切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版) ›› 2021, Vol. 15 ›› Issue (06) : 617 -620. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-392X.2021.06.018

临床论著

超声引导下腰方肌阻滞与腹横肌平面阻滞技术在腹股沟疝修补术后镇痛中的应用比较
张珏颢1, 张凯2, 杨学林1,()   
  1. 1. 210008 南京大学医学院附属鼓楼医院麻醉科
    2. 210008 南京大学医学院附属鼓楼医院普通外科
  • 收稿日期:2020-12-06 出版日期:2021-12-20
  • 通信作者: 杨学林

Comparison of the postoperative analgesic effects of ultrasound-guided quadratus lumborum block and transversus abdominis plane block after inguinal hernia repair

Juehao Zhang1, Kai Zhang2, Xuelin Yang1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Anesthesiology, The Drum Tower Hospital Affiliated to Nanjing University Medical College, Nanjing 210008, China
    2. Department of General Surgery, The Drum Tower Hospital Affiliated to Nanjing University Medical College, Nanjing 210008, China
  • Received:2020-12-06 Published:2021-12-20
  • Corresponding author: Xuelin Yang
引用本文:

张珏颢, 张凯, 杨学林. 超声引导下腰方肌阻滞与腹横肌平面阻滞技术在腹股沟疝修补术后镇痛中的应用比较[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(06): 617-620.

Juehao Zhang, Kai Zhang, Xuelin Yang. Comparison of the postoperative analgesic effects of ultrasound-guided quadratus lumborum block and transversus abdominis plane block after inguinal hernia repair[J]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2021, 15(06): 617-620.

目的

比较腰方肌阻滞与腹横肌平面阻滞在腹股沟疝修补术的术后镇痛效果。

方法

本研究为自身配对、左右对照、双盲研究。选择择期行双侧腹股沟疝修补术患者42例,均为男性,年龄60~80岁,体质量指数21~26 kg/m2,美国麻醉医师协会Ⅰ~Ⅲ级。根据随机数字表分为腰方肌阻滞组(Q组)和腹横肌平面阻滞组(T组)。随机序列数为奇数的患者左侧为腰方肌阻滞组(Q组),右侧为腹横肌平面阻滞组(T组);偶数者右侧为Q组,左侧为T组。Q组行腰方肌阻滞,T组行腹横肌平面阻滞,均给予0.375%罗哌卡因20 ml。所有患者采用相同的全身麻醉方案。记录所有患者的拔管时间、术后2、4、8、12、24、48 h静息和活动时视觉模拟评估法(VAS)评分,补救镇痛使用情况,双侧神经阻滞持续时间。记录血肿、内脏损伤、局部麻醉药中毒、穿刺部位感染等神经阻滞穿刺并发症和恶心呕吐等不良反应发生情况。

结果

与T组比较,Q组患者术后12、24、48 h静息和活动时VAS评分均明显降低(P<0.05),神经阻滞持续时间明显延长(P<0.05)。术后24 h、48 h分别有11例(26.2%)和13例(31.0%)患者需补救镇痛。所有患者均未见血肿、内脏损伤、局部麻醉药中毒、穿刺部位感染等神经阻滞穿刺后并发症,6例(14.3%)患者出现术后恶心呕吐。

结论

Q组可安全应用于腹股沟疝修补术患者,较T组提供更长,术后镇痛效果更好。

Objective

To compare the postoperative analgesic effects of quadratus lumborum block and transversus abdominis plane block in patients undergoing inguinal hernia repair.

