切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华普通外科学文献(电子版) ›› 2019, Vol. 13 ›› Issue (04) : 300 -303. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-0793.2019.04.010

所属专题: 文献

论著

超声引导下局部神经阻滞治疗老年腹股沟疝
武振1, 崔兆清1,(), 王永坤1, 周长鑫1, 孙善平1, 解磐磐1, 姚玉民1, 章阳1   
  1. 1. 252000 山东省聊城市人民医院疝与腹壁外科
  • 收稿日期:2018-07-03 出版日期:2019-08-01
  • 通信作者: 崔兆清

A retrospective study on the treatment of inguinal hernia by ultrasound-guided local nerve block

Zhen Wu1, Zhaoqing Cui1,(), Yongkun Wang1, Changxin Zhou1, Shanping Sun1, Panpan Xie1, Yumin Yao1, Yang Zhang1   

  1. 1. Department of Hernia and Abdominal Wall, Liaocheng People’s Hospital, Liaocheng 252000, China
  • Received:2018-07-03 Published:2019-08-01
  • Corresponding author: Zhaoqing Cui
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Cui Zhaoqing, Email:
引用本文:

武振, 崔兆清, 王永坤, 周长鑫, 孙善平, 解磐磐, 姚玉民, 章阳. 超声引导下局部神经阻滞治疗老年腹股沟疝[J/OL]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2019, 13(04): 300-303.

Zhen Wu, Zhaoqing Cui, Yongkun Wang, Changxin Zhou, Shanping Sun, Panpan Xie, Yumin Yao, Yang Zhang. A retrospective study on the treatment of inguinal hernia by ultrasound-guided local nerve block[J/OL]. Chinese Archives of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2019, 13(04): 300-303.

目的

探讨超声引导下局部神经阻滞在老年腹股沟疝患者无张力修补术中的应用。

方法

回顾性分析2014年6月至2016年6月聊城市人民医院收治的64例老年单侧男性腹股沟疝患者,采用超声引导下局部神经阻滞+局部浸润麻醉29例(超声引导组),对比同期体表定位局部神经阻滞+局部浸润麻醉35例(体表定位组),观察两组患者手术过程中麻醉效果、局麻药用量、手术时间、术后疼痛情况及镇痛持续时间、并发症发生率及随访复发率。

结果

所有患者均为60岁以上男性,年龄(67.5±5.3)岁。两组患者手术过程中手术区肌肉松弛,无明显疼痛感,均顺利完成手术。超声引导组术中局麻药用量为(24.3±4.2)ml,体表定位组为(24.8±3.7)ml,两组比较差异无统计学意义(t=0.491,P=0.625)。超声引导组手术时间为(55.2±10.0)min,体表定位组为(49.3±10.7)min,两组比较差异有统计学意义(t=2.267,P=0.027)。术后1、2 h超声引导组VAS评分(2.3±0.8)分、(1.5±1.0)分,体表定位组分别为(2.6±1.0)分、(1.2±1.1)分,两者比较差异均无统计学意义(t=-1.281、0.728,P=0.205、0.470);术后6 h超声引导组VAS评分为(0.4±0.5)分,显著低于体表定位组的(1.2±0.9)分,差异有统计学意义(t=0.000,P<0.05)。两组患者麻醉满意度评分差异无统计学意义。平均随访(33.5±6.5)个月,无复发、慢性疼痛等术后并发症发生。

结论

超声引导下局部神经阻滞可获得满意的麻醉效果,与体表定位下局部神经阻滞相比,手术时间稍长,但并不增加局麻药的用量,可延长术后镇痛时间,是老年腹股沟疝患者的理想麻醉方式,前景广阔,有待进一步推广。

Objective

To evaluate the application of ultrasound-guided nerve block in elderly patients undergoing inguinal hernia surgery.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was carried out of sixty-four elderly male patients who had underwent unilateral inguinal hernia repair under local nerve block anesthesia from June 2014 to June 2016 in Liaocheng People’s Hospital. Twenty-nine patients undergoing ultrasound-guided nerve block were the ultrasound-guided group, meanwhile the 35 cases undergoing anatomia located nerve block were the anatomia located group. Clinical data including anesthesia effects, anesthesia dosage, operation time, pain scores, postoperative complications and recurrence rates were recorded and analyzed.

