膝关节置换术后两种股神经阻滞镇痛比较

[目的]评价不同镇痛模式在全膝关节置换术后的镇痛效果。[方法]全膝关节置换手术40例,随机分为两种股神经阻滞方法进行术后镇痛,即连续股神经阻滞(连续组)(20例)和单次股神经阻滞联合患者自控静脉镇痛组(单次组)(20例)。连续组术前0.5%罗哌卡因30 ml行股神经阻滞并置管,术后0.2%罗哌卡因连续股神经自控镇痛;单次组术前行0.5%罗哌卡因30 ml单次股神经阻滞,术后0.2μg/kg舒芬太尼自控镇痛。观察指标:记录两组术后4、8、12、24、36及48 h术后静息、主动功能锻炼(AFE)及持续被动功能锻炼(CPM)状态下疼痛VAS评分情况,记录恶心、呕吐、嗜睡不良反应发生率、镇痛泵按压次数及追加哌替啶次数。[结果]术后4、8、12、24h静息VAS评分连续组和单次组比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05);术后36、48 h静息VAS评分连续组显著低于单次组,两组比较差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。术后24 h的AFE和CPM状态下VAS评分比较,两组差异无统计学意义(P0.05);而术后36、48 h,连续组显著低于单次组,两组比较差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。术后4、8、12 h按压次数两组差异无统计学意义(P),而术后24、48、36 h连续组按压次数明显低于单次组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。术后不良反应、追加哌替啶例数连续组明显高于单次组,两组比较差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。[结论]全膝关节置换术后,连续股神经阻滞镇痛优于单次股神经阻滞联合患者自控静脉镇痛,且前者不良反应少,患者满意度高。     

连续股神经阻滞镇痛与自控静脉镇痛在全膝关节置换术后镇痛的Meta分析（英文）

[目的]比较连续股神经阻滞镇痛和自控静脉镇痛在全膝关节置换术后的镇痛效果。[方法]运用计算机检索PubMed,Cochrane Library,EMBASE,BIOSIS,Ovid databases,中国知网和万方数据库以及手工检索方法收集自收录至2013年02月01日的相关参考文献。严格评价纳入研究的方法学质量并提取资料,统计软件采用RevMan5.0。[结果]共纳入23个随机对照试验,入选文献为10篇英文,13篇中文。Meta分析结果显示,连续股神经阻滞镇痛组的视觉模拟评分优于自控静脉镇痛组,术后24 h静息时视觉模拟评分(WMD=-1.38,95%CI:-2.66^-2.14,P<0.000 01),术后48 h活动时视觉模拟评分(WMD=-1.27,95%CI:-1.70-2.14,P<0.000 01),术后48 h活动时视觉模拟评分(WMD=-1.27,95%CI:-1.70^-0.85,P<0.00001)。然而,数据分析结果还表明连续股神经阻滞镇痛组的恶心呕吐发生率(RR=0.35,95%CI:0.09-0.85,P<0.00001)。然而,数据分析结果还表明连续股神经阻滞镇痛组的恶心呕吐发生率(RR=0.35,95%CI:0.09⁰.64,P=0.000 2)和头晕嗜睡发生率(RR=0.22,95%CI:0.120.64,P=0.000 2)和头晕嗜睡发生率(RR=0.22,95%CI:0.12⁰.42,P<0.000 01)比自控静脉镇痛组高。但是,连续股神经阻滞镇痛组和自控静脉镇痛组的低血压发生率(RR=1.06,95%CI:0.540.42,P<0.000 01)比自控静脉镇痛组高。但是,连续股神经阻滞镇痛组和自控静脉镇痛组的低血压发生率(RR=1.06,95%CI:0.54².07,P=0.87)、需要追加镇痛药例数(RR=0.56,95%CI:0.222.07,P=0.87)、需要追加镇痛药例数(RR=0.56,95%CI:0.22¹.48,P=0.24)和对镇痛效果满意例数(RR=1.92,95%CI:0.961.48,P=0.24)和对镇痛效果满意例数(RR=1.92,95%CI:0.96³.84,P=0.06)差异无统计学意义。[结论]连续股神经阻滞镇痛比自控静脉镇痛的镇痛效果好,但是连续股神经阻滞镇痛的副作用相对更多,由于患者对两者镇痛效果满意度及需要追加镇痛药物无明显差异,建议在全膝关节置换术后使用自控静脉镇痛,同时进一步探讨疼痛管理方案。     

