The Department of Anesthesiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
The Department of Anesthesiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2024 Aug;6(8):101433. doi: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2024.101433. Epub 2024 Jul 16.
Improved pain control after cesarean section remains a challenging objective. Although both the lateral quadratus lumborum block (L-QLB) and acupuncture have been reported to provide superior postoperative analgesia after cesarean section when compared to placebo, the efficacy of these techniques has never been compared head-to-head.
This study was conducted to investigate the comparative analgesic efficacy of L-QLB and acupuncture following elective cesarean section.
In this prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial, a total of 190 patients with singleton-term pregnancies scheduled for cesarean section under spinal-epidural anesthesia were enrolled. Patients were randomized 1:1 to acupuncture group or L-QLB group. L-QLB group received bilateral L-QLB with 0.33% ropivacaine and sham acupuncture, acupuncture group received transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation and press needle therapy, and sham L-QLB. All patients received the standard postoperative pain treatment. The primary outcome was pain scores on movement at 24 hours. Secondary endpoints included pain scores in the first 48 hours postoperatively, patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) demands, analgesia-related adverse effects, postoperative complications, QoR-15, the time to mobilization, and gastrointestinal function.
Median (interquartile range [range]) pain scores at 24 hours on movement were similar in patients receiving acupuncture or L-QLB (3 [2-4] vs 3 [2-4], respectively; P=.40). PCIA consumption and pain scores within 48 hours postoperatively also showed no difference between the two groups. The acupuncture improved QoR-15 scores at 24 and 48 hours postoperatively (P<.001), as well as shortened the time to first flatus (P=.03) and first drinking (P<.001) compared to L-QLB. In addition, the median time to mobilization in the L-QLB group was markedly prolonged compare with acupuncture group (17.0 [15.0-19.0] hours vs 15.3 [13.3-17.0] hours, estimated median difference, 1.5; 95% CI, 1-2; P<.001).
As a component of multimodal analgesia regimen after cesarean section, acupuncture did not lower postoperative pain scores or reduce analgesic medication consumption compared to L-QLB.
剖宫产术后疼痛控制的改善仍然是一个具有挑战性的目标。虽然与安慰剂相比,竖脊肌外侧方阻滞(L-QLB)和针刺均可提供更好的剖宫产术后镇痛效果,但这些技术的疗效从未进行过直接比较。
本研究旨在比较 L-QLB 和针刺在择期剖宫产术后的镇痛效果。
这是一项前瞻性、随机、对照临床试验,共纳入 190 例拟行椎管内麻醉下剖宫产术的单胎足月妊娠患者。患者按 1:1 随机分为针刺组或 L-QLB 组。L-QLB 组接受双侧 L-QLB 联合 0.33%罗哌卡因和假针刺,针刺组接受经皮穴位电刺激和按压针治疗,假 L-QLB 组。所有患者均接受标准的术后疼痛治疗。主要结局为术后 24 小时运动时的疼痛评分。次要终点包括术后 48 小时内的疼痛评分、患者自控静脉镇痛(PCIA)需求、镇痛相关不良反应、术后并发症、QoR-15 评分、活动时间和胃肠功能。
接受针刺或 L-QLB 的患者术后 24 小时运动时的疼痛评分中位数(四分位距[范围])相似(3 [2-4] 与 3 [2-4],分别;P=0.40)。两组术后 48 小时内 PCIA 消耗和疼痛评分也无差异。针刺治疗可改善术后 24 小时和 48 小时的 QoR-15 评分(P<.001),并缩短首次排气(P=.03)和首次饮水(P<.001)时间,与 L-QLB 相比。此外,L-QLB 组的首次活动时间明显延长(17.0 [15.0-19.0] 小时与 15.3 [13.3-17.0] 小时,估计中位数差异为 1.5;95%CI,1-2;P<.001)。
作为剖宫产术后多模式镇痛方案的一部分,与 L-QLB 相比,针刺并不能降低术后疼痛评分或减少镇痛药物的使用。