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) ›› 2026, Vol. 20 ›› Issue (01) : 58 -61. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-392X.2026.01.011

论著

超声引导前、后路腰方肌阻滞对腹股沟疝修补术后镇痛效果的比较
谢本发, 牛居辉(), 韩苗华, 何睿, 张庆兵, 许伟   
  1. 241000 安徽,芜湖市第一人民医院麻醉科
  • 收稿日期:2023-11-10 出版日期:2026-02-18
  • 通信作者: 牛居辉
  • 基金资助:
    皖南医学院校级科研项目(JXYY2022110); 吴阶平医学基金会临床科研专项资助(320.6750.18286)

Comparison of analgesic effects of ultrasound-guided anterior and posterior quadratus lumborum block after inguinal hernia repair

Benfa Xie, Juhui Niu(), Miaohua Han, Rui He, Qingbing Zhang, Wei Xu   

  1. Department of Anesthesiology, The First People's Hospital of Wuhu, Wuhu 241000, Anhui Province, China
  • Received:2023-11-10 Published:2026-02-18
  • Corresponding author: Juhui Niu
引用本文:

谢本发, 牛居辉, 韩苗华, 何睿, 张庆兵, 许伟. 超声引导前、后路腰方肌阻滞对腹股沟疝修补术后镇痛效果的比较[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(01): 58-61.

Benfa Xie, Juhui Niu, Miaohua Han, Rui He, Qingbing Zhang, Wei Xu. Comparison of analgesic effects of ultrasound-guided anterior and posterior quadratus lumborum block after inguinal hernia repair[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2026, 20(01): 58-61.

目的

探讨超声引导下前、后路腰方肌阻滞(QLB)在单侧腹股沟疝修补术后镇痛的效果。

方法

选择2020年2月至2022年2月芜湖市第一人民医院择期行单侧开放性腹股沟疝修补术的患者60例,随机分为前路QLB组(A组)和后路QLB组(B组),每组30例。全身麻醉诱导前行QLB。术毕行舒芬太尼静脉自控镇痛,肌注地佐辛进行补救镇痛。记录术后2、6、12、24 h静息及从躺卧姿势坐立时数字疼痛评价量表(NRS)评分、镇痛泵首次按压时间、镇痛泵有效按压次数、24 h内补救性镇痛例数、口述评分法满意度评分;记录下肢肌力减退、恶心呕吐、嗜睡、低血压等不良反应及感染、内脏损伤、血肿、局部麻醉药中毒等并发症发生情况。

结果

A组术后12、24 h从躺卧姿势坐立时NRS评分低于B组(P<0.05),A组术后48 h高满意度比例显著高于B组(P<0.05),A组镇痛泵首次按压时间、镇痛泵有效按压次数、24 h补救性镇痛例数、恶心呕吐发生率显著少于B组(P<0.05);2组低血压、肌力减退、嗜睡发生率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),2组均无感染、内脏损伤、血肿、局部麻醉药中毒等并发症发生。

结论

对于行单侧腹股沟疝修补术的患者,超声引导下前路QLB的镇痛效果优于后路。

Objective

To investigate the effects of ultrasound-guided anterior and posterior quadratus lumborum block (QLB) for analgesia after unilateral inguinal hernia repair surgery.

Methods

Sixty patients who underwent elective unilateral open inguinal hernia repair in Wuhu First People's Hospital from February 2020 to February 2022 were selected and randomly divided into anterior QLB group (group A) and posterior QLB group (group B), with 30 patients in each group. QLB was performed before general anesthesia induction. Sufentanil PICA was completed after the operation. Intramuscular injection of dezocine was given for remedial analgesia. Numerical rating scale (NRS) scores were recorded at 2, 6, 12, 24 h postoperatively at rest and when sitting up from the lying position. The first pressing time of analgesia pump, analgesia pump effective press number, the number of cases requiring remedial analgesia within 24 h, and VRS satisfaction score were recorded. The occurrence of lower limb muscle weakness, nausea and vomiting, drowsiness, hypotension and other adverse reactions and complications such as infection, visceral injury, hematoma, and local anesthetic poisoning were recorded.