人工全膝关节表面置换术后连续股神经阻滞与经静脉患者自控镇痛的随机对照研究

背景:全膝关节表面置换术(total knee arthroplasty,TKA)后重度疼痛的发生率高,患者自控镇痛(patient controlled analgesia,PCA)和连续股神经阻滞(continuous femoral nerve block,CFNB)是TKA后常用的镇痛方法。目的:比较CFNB与经静脉PCA在TKA围手术期镇痛中的有效性和安全性。方法:120例全身麻醉下行单膝TKA的患者,随机分成三组,分别接受CFNB(A组),静脉PCA(B组)和单次股神经阻滞联合静脉PCA(C组)作为术后镇痛方式。观察术后不同时间点静息和活动疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)及动态VAS评分与静态VAS评分差值(Δ_(动态VAS-静态VAS)),关节活动度(ROM)及术后吗啡的使用量。同时记录镇痛相关并发症。结果:术后各观察时间点内,A组及C组患者动静态VAS评分均显著低于B组,A组与C组术后VAS评分无差异。A组术后第3天,Δ_(动态VAS-静态VAS)最低。术后第6天,三组Δ_(动态VAS-静态VAS)无差异。C组吗啡使用量及PCA按压次数明显少于B组。术后第6天,三组膝ROM无统计学差异(A组114°,B组111°,C组114°)。A组有2例出现镇痛失败,1例出现术后导管脱落,行静脉PCA补救镇痛。B组术后恶心、呕吐发生率为42%,显著高于A组(8%)及C组(25%)。结论:TKA术后,CFNB镇痛可获得有效的静息镇痛及运动镇痛,有助于关节功能恢复,副作用小,但存在镇痛失败的可能。单次股神经阻滞联联合静脉PCA可减少镇痛不全,PCA用药次数和用量,降低单纯使用静脉PCA镇痛的并发症。     

股神经阻滞用于全膝关节置换术患者术后镇痛的Meta分析

目的 采用Meta分析的方法评价股神经阻滞(femoral nerve block,FNB)对全膝关节置换术(total knee arthroplasty,TKA)患者术后镇痛的效果. 方法 检索PubMed、OVID、EMBASE、Cochrane图书馆,检索时间从建库至2014年11月.收集在TKA术后使用FNB与患者自控静脉镇痛(patient-controlled intravenous analgesia,PCIA)或患者自控硬膜外镇痛(patient-controlled epidural analgesia,PCEA)的临床随机对照实验(randomized controlled trial,RCT).采用Cochrane协作网系统评价法评价纳入文献的质量,采用RevMan5.2软件进行Meta分析评价. 结果 共纳入14项研究,包括1 157例患者,其中FNB组616例,PCIA组380例,PCEA组161例.与PCIA组比较,FNB有效减少了患者术后24 h[加权均数差(weighted mean difference,WMD)=-17.93,95％置信区间(confidence interval,CI)=-27.38～-8.49]及48 h(WMD=-25.70,95％CI:-41.67～-9.74)的吗啡累计消耗量,降低患者术后24 h活动时VAS(WMD=-1.99,95％CI:-3.14～-0.85)(P＜0.05);且FNB组患者术后恶心呕吐比值比(odds ratio,OR)(0.31,95％CI:0.22～0.44)、尿潴留(OR=0.24,95％CI:0.13～0.43,P＜0.05)及头晕的发生率(OR=0.27,95％CI:0.14～0.52)都较低(P＜0.05). 结论 比较PCIA及PCEA,FNB可能是TKA患者术后镇痛的一种更好的选择.     