Methods

This is a self-matched, left-right control, double-blind study. Forty-two male patients, aged 60 to 80 years, with BMI of 21 to 26 kg/m2, ASA physical status of Ⅰ to Ⅲ, undergoing elective bilateral inguinal hernia repair were enrolled in this study. According to the random number table, they were divided into two groups: quadratus lumborum block group (group Q) and transversus abdominis plane block group (group T). The left side was group Q and the right side was group T when the random number was odd number. Conversely, the left side was group T and the right side was group Q when the random number was even number. Group Q received quadratus lumborum block while group T received transversus abdominis plane block. All the patients were given 20 ml of 0.375% ropivacaine under either of these two nerve blocks. All the patients received the same general anesthesia. The extubation time, visual analogue scale (VAS) at rest and on movement at 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 48 hours postoperative, the use of rescue analgesia, the duration of bilateral nerve block were recorded. We also recorded, complications of nerve block such as hematoma, visceral injury, local anesthetic poisoning, infection of puncture site and the incidences of adverse effects such as nausea and vomiting.

Results

The VAS scores at rest and on movement in group Q post-operative 12, 24, 48 h were lower than those in group T (P<0.05). The durations of analgesia were longer in group Q than that in group T (P<0.05). Eleven patients (26.2%) and thirteen patients (31.0%) needed rescue analgesia 24 and 48 h after operation respectively. No complications of nerve block such as hematoma, visceral injury, local anesthetic intoxication, and infection of puncture site were observed in both groups. Six patients (14.3%) suffered from nausea and vomiting after surgery.

Conclusion

The results of this study showed that in patients undergoing inguinal hernia repair, the quadratus lumborum block provided safe, longer and more effective postoperative analgesia compared with the transversus abdominis plane block.