Results

All the patients aged over 60 years old, with an average age of (67.5±5.3) years. All operations were completed successfully. The average anesthesia dosage of ultrasound-guided group was (24.3±4.2) mland (24.8±3.7) ml in the anatomia located group, with no significant difference (t=0.491, P=0.625). The average operation time of two groups was (55.2±10.0) min vs (49.3±10.7) min with significant difference (t=2.267, P=0.027). One hour after surgery, the VAS score of the ultrasound-guided group was (2.3±0.8), and two hours after surgery the score was (1.5±1.0), meanwhile the scores of the anatomia located group respectively were (2.6±1.0) and (1.2±1.1), with no statistical significances (t=-1.281, 0.728, P=0.205, 0.470). Six hours after surgery, the VAS scores were (0.4±0.5) vs (1.2±0.9), with statistical significance (t=0.000, P<0.05). There was no difference in anesthesia satisfaction scores between the two groups. No significant postoperative complications were observed in the two groups, with an average follow-up of (33.5± 6.5) months, no recurrence or chronic pain occurred.

Conclusions

Local nerve block guided by ultrasound shows satisfactory anesthetic effects. Compared with local nerve block under body surface localization, it slightly increases operation time, but does not increase the dosage of local anesthetics, which can extend the postoperative analgesia time. Local nerve block guided by ultrasound is an ideal anesthesia in elderly patients with inguinal hernia and needs to be further promoted.