超声引导下连续股神经阻滞用于全膝关节置换术后的镇痛效果

目的 观察超声引导下连续股神经阻滞(CFNB)用于全膝关节置换术(TKA)后的镇痛效果.方法 拟行单侧全膝关节置换术患者40例,随机均分为两组.PCIA组患者术后持续静脉输注芬太尼镇痛,PCNA组行超声引导下罗哌卡因连续股神经阻滞,两组均持续镇痛2d.记录静息、持续被动运动(功能锻炼)时的VAS评分、患肢主动关节屈曲角度、肌力分级、镇静程度和不良反应发生情况.结果 PCNA组患者术后8、12、24、48 h静息时和术后48 h功能锻炼时VAS评分均明显低于PCIA组(P＜0.05或P＜0.01).PCNA组患者术后24、48 h患肢主动关节屈曲角度明显大于PCIA组(P＜0.01).结论 超声引导下连续股神经阻滞用于TKA术后镇痛效果良好,对肌力影响小,不良反应发生率低,是TKA术后较为理想的镇痛方法.     

连续股神经阻滞镇痛与静脉镇痛用于全膝关节置换术后快速康复的比较

目的比较连续股神经阻滞（continuous femoral nerveblock,CFNB）镇痛与静脉镇痛用于全膝关节置换术（total knee arthroplasty,TKA）后的快速康复效果。方法择期行单侧TKA患者60例,年龄45。78岁,ASA分级I、Ⅱ级,采用随机数字表法分为两组（每组30例）：患者自控神经阻滞镇痛（patient controlled nerve block analgesia,PCNA）组与患者自控静脉镇痛（patient controlled intravenous analgesia,PCIA）组。两组均采用蛛网膜下腔顿膜外腔联合麻醉。观察患者术后静息和运动时VAS评分、患者自控镇痛（patient-contmlled analgesia,PCA）泵按压次数及补救性镇痛药应用次数,观察术后患肢膝关节主动屈曲角度、术后血糖变化、术后平均住院日、并发症、副作用及满意度。结果术后6、12、24、48h静息状态下,两组VAS评分差异无统计学意义（P〉O．05）;与PCIA组比较,PCNA组术后24、48h被动运动时VAS评分降低[（3．6±0．5）分比（4．7±0．6）分、（3．4±0．5）分比（4．5±0．4）分]（P〈O．05）,PCA泵按压次数及肌内注射哌替啶次数减少（P〈0．05）。与PCIA组比较,PCNA组术后24、48h患肢膝关节主动屈曲角度增大（P〈0．05）,术后各时点血糖水平降低（P〈O．05）,深静脉血栓形成并发症及嗜睡、呼吸抑制等副作用减少（P〈O．05）;PCNA组术后满意度评分高于PCIA组[（9．6±1．4）分比（7．9±1．2）分]（P〈O．05o结论与静脉镇痛比较,CFNB用于TKA术后镇痛效果确切、并发症及副作用少、住院时间缩短、术后恢复快、总体满意度高,符合快速康复外科理念。     

股神经和硬膜外自控镇痛在全膝关节置换术后的效果比较

目的：比较股神经和硬膜外自控镇痛在膝关节置换术后的效果和副作用。方法：选择ASAⅠ～Ⅱ级行单侧膝关节置换术患者50例,随机分为股神经自控镇痛组（PCFNA,n=25）和硬膜外自控镇痛组（PCEA,n=25）。均在单侧蛛网膜下腔阻滞麻醉下施术,术后通过留置导管连接0.2%罗哌卡因、2μg/mL芬太尼止痛泵镇痛。结果：两组在术后各时点静息VAS和吗啡用量、副作用的发生率无统计学差异。PCFNA组持续被动功能训练时的VAS疼痛评分均明显低于PCEA组患者（P〈0.01）;PCFNA组术后24h患肢股四头肌的肌力略低,非手术侧肌力略高（P〈0.000）。结论：股神经自控镇痛在持续被动运动镇痛效果优于硬膜外自控镇痛,不影响非手术侧股四头肌肌力,有利于早期下床活动。     