表1 2组患者不同时点VAS评分的比较[分,MQ1Q3)]
[1]
Urits I, Ostling PS, Novitch MB, et al. Truncal regional nerve blocks in clinical anesthesia practice[J]. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol, 2019, 33(4): 559-571.
[2]
D'Ercole F, Arora H, Kumar PA. Paravertebral block for thoracic surgery[J]. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth, 2018, 32(2): 915-927.
[3]
张珏颢,杨学林,张凯. 腹横肌平面阻滞在腹股沟疝修补术患者术后快速康复中的作用[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2020, 14(3): 233-237.
[4]
杨学林,张凯,杜颖, 等. 超声引导下腹横肌平面阻滞对老年腹股沟疝修补术患者术后疼痛的影响[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2017, 11(6): 441-444.
[5]
付越,刘俊艳. 超声引导腹横肌平面阻滞复合右美托咪定对老年腹股沟斜疝手术患者麻醉效果的影响[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2020, 14(3): 243-246.
[6]
Wang Y, Wang X, Zhang K. Correction to: effects of transversusabdominis plane block versus quadratuslumborum block on postoperative analgesia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials[J]. BMC Anesthesiol, 2020, 20(1): 128.
[7]
韩彬,王武涛,何爱萍. 超声引导下腰方肌阻滞或腹横肌平面阻滞联合舒芬太尼PCIA在阑尾切除术后镇痛中的比较[J]. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2017, 33(10): 984-986.
[8]
Öksüz G, Bilal B, Gürkan Y, et al. Quadratuslumborum block versus transversusabdominis plane block in children undergoing low abdominal surgery: a randomized controlled trial[J]. RegAnesth Pain Med, 2017, 42(5): 674-679.
[9]
Blanco R, Ansari T, Riad W, et al. Quadratuslumborum block versus transversusabdominis plane block for postoperative pain after cesarean delivery: a randomized controlled trial[J]. Reg Anesth Pain Med, 2016, 41(6): 757-762.
[10]
Verma K, Malawat A, Jethava D, et al. Comparison of transversusabdominis plane block and quadratuslumborum block for post-caesarean section analgesia: a randomised clinical trial[J]. Indian J Anaesth, 2019, 63(10): 820-826.
[11]
Murouchi T, Iwasaki S, Yamakage M. Quadratuslumborum block: analgesic effects and chronological ropivacaine concentrations after laparoscopic surgery[J]. RegAnesth Pain Med, 2016, 41(2): 146-150.
[12]
İpek CB, Kara D, Yılmaz S, et al. Comparison of ultrasound-guided transversusabdominis plane block, quadratuslumborum block, and caudal epidural block for perioperative analgesia in pediatric lower abdominal surgery[J]. Turk J Med Sci, 2019, 49(5): 1395-1402.
[13]
王健. 超声引导下腰方肌阻滞[J]. 岭南现代临床外科, 2017, 17(5): 604-608.
[14]
Ueshima H, Otake H, Lin JA. Ultrasound-guided quadratuslumborum block: an updated review of anatomy and techniques[J]. Biomed Res Int, 2017, 2017: 2752876.
[15]
Dam M, Moriggl B, Hansen CK, et al. The pathway of injectate spread with the transmuscularquadratuslumborum block: a cadaver study[J]. Anesth Analg, 2017, 125(1): 303-312.
[16]
Elsharkawy H, El-Boghdadly K, Kolli S, et al. Injectate spread following anterior sub-costal and posterior approaches to the quadratuslumborum block: a comparative cadaveric study[J]. Eur J Anaesthesiol, 2017, 34(9): 587-595.
[17]
Mirra A, von Rotz A, Schmidhalter M, et al. Ultrasound-guided lateral and subcostal transversusabdominis plane block in calves: a cadaveric study[J]. Vet Anaesth Analg, 2018, 45(3): 384-391.
[18]
李纯青. 腰方肌阻滞的临床应用进展[J]. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2018, 34(6): 616-619.
[19]
Wikner M. Unexpected motor weakness following quadratus lumborum block for gynaecological laparoscopy[J]. Anaesthesia, 2017, 72(2): 230-232.
[1] 刘嘉嘉, 王承华, 陈绪娇, 刘瑗玲, 王善钰, 屈海花, 张莉. 经阴道子宫-输卵管实时三维超声造影中患者疼痛发生情况及其影响因素分析[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(09): 959-965.
[2] 董红华, 郭艮春, 江磊, 吴雪飞, 马飞翔, 李海凤. 骨科康复一体化模式在踝关节骨折快速康复中的应用[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 802-807.
[3] 吴畏, 吴永哲, 李宗倍, 崔宏力, 李华志, 许臣. 轻质大网孔补片腹腔镜下疝修补术治疗老年腹股沟疝的疗效及炎症因子的影响[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 70-73.
[4] 孟飞龙, 华帅, 张莹, 路广海. 经脐单孔腹腔镜后鞘后入路在全腹膜外腹股沟疝修补术中的应用[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 658-660.
[5] 田文, 杨晓冬. 腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术式选择及注意事项[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 595-597.
[6] 李涛, 陈纲, 李世拥. 腹腔镜下右侧腹股沟斜疝修补术(TAPP)[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 598-598.
[7] 王可, 范彬, 李多富, 刘奎. 两种疝囊残端处理方法在经腹腹膜前腹股沟疝修补术中的疗效比较[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 692-696.
[8] 袁伟, 张修稳, 潘宏波, 章军, 王虎, 黄敏. 平片式与填充式腹股沟疝修补术的疗效比较[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 697-701.
[9] 夏松, 姚嗣会, 汪勇刚. 经腹腹膜前与疝环充填式疝修补术治疗腹股沟疝的对照研究[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 702-705.
[10] 刘跃刚, 薛振峰. 腹腔镜腹股沟疝日间手术在老年患者中的安全性分析[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 711-714.
[11] 杨瑞洲, 李国栋, 吴向阳. 腹股沟疝术后感染的治疗方法探讨[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 715-719.
[12] 徐金林, 陈征. 抗菌药物临床应用监测对腹股沟疝修补术预防用药及感染的影响[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 720-723.
[13] 于智慧, 赵建军. 后路腰方肌阻滞复合全身麻醉在腹股沟斜疝经腹腹膜前手术中的应用效果[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 734-739.
[14] 田静, 方秀春. 超声引导下横筋膜平面阻滞在儿童腹股沟疝手术的应用效果[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 740-744.
[15] 李静如, 王江玲, 吴向阳. 简易负压引流在腹股沟疝术后浅部感染中的疗效分析[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 745-749.
阅读次数
全文


摘要