三种不同镇痛方式用于剖宫产术后镇痛的效果

摘要
图/表
参考文献(22)
相关文章 (13)

全文: PDF (450 KB) HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要目的评价三种不同镇痛方式用于剖宫产术后镇痛的效果。方法选取2017年3～12月武汉大学中南医院收治的90例择期行剖宫产术的产妇为研究对象，所有产妇均在硬膜外和脊髓联合麻醉下行剖宫产。采用随机数字表法将其分为连续硬膜外自控镇痛组（PCEA组）、静脉自控镇痛组（PCIA组）、连续腹横肌平面阻滞组（CTAP组），每组30例。PCEA组术后经硬膜外导管输注0.375%罗哌卡因，负荷剂量2 mL，背景输注2 mL/h，单次按压剂量2 mL，锁定时间15 min；PCIA组术后静脉泵注1 μg/mL舒芬太尼+50 μg/mL托烷司琼，负荷剂量2 mL，背景输注2 mL/h，单次按压剂量2 mL，锁定时间15 min；CTAP组术后经导管向腹横筋膜间隙内输注0.375%罗哌卡因，负荷量20 mL/侧，背景输注6～8 mL/h，单次病人自控镇痛（PCA）剂量6～8 mL，锁定时间60 min。各组术后镇痛均持续72 h。若静息疼痛视觉模拟评分（VAS）≥4分则肌内注射曲马多100 mg进行补救镇痛。记录产妇术后即刻、2、6、12、24、36、48、72 h静息和运动时的VAS评分、舒适度评分（BCS）、补救镇痛率、人均曲马多消耗量、术后肛门排气时间、双下肢抬离床面时间及镇痛相关并发症。结果与PCIA组比较，PCEA组和CTAP组术后6、12、24、36、48 h时静息和运动状态的VAS评分较低，BCS评分较高，差异有统计学意义（P ＜ 0.05），补救镇痛率低，人均曲马多消耗量少，肛门排气时间缩短，镇痛相关并发症发生率低，差异有统计学意义（P ＜ 0.05）；PCEA组及CTAP组术后各时间点运动状态的VAS评分、BCS评分、补救镇痛率、人均曲马多消耗量、肛门排气时间及镇痛相关并发症总发生率比较，差异无统计学意义（P ＞ 0.05），但CTAP组双下肢抬离床面时间较PCEA组缩短（P ＜ 0.05）。结论与PCIA和PCEA比较，CTAP在剖宫产术中镇痛效果更好，不良反应发生率更低，并发症最少。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	杜鹏辉1 杨胜凤2 王正刚3 陈春意3 冯晓波3▲

关键词 ：剖宫产, 术后镇痛, 腹横肌平面阻滞, 硬膜外麻醉

Abstract：Objective To evaluate the efficacy of three different analgesic methods when used for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing cesarean section. Methods A total of 90 parturients scheduled for elective cesarean section in Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, from March to December 2017 were selected as research subjects. All parturients underwent cesarean delivery under combined spinal and epidural anesthesia. They were divided into patient-controlled epidural analgesia group (PCEA group), patient-controlled intravenous analgesia group (PCIA group) and continuous transversus abdominis plane block group (CTAP group) according to the random number table method, with 30 cases in each group. In PCEA group, the patients received PCEA with 0.375% Ropivacaine 2 mL after surgery, and the PCEA pump was set up to deliver a 2 mL bolus dose, a 15 min lockout interval and background infusion at a rate of 2 mL/h. In PCIA group, the patients received PCIA with Sufentanil 1 μg/mL + Tropisetron 50 μg/mL mixture 2 mL after surgery, and the PCIA pump was set up to deliver a 2 mL bolus dose, a 15 min lockout interval and background infusion at a rate of 2 mL/h. In CTAP group, bilateral TAP block was performed with 0.375% Ropivacaine 20 mL under ultrasound guidance and 0.375% Ropivacaine 6-8 mL/h was infused into bilateral TAPs by pump after surgery, the pump was set up to deliver a 6-8 mL bolus dose, a 60 min lockout interval. Analgesia lasted until 72 h after operation in all groups. When resting visual analog scale (VAS) scores≥4, Tramadol 100 mg was injected intravenously as rescue analgesia. The resting and moving VAS and Bruggrmann comfort scale (BCS) scores were recorded at immediately after the end of operation and at 2, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72 hours after operation, the rate of rescue analgesia, dosage of Tramadol, the recovery time of postoperative intestinal function and lower limb motor function, and the incidence of adverse reactions were also recorded within 72 h after operation. Results Compared with PCIA group, the resting and moving VAS scores were lower and the BCS scores were higher at 6, 12, 24, 36, 48 hours after operation in PCEA group and CTAP group, the differences were statistically significant (P ＜ 0.05), and the rate of rescue analgesia, dosage of Tramadol, recovery time of postoperative intestinal function and the incidence of adverse reactions were lower in PCEA group and CTAP group, the differences were statistically significant (P ＜ 0.05). There were no significant differences in moving VAS scores, BCS scores, rate of rescue analgesia, dosage of Tramadol, recovery time of postoperative intestinal function and the incidence of adverse reactions between the PCEA group and the CTAP group (P ＞ 0.05), but the recovery time of lower limb motor function in CTAP group was less than that in PCEA group (P ＜ 0.05). Conclusion Compared with PCIA and PCEA, CTAP can provide a better obstetric analgesia and less incidence of adverse reactions when used for the patients undergoing cesarean section, and the complication of CTAP is least.

