切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志 ›› 2021, Vol. 07 ›› Issue (04) : 201 -206. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2096-0263.2021.04.002

麻醉医学

不同浓度局麻药对超声引导下锁骨上臂丛神经阻滞效果的影响
黄泽良1,(), 白静1, 王程1   
  1. 1. 614000 乐山市市中区人民医院麻醉科
  • 收稿日期:2020-03-15 出版日期:2021-08-05
  • 通信作者: 黄泽良
  • 基金资助:
    乐山市重点研究项目(16SZD105)

The effect of different concentrations of local anesthetics on the ultrasound-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block

Zeliang Huang1,(), Jing Bai1, Cheng Wang1   

  1. 1. Department of Anesthesiology, Leshan Shizhong District People's Hospital, Leshan 614000, China
  • Received:2020-03-15 Published:2021-08-05
  • Corresponding author: Zeliang Huang
引用本文:

黄泽良, 白静, 王程. 不同浓度局麻药对超声引导下锁骨上臂丛神经阻滞效果的影响[J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2021, 07(04): 201-206.

Zeliang Huang, Jing Bai, Cheng Wang. The effect of different concentrations of local anesthetics on the ultrasound-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block[J]. Chinese Journal of Geriatric Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation(Electronic Edition), 2021, 07(04): 201-206.

目的

探讨不同浓度局麻药(罗哌卡因)对超声引导下锁骨上臂丛神经阻滞效果的影响。

方法

前瞻性收集2017年1月至2018年12月本院超声引导下锁骨上臂丛神经阻滞患者80例,采用随机数字表法将患者分为A组、B组、C组、D组,每组20例。A组给予1.00%罗哌卡因,B组给予0.75%罗哌卡因,C组给予0.50%罗哌卡因,D组给予0.375%罗哌卡因,四组均注射10 ml罗哌卡因。

结果

所有患者均获得完整随访,平均(11.3±2.4)个月。A组年龄22~72岁,男性12例,女性8例;B组年龄20~74岁,男性8例,女性12例;C组年龄23~75岁,男性10例,女性10例;D组年龄21~74岁,男性11例,女性9例。A组、B组、C组桡神经、尺神经、正中神经、肌皮神经感觉和运动阻滞起效时间及麻醉完善时间明显快于D组,A组[(557.2±61.4)min]、B组[(556.0±61.0)min]、C组[(553.7±60.2)min]麻醉维持时间明显长于D组[(476.5±52.6)min](P<0.05),A组、B组、C组麻醉效果优良率为100.00%、95.00%、95.00%,明显高于D组的70.00%(χ2=9.614,P=0.004),A组、B组不良反应率为35.00%、30.00%,明显高于C组、D组的5.00%、5.00%(χ2=9.972,P=0.003)。

结论

不同浓度局麻药(罗哌卡因)对超声引导下锁骨上臂丛神经阻滞效果的影响存在差异,其中0.50%罗哌卡因既具有良好的阻滞效果,不会增加不良反应。

Objective

To discuss the effect of different concentrations of local anesthetics (ropivacaine) on the ultrasound-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block.

Methods

Eighty patients with ultrasound-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block were selected prospectively in our hospital from January 2017 to December 2018, they were divided into the group A, group B, group C and group D according to the random number table, there were 20 cases in each group. The group A was given 1.00% ropivacaine, the group B was given 0.75% ropivacaine, the group C was given 0.50% ropivacaine, the group D was given 0.375% ropivacaine, and the four groups were injected with 10 ml ropivacaine.

Results

All patients were followed up for an average of (11.3±2.4) months. In group A, there were 12 males and 8 females, the aged was 22-72. In group B, there were 8 males and 12 females, the aged was 20-74. In group C, there were 10 males and 10 females, the aged was 23-75. In group D, there were 11 males and 9 females, the aged was 21-74. The sensory and motor block onset time of radial nerve, ulnar nerve, median nerve, musculocutaneous nerve and the anesthesia completion time in the group A, group B and group C were significantly faster than those in the group D, and the duration of anesthesia in the group A [(557.2±61.4)min], group B [(556.0±61.0)min] and group C [(553.7±60.2)min] were significantly longer than those in group D [(476.5±52.6)min] (P<0.05). The excellent and good rate of anesthesia effect in the group A, group B and group C were 100.00%, 95.00% and 95.00%, which were significantly higher than the 70.00% in the group D, the difference was statistically significant (χ2=9.614, P=0.004). The adverse reaction rate in the group A and group B were 35.00% and 30.00%, they were significantly higher than the 5.00% in the group C and the 5.00% in the group D, the difference was statistically significant (χ2=9.972, P=0.003).

Conclusions

Different concentrations of local anesthetics (ropivacaine) have different effects on ultrasound-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block, and among them, the 0.50% ropivacaine not only has the good blocking effect, but also does not increase the adverse reactions.

