前VAS评分为6．7±0．6,术后VAS评分为3．6±0．7,术后2组疼痛均有明显的改善,MED神经根鞘内注射组改善更明显（P〈0．01）。MED神经根鞘内注射组直腿抬高术前为28．4°±13．0°,术后为67．0°±12．0°;MED组术前为27．6°±11．0°,术后为51．0°±17．0°,2组术后直腿抬高都有明显改善,MED神经根鞘内注射组改善更明显（P〈0．01）。MED神经根鞘内注射组恢复正常生活时间为12d,MED组为21d,MED神经根鞘内沣射组比MED组恢复时间最苫缩短。结果后路脊柱显微内镜能对神经根进行高倍放大,从而进行精确鞘内注射,鞘内注射类闺醇激素治疗腰椎椎间盘突出能显著改善术后疼痛、恢复肢体活动范围及更早的恢复日常生活。