单次股神经阻滞联合关节腔周围注射在膝关节置换术后镇痛的研究

目的观察单次股神经阻滞联合关节腔周围注射在全膝关节置换术后的镇痛效果。方法选取2017年1月至2018年5月于我院拟行全膝关节置换术的患者共50例,其中男22例,女28例;年龄60~80岁,平均为(69.90±9.46)岁。50例患者随机分为实验组(单次股神经阻滞联合关节腔周围注射组)和对照组(单次股神经阻滞组),每组各25例。比较两组患者术后静息和运动状态视觉模拟评分(visual analogue scale,VAS)、术后膝关节活动度(range of motion,ROM)及不良反应发生情况。结果实验组在术后6 h、12 h、24 h、48 h静息及运动状态VAS评分均比对照组同期VAS评分低,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);实验组术后1 d、2 d膝关节活动度比对照组同期膝关节活动度高(P<0.05),但术后3 d、7 d两组患者术后膝关节活动度比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两组患者术后并发症发生率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论对于膝关节置换患者,单次股神经阻滞联合关节腔周围注射比单纯单次股神经阻滞更能缓解患者术后早期的疼痛,有助于患者术后早期行功能锻炼,且不增加术后并发症发生,但对于患者远期功能恢复并无明显优势。     

股神经阻滞用于膝关节置换的术后镇痛的疗效观察

目的:膝关节置换术在临床中逐渐增多,这与患者老龄化的增多和对生活质量的要求提高有关,我们为了帮助膝关节术后镇痛及功能的尽快恢复设计这项研究,观察对病人的术后恢复及功能锻炼的有效性,患者的满意度,与以往的未行股神经阻滞的病例进行比较,及施行前后进行比较研究其有效性.     

不同镇痛方式对全膝关节置换术后镇痛效果及炎性反应的影响

目的探讨神经刺激仪引导下连续股神经阻滞(continuous femoral nerve block,CFNB)镇痛或静脉镇痛对全膝关节置换术(total knee arthroplasty,TKA)后患者镇痛效果及炎性反应的影响。方法择期行单侧全膝关节置换术患者60例,ASAⅠ或Ⅱ级,年龄51~71岁,体重50~77kg,随机均分两组:PCIA组和患者自控股神经镇痛组(PCNA组)。PCIA组:术后持续输注芬太尼镇痛;PCNA组:在神经刺激仪引导下行股神经置管,术后连续股神经阻滞镇痛。分别于术前、术毕、术后6、12、24和48h时采集股静脉血,检测IL-6及IL-10浓度。观察并记录术后2、12、24、36、48h静止时和术后24、48、72h运动时VAS评分。记录尿潴留、低氧血症(SpO290%)、恶心、呕吐、嗜睡不良反应发生情况及追加哌替啶例数。结果与术前比较,术后各时点PCIA组IL-6、IL-10浓度明显升高(P0.05),PCNA组术后6、12hIL-6和术后6、12、24hIL-10浓度明显升高(P0.05)。与PCNA组比较,术后各时点PCIA组IL-6浓度明显升高(P0.05),而术后6h时PCIA组IL-10浓度明显降低(P0.05)。与PCNA组比较,PCIA组术后2、12、24、36、48h静止时VAS评分和术后24、48、72h运动时VAS明显升高(P0.05)。与PCNA组比较,PCIA组术后恶心、嗜睡、追加哌替啶例数明显增加(P0.05)。两组无一例患者发生低氧血症。结论神经刺激仪引导下连续股神经阻滞镇痛效果良好,不良反应少,可以减轻TKA术后患者机体炎性反应。     

Comparison of Periarticular Local Infiltration Analgesia With Femoral Nerve Block for Total Knee Arthroplasty: a Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is accompanied by moderate-to-severe postoperative pain. Postoperative pain will hamper functional recovery and lower patients' satisfaction with surgery. Recently, periarticular local infiltration analgesia (LIA) has been widely used in TKA. However, there is no definite answer as to the efficacy and safety of LIA compared with femoral nerve block (FNB).

Comparing the Analgesia Effects of Single-injection and Continuous Femoral Nerve Blocks with Patient Controlled Analgesia after Total Knee Arthroplasty

We compared the analgesic effects of single-injection or continuous femoral nerve block (FNB) with intravenous patient controlled analgesia (PCA) opioids. Two hundred patients undergoing knee arthroplasty were randomized to one of the three regimens. Significant knee pain on movement at postoperative 24 h was reduced with single-injection (OR 0.30; 95% CI 0.12 to 0.74; P = 0.009) or continuous (OR 0.21; 95% CI 0.08 to 0.51; P = 0.001) FNB, compared with PCA. Allocation to FNBs also resulted in significantly less opioid consumption, fewer episodes of nausea and vomiting, and achieved knee flexion 90° earlier than allocation to PCA. Compared to single-injection FNB, patients with continuous FNB had lower pain scores on movement at 24 h (mean difference − 0.57; 95% CI − 1.14 to − 0.01; P = 0.045), consumed less opioid, and had fewer incidences of nausea and vomiting. The analgesic efficacy of single-injection and continuous FNBs was superior to PCA in the immediate postoperative period; with continuous FNB providing better analgesia than single-injection FNB.     