Results

The NRS score when sitting up from the lying position of group A was lower than that of group B at 12 and 24 h after surgery (P<0.05). The proportion of high satisfaction in group A was significantly higher than that of group B (P<0.05) at 48 h after operation. The first pressing time of the analgesic pump, the number of effective pressing of the analgesic pump, the number of 24 h remedial analgesia cases, and the incidence of nausea and vomiting in group A were significantly lower than those in group B (P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence rates of hypotension, muscle weakness, and drowsiness between the two groups (P>0.05). There were no complications such as infection, visceral injury, hematoma, and local anesthetic poisoning in the two groups.

Conclusion

For patients undergoing unilateral inguinal hernia repair, the analgesic effect of anterior QLB under ultrasound guidance is better than that of posterior approach.

表1 2组患者一般资料比较
表2 2组患者术后不同时点数字疼痛评价量表评分比较(分,±s
表3 2组患者术后48 h满意度VRS评分比较[例(%)]
表4 2组患者术后镇痛情况比较
表5 2组患者围手术期不良反应发生情况比较[例(%)]
[1]
中国医师协会外科医师分会疝和腹壁外科学组, 中华医学会外科学分会疝与腹壁外科学组, 全国卫生产业企业管理协会疝和腹壁外科产业及临床研究分会, 等. 腹股沟疝日间手术规范化流程专家共识(2020版)[J]. 中华消化外科杂志, 2020, 19(7): 714-719.
[2]
Köckerling F, Schug PC. Early surgical intervention following inguinal hernia repair with severe postoperative pain[J]. Front Surg, 2017, 4: 67.
[3]
律峰, 闵苏, 黎平, 等. 腰方肌阻滞用于老年患者单侧腹股沟斜疝修补术的效果[J]. 中华麻醉学杂志, 2019, 39(3): 369-372.
[4]
谢颖, 李林佶, 任普圣, 等. 超声引导下腰方肌阻滞与腹横肌平面阻滞在腹股沟疝无张力疝修补术中麻醉效果的比较[J]. 中国老年学杂志, 2020, 1(40): 95-98.
[5]
单涛, 孟庆胜, 尹骏, 等. 超声引导连续前路腰方肌阻滞用于全髋关节置换术后镇痛的效果[J]. 中华麻醉学杂志, 2019, 39(7): 840-842.
[6]
夏玉中, 卜慧莲, 王照飞, 等. 超声引导下腰方肌阻滞用于腹腔镜胆囊切除术后镇痛的效果[J]. 中华麻醉学杂志, 2018, 38(8): 950-952.
[7]
邓欢玲, 朱妍梦, 戴春群, 等. 0.375%罗哌卡因不同注射速度对后入路腰方肌阻滞术后镇痛效果的影响[J]. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2020, 36(10): 1002-1005.
[8]
李运, 孙义, 张析哲, 等. 超声引导下肋下前路腰方肌阻滞对后腹腔镜肾脏手术后镇痛效果的影响[J]. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2020, 36(8): 745-749.
[9]
Blanco R. TAP block under ulrasound guidance: the description of a "no pops" technique[J]. Reg Anesth Pain Med, 2007, 32(Suppl 1): S1-S130.
[10]
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.
[11]
Saito T, Den S, Tanuma K, et al. Anatomical bases for paravertebral anesthetic block: fluid communication between the thoracic and lumbar paravertebral regions[J]. Surg Radiol Anat, 1999, 21(6): 359-363.
[12]
Dam M, Moriggl B, Hansen CK, et al. The pathway of injectate spread with the transmuscular quadratus lumborum block: a cadaver study[J]. Anesth Analg, 2017, 125(1): 303-312.
[13]
何君会, 冉伟, 杨雪莲, 等. 超声引导下腰方肌阻滞对剖宫产术后镇痛的影响[J]. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2019, 35(1): 21-25.
[14]