表1 超声引导组与体表定位组腹股沟疝患者局麻药用量及手术时间的比较(±s
表2 超声引导组与体表定位组腹股沟疝患者麻醉满意度评分比较[例(%)]
[1]
唐健雄,陈革,黄磊, 等. 上海地区腹股沟疝发病情况的初步流行病学调查[G]. 上海:中华医学会第十四届全国外科学术会议论文汇编, 2001: 70-71.
[2]
江浩. 开放及腔镜下腹股沟疝腹膜前修补术的比较研究[D]. 上海: 复旦大学, 2008.
[3]
陈杰,那冬鸣,申英末, 等. 局部神经阻滞麻醉在腹股沟无张力疝修补术中的应用[J]. 中华普通外科杂志, 2005, 20(2): 410-412.
[4]
崔兆清,章阳,孙善平, 等. 局部麻醉下腹膜前间隙修补术在老年腹股沟疝患者中应用体会 [J/CD]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2014, 8(1): 23-25.
[5]
吴江宏. 无张力疝修补术中补片类型的选择对老年腹股沟疝短期疗效及预后的影响[J/CD].中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2017, 11(2): 96-99.
[6]
杨宁,左明章,孟小燕, 等. 超声引导下髂腹股沟-髂腹下神经阻滞联合局部浸润麻醉在老年患者腹股沟疝中的应用[J]. 中国临床医生杂志, 2017, 45(3): 48-51.
[7]
沈亚芳,李泉. 超声引导下髂腹股沟髂腹下神经阻滞用于老年腹股沟疝手术的安全性及有效性探究[J]. 湖南中医药大学学报, 2016, 36(A02): 810-811.
[8]
Tsui B, Suresh S. Ultrasound imaging for regional anesthesia in infants, children, and adolescents: A review of current literature and its application in the practice of extremity and trunk blocks[J]. Anesthesiology, 2010, 112(2): 473.
[9]
孟云潇,李绍杰,唐健雄. 腹股沟疝手术常见并发症的预防及处理[J/CD]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2017, 11(2): 73-75.
[10]
Simons MP, Aufenacker T, Bay-Nielsen M, et al. European hernia society guidelines on the treatment of inguinal hernia in adult patients[J]. Hernia, 2009, 13(4): 343-403.
[11]
Andersen FH, Nielsen K, Kehlet H. Combined ilioinguinal blockade and local infiltration anaesthesia for groin hernia repair—a double-blind randomized study[J]. Br J Anaesth, 2005, 94(4): 520-523.
[12]
宋应寒,雷文章. 腹股沟疝修补术局部浸润麻醉要点[J]. 中国实用外科杂志, 2014, 34(5): 462-463.
[13]
Sanjay P, Woodward A. Inguinal hernia repair: Local or general anaesthesia?[J]. Ann R Coll Surg Engl, 2007, 89(5): 497-503.
[14]
Berrevoet F, Vanlander A, Bontinck J, et al. Open preperitoneal mesh repair of inguinal hernias using a mesh with nitinol memory frame[J]. Hernia, 2013, 17(3): 365-371.
[15]
蒋松松,陈刚,郑黎明, 等. 超声引导局部神经阻滞麻醉下改良腹股沟疝双间隙无张力修补术的临床应用[J]. 国际外科学杂志, 2015, 42(9): 594-596.
[16]
Wang Y, Wu T, Terry MJ, et al. Improved perioperative analgesia with ultrasound-guided ilioinguinal/iliohypogastric nerve or transversus abdominis plane block for open inguinal surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials[J]. J Phys Ther Sci, 2016, 28(3): 1055-1060.
[17]
王涛,黎沾良. 腹股沟疝手术神经损伤的预防和治疗[J]. 中国实用外科杂志, 2001, 21(2): 68-70.
[1] 宋玟焱, 杜美君, 陈佳丽, 石冰, 黄汉尧. 唇腭裂手术围手术期疼痛管理的研究进展及基于生物材料治疗新方法的展望[J/OL]. 中华口腔医学研究杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 397-405.
[2] 杜伟, 廖土明, 李雄才, 关刚强, 何燊, 吴佳桥, 朱和荣. 2%利多卡因凝胶和润滑剂凝胶在女性尿流动力学检查中应用的随机对照研究[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 613-617.
[3] 杨勇军, 曾一鸣, 贺显雅, 卢强, 李远伟. ASA分级≥Ⅲ级患者局麻经会阴前列腺多模态影像融合穿刺的安全性和有效性[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 441-447.
[4] 马东扬, 李斌, 陆安清, 王光华, 雷文章, 宋应寒. Gilbert 与单层补片腹膜前疝修补术疗效的随机对照研究[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 629-633.
[5] 周正阳, 陈凯, 仇多良, 邵乐宁, 吴浩荣, 钟丰云. 腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术后出血原因分析及处理[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 660-664.
[6] 顾熙, 徐子宇, 周澍, 张吴楼, 张业鹏, 林昊, 刘宗航, 嵇振岭, 郑立锋. 腹股沟疝腹膜前间隙无张力修补术后补片感染10 例报道[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 665-669.
[7] 宋俊锋, 张珍珍. 单侧初发性腹股沟斜疝老年患者经腹腹膜前疝修补术中残余疝囊腹直肌下缘固定效果评估[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 670-674.
[8] 高娟, 徐建庆, 闫芳, 丁盛华, 刘霞. Rutkow、TAPP、TEP 手术治疗单侧腹股沟疝患者的临床疗效及对血清炎症因子水平的影响[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 675-680.
[9] 于新峰, 曾琦, 后强, 徐浩, 操谢芳. 腹腔镜经腹腹膜前疝修补术和腹腔镜完全腹膜外疝修补术对成人腹股沟疝治疗效果及预后分析[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 681-686.
[10] 方辉强, 黄杰, 随冰琰. 腰方肌阻滞与腹横肌平面阻滞对腹股沟疝腹腔镜手术患者术后镇痛效果的影响[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 697-702.
[11] 张晋伟, 董永红, 王家璇. 基于GBD2021 数据库对中国与全球老年人疝疾病负担和健康不平等的分析比较[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 708-716.
[12] 袁志静, 黄杰, 何国安, 方辉强. 罗哌卡因联合右美托咪定局部阻滞麻醉在老年腹腔镜下无张力疝修补术中的应用[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 557-561.
[13] 何岩, 向文采. 七氟醚与异丙酚联合氯胺酮麻醉在疝修补术中的镇静镇痛效果及安全性[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 566-569.
[14] 王贝贝, 崔振义, 王静, 王晗妍, 吕红芝, 李秀婷. 老年股骨粗隆间骨折患者术后贫血预测模型的构建与验证[J/OL]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2024, 10(06): 355-362.
[15] 崔健, 夏青, 林云, 李光玲, 李心娜, 王位. 血小板与淋巴细胞比值、免疫球蛋白、心肌酶谱及心电图对中老年肝硬化患者病情及预后的影响[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(05): 400-406.
阅读次数
全文


摘要