Periarticular Knee Injection With Liposomal Bupivacaine and Continuous Femoral Nerve Block for Postoperative Pain Management After Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Local periarticular infiltration (PAI) analgesia has emerged as an important component of multimodal approaches to treat total knee arthroplasty postoperative pain. Liposomal bupivacaine may provide prolonged analgesic duration when injected into the surrounding tissues. The purpose of this study was to compare the analgesic efficacy and serum bupivacaine levels of a continuous femoral nerve block (CFNB) with bupivacaine to PAI with liposomal bupivacaine.

Continuous Femoral Versus Epidural Block for Attainment Of 120° Knee Flexion After Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial

We conducted the prospective randomized controlled trial to test that continuous femoral nerve block (CFNB) improves attainment of 120° knee flexion compared to continuous epidural analgesia (CEA). Sixty-six patients scheduled for unilateral total knee arthroplasty were randomized into two groups; infusion of ropivacaine 0.15% into CEA or CFNB to third postoperative days. We studied the time required to attain 120° knee flexion, variations in thigh and calf circumferences around the treated knee, pain scores, rehabilitation milestones, the need for adjuvant analgesics, and side effects. CFNB patients attained earlier knee flexion to 120°, lower variations in thigh and calf circumferences, less pain during rehabilitation, and less need for adjuvant analgesics. CFNB is a better pain management strategy that accelerates knee flexion rehabilitation.     

超声联合神经刺激器引导连续股神经阻滞用于全膝关节置换术后镇痛的对比研究

目的探讨超声联合神经刺激器引导连续股神经阻滞的临床效果。方法 2010年9月对全膝关节置换术后镇痛22例采用超声联合神经刺激器引导连续股神经阻滞（C＋S组）,23例采用单纯神经刺激器引导连续股神经阻滞（S组）,比较2组镇痛效果及穿刺并发症。结果 C＋S组操作时间（6.3±3.0）min,明显短于S组（11.5±7.0）min（t=-3.212,P=0.002）。经股神经管推注0.25%罗哌卡因20 ml后15 min麻醉效果差异无显著性（Z=-0.462,P=0.644）。术后静态VAS评分（RVAS）、主动功能训练VAS评分（IVAS）和持续被动功能训练VAS评分（PVAS）差异无显著性（P〉0.05）。术后S组5例穿刺部位皮下淤血,C＋S组无皮下淤血病例（P=0.049）。术后C＋S组需要单次推注利多卡因4例,S组为5例,差异无显著性（χ2=0.000,P=1.000）。术后72 h哌替啶用量C＋S组与S组差异无显著性（Z=-0.069,P=0.945）。结论超声联合神经刺激器引导连续股神经阻滞操作时间明显缩短,同时可以减少穿刺导致的术后皮下淤血。     

Comparison of Local Infiltration of Analgesia and Sciatic Nerve Block in Addition to Femoral Nerve Block for Total Knee Arthroplasty

We conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial to test the null hypothesis that there is no difference between sciatic nerve block (SNB) and local infiltration of analgesia (LIA) regarding postoperative analgesia after total knee arthroplasty (TKA), when administrated in addition to femoral nerve block (FNB). Forty-six patients scheduled for TKA were randomized into two groups: concomitant administration of FNB and SNB or FNB and LIA. Average pain scores during the first 21 days after surgery were similar in the two groups and remained at low level. There was no significant difference in the need for adjuvant analgesics, patient satisfaction level, the time to achieve rehabilitation goals, and length of hospital stay. The LIA offers a potentially safer alternative to SNB as an adjunct to FNB.     