Key words： Cesarean section Postoperative analgesia Transversus abdominis plane block Epidural anesthesia

基金资助:湖北省卫生计生委科研资助项目（WJ2017M036）。

通讯作者: ▲通讯作者

引用本文:

杜鹏辉1 杨胜凤2 王正刚3 陈春意3 冯晓波3▲. 三种不同镇痛方式用于剖宫产术后镇痛的效果[J]. 中国医药导报, 2019, 16(7): 100-104.
DU Penghui1 YANG Shengfeng2 WANG Zhenggang3 CHEN Chunyi3 FENG Xiaobo3▲. Efficacy of three different analgesic methods for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing cesarean section. 中国医药导报, 2019, 16(7): 100-104.

链接本文:

http://www.yiyaodaobao.com.cn/CN/ 或 http://www.yiyaodaobao.com.cn/CN/Y2019/V16/I7/100

[1] 阮焱，张为远.剖宫产的现状及剖宫产率高居不下的原因[J].实用妇产科杂志，2015，31（4）：241-243.
[2] 杨菊华，庞汝彦，钱军程，等.畸高的中国剖宫产率：问题与对策[J].人口与发展，2012，18（5）：36-51.
[3] Andziak M，Beta J，Barwijuk M，et al. Efficacy and tolerability of intravenous morphine patient-controlled analgesia（PCA）in women undergoing cesarean delivery [J]. Ginekol Pol，2015，86（6）：453-456.
[4] Kerai S，Saxena KN，Taneja B. Post-caesarean analgesia：What is new? [J]. Indian J Anaesth，2017，61（3）：200-214.
[5] 雷钟，刘亚华，段惠洁，等.经静脉与硬膜外两种自控镇痛方式效果的系统评价[J].中国循证医学杂志，2009，9（8）：880-886.
[6] 张双银，白洁，高翊博，等.超声引导下连续腹横肌平面阻滞用于子宫全切术患者术后镇痛的效果[J].中华麻醉学杂志，2017，37（8）：951-953.
[7] 占大兴，邹高锐，陈超，等.局部浸润镇痛和腹横肌平面阻滞用于剖宫产术后镇痛的效果比较[J].中国医药导报，2017，14（34）：58-61.
[8] Tikuisis R，Miliauskas P，Lukoseviciene V，et al. Transversus abdominis plane block for postoperative pain relief after hand-assisted laparoscopic colon surgery：a randomized，placebo-controlled clinical trial [J]. Tech Coloproctol，2016，20（12）：835-844.
[9] Nohuz E，El DB，Triki A，et al. Why and how to perform an ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plane block：A step-by-step approach [J]. Gynecol Obstet Fertil，2016， 44（12）：716-720.
[10] Ripolles J，Marmana MS，Abad A，et al. Analgesic efficacy of the ultrasound-guided blockade of the transversus abdominis plane - a systematic review [J]. Rev Bras Anestesiol，2015，65（4）：255-280.
[11] Eslamian L，Kabiri-Nasab M，Agha-Husseini M，et al. Adding Sufentanil to TAP Block Hyperbaric Bupivacaine Decreases Post-Cesarean Delivery Morphine Consumption [J]. Acta Med Iran，2016，54（3）：185-190.
[12] 侯铁军，陈继恩，陈沛华，等.腰硬联合阻滞、腹横肌平面阻滞在剖宫产术中的应用效果观察[J].山东医药，2015，55（35）：83-84.
[13] Mankikar MG，Sardesai SP，Ghodki PS. Ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plane block for post-operative analgesia in patients undergoing caesarean section [J]. Indian J Anaesth，2016，60（4）：253-257.
[14] Fusco P，Scimia P，Paladini G，et al. Transversus abdominis plane block for analgesia after Cesarean delivery. A systematic review [J]. Minerva Anestesiol，2015，81（2）：195-204.
[15] Mcdonnell JG，O'Donnell BD，Farrell T，et al. Transversus abdominis plane block：a cadaveric and radiological evaluation [J]. Reg Anesth Pain Med，2007，32（5）：399-404.
[16] Maeda A，Shibata SC，Kamibayashi T，et al. Continuous subcostal oblique transversus abdominis plane block provides more effective analgesia than single-shot block after gynaecological laparotomy：A randomised controlled trial [J]. Eur J Anaesthesiol，2015，32（7）：514-515.
[17] Ganapathy S，Sondekoppam RV，Terlecki M，et al. Comparison of efficacy and safety of lateral-to-medial continuous transversus abdominis plane block with thoracic epidural analgesia in patients undergoing abdominal surgery：A randomised，open-label feasibility study [J]. Eur J Anaesthesiol，2015，32（11）：797-804.
[18] Kuthiala G，Chaudhary G. Ropivacaine：A review of its pharmacology and clinical use [J]. Indian J Anaesth，2011，55（2）：104-110.
[19] 张国梁，任燕，孟明华，等.超声引导下连续腹横肌平面阻滞对剖宫产产妇术后镇痛的效果[J].山东医药，2017， 57（37）：84-86.
[20] Pinto FW，Fernandes CR，Vale ML，et al. Evaluation of transversus abdominis plane block in open appendectomy in paediatrics：Comparison of ropivacaine in two different concentrations [J]. Eur J Anaesthesiol，2018，35（7）：547-548.
[21] Mittal T，Dey A，Siddhartha R，et al. Efficacy of ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plane（TAP）block for postoperative analgesia in laparoscopic gastric sleeve resection：a randomized single blinded case control study [J]. Surg Endosc，2018，32（12）：4985-4989.
[22] 秦朝生.超声引导下连续腹横肌平面阻滞在腹腔镜结直肠手术术后镇痛的效果[D].南宁：广西医科大学，2016.