Elsharkawy H, E -Boghdadly K, Kolli S, et al. Injectate spread following anterior sub-costal and posterior approaches to the quadratus lumborum block: a comparative cadaveric study[J]. Eur J Anaesthesiol, 2017, 34(9): 587 -595.
[15]
Ueshima H, Hiroshi O. Incidence of lower-extremity muscle weakness after quadratus lumborum block[J]. J Clin Anesth, 2018, 44: 104.
[16]
Carline L, Mcleod GA, Lamb C, et al. A cadaver study comparing spread of dye and nerve involvement after three different quadratus lumborum blocks[J]. Br J Anaesth, 2016, 117(3): 387-394.
[1] 高昕雨, 杨楷熠, 陈慧婷, 朱丽, 方雅滨, 宋梅, 曾锦树. 甲状腺乳头状癌术后颈部转移淋巴结超声引导下微波消融与再次手术的疗效比较[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2025, 22(09): 858-867.
[2] 魏平, 赵鑫, 田广健. 腹腔镜下置入IPST专用疝补片并开放原位造口重建治疗造口旁疝疗效分析(附52例报告)[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(01): 67-70.
[3] 王宝山, 郑若彤, 赵敏娴, 邢晓伟, 申英末. 日间手术模式在腹股沟疝合并肝硬化及中少量腹水患者中的应用[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(01): 26-32.
[4] 刘永飞, 王璐婷, 刘雨辰, 赵凤林, 张洪铭. Lichtenstein手术在口服抗血小板药物的日间手术患者应用安全性对比研究[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(01): 33-36.
[5] 刘宗航, 顾熙, 徐子宇, 周澍, 张吴楼, 张业鹏, 林昊, 嵇振岭. 腹腔镜膈疝修补术的单中心临床经验[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(01): 37-41.
[6] 闫红林, 任海强, 李京, 郝俊强, 王子康, 杨彦伟. 羟考酮在腹腔镜疝修补术患者中应用价值的回顾性研究[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(01): 42-47.
[7] 黄建朋, 宗华, 杨骏波. 基于神经分布的局部浸润麻醉在Lichtenstein手术中的应用[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(01): 48-51.
[8] 潘振坤, 张洪海, 倪永健, 叶晋生. 局部浸润联合神经阻滞麻醉下Lichtenstein疝修补术在腹膜透析相关腹股沟疝中的应用[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(01): 52-57.
[9] 中国日间手术合作联盟疝和腹壁外科专业日间手术专家委员会, 《中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版)》编辑委员会, 全国卫生产业企业管理协会疝和腹壁外科产业及临床研究分会, 中国医师协会外科医师分会疝和腹壁外科专家工作组, 中华医学会外科学分会疝与腹壁外科学组, 中华消化外科菁英荟疝与腹壁外科学组, 中华志愿者协会中西医结合专家工作委员会疝和腹壁外科全国专业组, 中国非公立医疗机构协会日间手术与疝外科专业委员会. 腹股沟疝日间手术规范化流程与标准专家指南(2026版)[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(01): 1-9.
[10] 钟秋润, 严丹檎, 范小莉, 陈蓉, 罗坤. 腹股沟疝修补术后发生血清肿危险因素的Meta分析[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 701-706.
[11] 刘沐阳, 沈晓军, 史立洲, 谭华志, 王睿杰, 程杰, 吴凡, 顾隆淼. 术后血清肿:腹股沟疝修补术的潜在挑战及干预策略[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 712-716.
[12] 王佳杰, 李文波. 3D腹腔镜在腹股沟疝治疗中的临床应用进展[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 717-721.
[13] 陈双, 李英儒. 单孔腹腔镜腹股沟疝经腹腹膜前修补术的技术与方法[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 629-632.
[14] 杨健康, 周茂旭, 胡强, 何宗国, 顾亚奇. 超声引导下经皮经肝Ⅰ期胆道造瘘取石术与经皮经肝胆道镜治疗复杂肝胆管结石的结石清除效果及复发率比较[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2026, 16(01): 61-66.
[15] 韩静, 李西羊, 张桂芝. 不同浓度罗哌卡因超声引导下腹横肌平面阻滞在结直肠癌术后镇痛中的效果对比[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2026, 16(01): 79-85.
阅读次数
全文


摘要


AI


AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?