Comparison of Efficacy of Adductor Canal Block,Local Infiltration Analgesia and Both Combined in Postoperative Pain Management After Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial

PurposeThe aim of our study is to compare the efficacy of adductor canal block (ACB), periarticular local infiltration (PLI) and both combined (ACB + PLI) in multimodal pain management after TKA.MethodsThis is a prospective, randomized controlled double-blinded study undergoing primary unilateral TKA. They were randomized into three groups with fifty patients in each group: ACB alone (30 ml of 0.2% ropivacaine), PLI alone (30 ml 0.5% ropivacaine in 20 ml of normal saline), and both combined (ACB + PLI). The primary outcome studied was pain using visual analog score (VAS) in postoperative days (POD) 1 and 2. The secondary outcomes estimated were the ambulation capacity, the knee range of motion, need for rescue analgesia and length of hospital stay.ResultsThe mean VAS score was significantly lower at rest and after mobilization in the combined group (3.51 at POD 1, 2.04 at POD 2), compared with either alone group (ACB = 4.70, 2.86 versus PLI = 4.39, 3.41 at POD 1 and 2 respectively after mobilization, p < 0.001). The ambulation capacity (combined = 103.3 steps versus ACB = 98.1 and PLI = 95.2 steps, p = 0.04) and the knee range of motion (arc of motion 106.7 degrees versus ACB = 104.9 and PLI = 102.2 degrees, p = 0.004) were significantly higher in the combined group compared to the other groups. There was no significant difference in the length of stay between the groups (p = 0.12).ConclusionAdductor canal block combined with periarticular local infiltration provides better pain relief, good range of motion, quicker rehabilitation, and reduced opioid consumption.     

Comparison between Ultrasound-Guided Pericapsular Nerve Group Block and Local Infiltration Analgesia for Postoperative Analgesia after Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Objectives

Pericapsular nerve group (PENG) blocking is a novel nerve block modality for analgesia after total hip arthroplasty (THA); however, its analgesic efficacy is unclear. We aimed to compare the analgesic effect of ultrasound-guided PENG blocking and periarticular local infiltration analgesia after THA.

Methods

This study involved patients undergoing unilateral primary THA at our institution between October 2022 and December 2022. Based on a prospective double-blind, randomized approach, patients were randomly divided into two groups: the PENG and infiltration groups. The former received ultrasound-guided pericapsular nerve block before surgery while the latter received local anesthesia and local infiltration analgesia during surgery. The primary outcome was the amount of morphine used for rescue analgesia within 48 h after surgery and the visual analog scale (VAS) pain score at 3, 6, 12, 24, and 48 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes consisted of postoperative hip function on the first and second postoperative days, including hip extension angle and flexion, as well as distance traveled by the patient. Tertiary outcomes included length of hospital stay and postoperative adverse reactions. The data were analyzed using SPSS 26.0. Using the appropriate statistical methodology, continuous and categorical data were analyzed, and p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

There was no clear difference in morphine requirements during the first 24 hours postoperatively (5.8 ± 5.9 vs. 6.0 ± 6.3, p = 0.910), in the total postoperative morphine consumption (7.5 ± 6.3 vs. 7.8 ± 6.6, p = 0.889), and in the postoperative resting VAS pain scores (p > 0.05). However, the exercise VAS score in the PENG group was significantly higher than that in the infiltration group within 12 hours after surgery (6.1 + 1.2 vs. 5.4 + 1.0, p = 0.008). There was no significant difference in hip function, length of hospital stay, or incidence of complications between the two groups.

Conclusion

The analgesic effect and functional recovery of ultrasound-guided pericapsular nerve block for THA was not superior to that of periarticular local infiltration analgesia.     

人工全髋与股骨头置换术并发异位骨化的比较

本文报告人工全髋关节置换术与人工股骨头置换术164例,术后发生异位骨化39例。全髋关节置换术的异位骨化率为40％,人工股骨头置换术的异位骨化率为18.5％。异位骨化均按Brooker分类法分类,二种不同术式的异位骨化率有显著性差异（P<0.05）。作者就异位骨化的形成、异位骨化率在二种术式之间的差异进行了讨论,并提出了异位骨化对疗效的影响及其与术式选择之间的关系。