表1 四组超声引导下锁骨上臂丛神经阻滞患者一般资料比较
表2 四组超声引导下锁骨上臂丛神经感觉阻滞起效时间比较(min,±s
表3 A组、B组、C组与D组感觉阻滞起效时间比较的配对SNK-q检验结果
表4 四组超声引导下锁骨上臂丛神经运动阻滞起效时间比较(min,±s
表5 A组、B组、C组与D组运动阻滞起效时间比较的SNK-q检验结果
表6 四组超声引导下锁骨上臂丛神经阻滞麻醉效果比较[例(%)]
表7 四组超声引导下锁骨上臂丛神经阻滞不良反应比较[例(%)]
1
Choudhary N, Kumar A, Kohli A, et al. Single-point versus double-point injection technique of ultrasound-guided supraclavicular block: A randomized controlled study [J]. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol, 2019, 35(3): 373-378.
2
Grape S, Pawa A, Weber E, et al. Retroclavicular vs supraclavicular brachial plexus block for distal upper limb surgery: a randomised, controlled, single-blinded trial [J]. Br J Anaesth, 2019, 122(4): 518-524.
3
赵彩霞,靳会欣,张在旺,等.不同剂量右美托咪定对罗哌卡因臂丛神经阻滞时半数有效浓度的影响[J].中华麻醉学杂志, 2015, 35(7): 844-847.
4
Şalvız EA, Bingül ES, Savran-Karadeniz M, et al. Use of ultrasound-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block as an anesthesia technique in a patient with neurofibromatosis type 1:A case report [J]. Agri, 2018, 30(2): 93-96.
5
Retter S, Szerb J, Kwofie K, et al. Incidence of sub-perineural injection using a targeted intracluster supraclavicular ultrasound-guided approach in cadavers [J]. Br J Anaesth, 2019, 122(6): 776-781.
6
陈韬予,王少伟,王小健,等.经劈三角肌入路与经三角肌胸大肌入路治疗肱骨近端骨折临床疗效的Meta分析[J].中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2018, 4(6): 360-368.
7
Mangal V, Mistry T, Sharma G, et al. Effects of dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to ropivacaine in ultrasound-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus Block: A prospective, randomized, double-blind study [J]. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol, 2018, 34(3): 357-361.
8
Silva GR, Borges DG, Lopes IF, et al. Ultrasound-guided costoclavicular block as an alternative for upper limb anesthesia in obese patients [J]. Braz J Anesthesiol, 2019, 69(5): 510-513.
9
Palaniappan S, Subbiah V, Gopalan VR, et al. Observational study of the efficacy of supraclavicular brachial plexus block for arteriovenous fistula creation [J]. Indian J Anaesth, 2018, 62(8): 616-620.
10
Sato M. Ultrasound-guided quadratus lumborum block compared to caudal ropivacaine/morphine in children undergoing surgery for vesicoureteric reflex [J]. Paediatr Anaesth, 2019, 29(7): 738-743.
11
Bao N, Chen L, Xia Y, et al. Effect of ultrasound-guided nerve block with 0.75%ropivacaine at the mid-forearm on the prevalence of moderate to severe pain after hand surgery [J]. Clin Ther, 2018, 40(6): 1014-1022.
12
Grape S, Pawa A, Weber E, et al. Retroclavicular vs supraclavicular brachial plexus block for distal upper limb surgery: a randomised, controlled, single-blinded trial [J]. Br J Anaesth, 2019, 122(4): 518-524.
13
Abdelhamid BM, Omar H. Nalbuphine as an adjuvant to 0.25% levobupivacaine in ultrasound-guided supraclavicular block provided prolonged sensory block and similar motor block durations (RCT) [J]. J Anesth, 2018, 32(4): 551-557.
14
刘涛,丰浩荣,张群英,等.不同浓度罗哌卡因肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞对心率变异性的影响[J].临床麻醉学杂志, 2016, 32(9): 853-856.
15
Bao X, Huang J, Feng H, et al. Effect of local anesthetic volume (20 mL vs 30 mL ropivacaine) on electromyography of the diaphragm and pulmonary function after ultrasound-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block: a randomized controlled trial [J]. Reg Anesth Pain Med, 2019, 44(1): 69-75.
16
