Suppr超能文献

髂筋膜阻滞用于髋关节镜检查术后疼痛控制:随机对照试验的系统评价

Fascia Iliaca Block for Postoperative Pain Control After Hip Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

作者信息

Smith John-Rudolph H, Kraeutler Matthew J, Keeling Laura E, Scillia Anthony J, McCarty Eric C, Mei-Dan Omer

机构信息

Mayo Clinic Alix School of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, St. Joseph's University Medical Center, Paterson, New Jersey, USA.

出版信息

Am J Sports Med. 2021 Dec;49(14):4042-4049. doi: 10.1177/0363546521996713. Epub 2021 Mar 12.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Various analgesic modalities have been used to improve postoperative pain in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy.

PURPOSE

To systematically review the literature to compare the efficacy of the fascia iliaca block (FIB) with that of other analgesic modalities after hip arthroscopy in terms of postoperative pain scores and analgesic consumption.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase up to April 2020 to identify randomized controlled trials that compared postoperative pain and analgesic consumption in patients after hip arthroscopy with FIB versus other pain control modalities. The search phrase used was "hip arthroscopy fascia iliaca randomized." Patients were evaluated based on postoperative pain scores and total postoperative analgesic consumption.

RESULTS

Five studies (3 level 1, 2 level 2) were identified that met inclusion criteria, including 157 patients undergoing hip arthroscopy with FIB (mean age, 38.3 years; 44.6% men) and 159 patients among the following comparison groups: lumbar plexus block (LPB), intra-articular ropivacaine (IAR), local anesthetic infiltration (LAI), saline placebo, and a no-block control group (overall mean age, 36.2 years; 36.5% men). No significant differences in pain scores were reported in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) between the FIB and LPB (3.4 vs 2.9; = .054), IAR (7.7 vs 7.9; = .72), control group (no FIB: 4.1 vs 3.8; = .76); or saline placebo (difference, -0.2 [95% CI, -1.1 to 0.7]). One study reported significantly higher pain scores at 1 hour postoperation in the FIB group compared with the LAI group (5.5 vs 3.4; = .02). Another study reported significantly greater total analgesic consumption (in morphine equivalent dosing) in the PACU among the FIB group compared with the LPB group (20.8 vs 17.0; = .02). No significant differences were observed in total PACU analgesic consumption between FIB and other analgesic modalities.

CONCLUSION

In patients undergoing hip arthroscopy, the FIB does not appear to demonstrate superiority to other forms of analgesics in the immediate postoperative period. Therefore, it is not recommended as a routine form of pain control for these procedures.

摘要

背景

多种镇痛方式已被用于改善接受髋关节镜手术患者的术后疼痛。

目的

系统回顾文献,比较髋关节镜检查后髂筋膜阻滞(FIB)与其他镇痛方式在术后疼痛评分和镇痛药物消耗量方面的疗效。

研究设计

系统评价。

方法

通过检索截至2020年4月的PubMed、Cochrane图书馆和Embase进行系统评价,以确定比较髋关节镜检查后接受FIB治疗的患者与其他疼痛控制方式患者的术后疼痛和镇痛药物消耗量的随机对照试验。使用的检索词为“髋关节镜检查 髂筋膜 随机”。根据术后疼痛评分和术后总镇痛药物消耗量对患者进行评估。

结果

确定了5项符合纳入标准的研究(3项1级研究,2项2级研究),包括157例接受FIB治疗的髋关节镜检查患者(平均年龄38.3岁;男性占44.6%),以及以下比较组中的159例患者:腰丛阻滞(LPB)、关节腔内罗哌卡因(IAR)、局部麻醉浸润(LAI)、生理盐水安慰剂和无阻滞对照组(总体平均年龄36.2岁;男性占36.5%)。FIB组与LPB组在麻醉后护理单元(PACU)的疼痛评分无显著差异(3.4对2.9;P = 0.054),与IAR组无显著差异(7.7对7.9;P = 0.72),与对照组(无FIB:4.1对3.8;P = 0.76)无显著差异;与生理盐水安慰剂组也无显著差异(差值为 -0.2[95%CI,-1.1至0.7])。一项研究报告,FIB组术后1小时的疼痛评分显著高于LAI组(5.5对3.4;P = 0.02)。另一项研究报告,FIB组在PACU的总镇痛药物消耗量(以吗啡当量剂量计)显著高于LPB组(20.8对17.0;P = 0.02)。FIB组与其他镇痛方式在PACU的总镇痛药物消耗量方面未观察到显著差异。

结论

在接受髋关节镜手术的患者中,FIB在术后即刻似乎并不比其他形式的镇痛药更具优势。因此,不建议将其作为这些手术常规的疼痛控制方式。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验