Cabaton J, Nové-Josserand L, Mercadal L, et al. Analgesic efficacy of ultrasound-guided interscalene block vs. supraclavicular block for ambulatory arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: A randomised noninferiority study [J]. Eur J Anaesthesiol, 2019, 36(10): 778-786.
17
Li JW, Songthamwat B, Samy W, et al. Ultrasound-Guided costoclavicular brachial plexus block: sonoanatomy, technique, and block dynamics [J]. Reg Anesth Pain Med, 2017, 42(2): 233-240.
18
李亚南,张琦,霍树平,等.不同麻醉方式联合静脉快通道在老年下肢微创骨科手术中的应用研究[J].中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2017, 3(4): 232-237.
19
Tamura T, Kaneko K, Yokota S, et al. Comparison between rectus sheath block with 0.25% ropivacaine and local anesthetic infiltration with 0.5% ropivacaine for laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair in children [J]. Nagoya J Med Sci, 2019, 81(3): 341-349.
20
Tao Y, Zheng SQ, Xu T, et al. Median effective volume of ropivacaine 0.5\% for ultrasound-guided adductor canal block [J]. J Int Med Res, 2018, 46(10): 4207-4213.
21
Warrit K, Griffenhagen G, Goh C, et al. Comparison of ultrasound-guided lumbar plexus and sciatic nerve blocks with ropivacaine and sham blocks with saline on perianesthetic analgesia and recovery in dogs undergoing tibial plateau leveling osteotomy surgery [J]. Vet Anaesth Analg, 2019, 46(5): 673-681.
22
Wiegele M, Marhofer P, Lönnqvist PA. Caudal epidural blocks in paediatric patients: a review and practical considerations [J]. Br J Anaesth, 2019, 122(4): 509-517.
[1] 张婉微, 秦芸芸, 蔡绮哲, 林明明, 田润雨, 金姗, 吕秀章. 心肌收缩早期延长对非ST段抬高型急性冠脉综合征患者冠状动脉严重狭窄的预测价值[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(10): 1016-1022.
[2] 任书堂, 刘晓程, 张亚东, 孙佳英, 陈萍, 周建华, 龙进, 黄云洲. 左心室辅助装置支持下单纯收缩期主动脉瓣反流的超声心动图特征[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(10): 1023-1028.
[3] 何金梅, 尹立雪, 谭静, 张文军, 王锐, 任梅, 廖明娇. 超声心肌做功技术对2型糖尿病患者潜在左心室心肌收缩功能损伤的评价[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(10): 1029-1035.
[4] 薛艳玲, 马小静, 谢姝瑞, 何俊, 夏娟, 何亚峰. 左心声学造影在急性心肌梗死合并室间隔穿孔中的应用价值[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(10): 1036-1039.
[5] 吕琦, 惠品晶, 丁亚芳, 颜燕红. 颈动脉斑块易损性的超声造影评估及与缺血性卒中的相关性研究[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(10): 1040-1045.
[6] 魏淑婕, 惠品晶, 丁亚芳, 张白, 颜燕红, 周鹏, 黄亚波. 单侧颈内动脉闭塞患者行颞浅动脉-大脑中动脉搭桥术的脑血流动力学评估[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(10): 1046-1055.
[7] 武玺宁, 欧阳云淑, 张一休, 孟华, 徐钟慧, 张培培, 吕珂. 胎儿心脏超声检查在抗SSA/Ro-SSB/La抗体阳性妊娠管理中的应用[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(10): 1056-1060.
[8] 杨水华, 何桂丹, 覃桂灿, 梁蒙凤, 罗艳合, 李雪芹, 唐娟松. 胎儿孤立性完全型肺静脉异位引流的超声心动图特征及高分辨率血流联合时间-空间相关成像的应用[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(10): 1061-1067.
[9] 张璇, 马宇童, 苗玉倩, 张云, 吴士文, 党晓楚, 陈颖颖, 钟兆明, 王雪娟, 胡淼, 孙岩峰, 马秀珠, 吕发勤, 寇海燕. 超声对Duchenne肌营养不良儿童膈肌功能的评价[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(10): 1068-1073.
[10] 张宝富, 俞劲, 叶菁菁, 俞建根, 马晓辉, 刘喜旺. 先天性原发隔异位型肺静脉异位引流的超声心动图诊断[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(10): 1074-1080.
[11] 丁雷, 罗文, 杨晓, 庞丽娜, 张佩蒂, 刘海静, 袁佳妮, 刘瑾. 高帧频超声造影在评价C-TIRADS 4-5类甲状腺结节成像特征中的应用[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(09): 887-894.
[12] 张茜, 陈佳慧, 高雪萌, 赵傲雪, 黄瑛. 基于高帧频超声造影的影像组学特征鉴别诊断甲状腺结节良恶性的价值[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(09): 895-903.
[13] 冯冰, 邹秋果, 梁振波, 卢艳明, 曾奕, 吴淑苗. 老年非特殊型浸润性乳腺癌超声征象与分子生物学指标的临床研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 48-51.
[14] 赵文毅, 邹冰子, 蔡冠晖, 刘永志, 温红. 超声应变力弹性成像联合MRI-DWI靶向引导穿刺在前列腺病变诊断中的应用[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(9): 988-994.
[15] 薛念余, 张盛敏, 吴凌恒, 沙蕾, 童揽月, 沈崔琴, 李朝军, 杜联芳. 研究血清胆红素对2型糖尿病患者心脏结构发生改变前心肌功能的影响[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(9): 1004-1009.
阅读次数
全文


摘要