中国综合临床
中國綜閤臨床
중국종합림상
CLINICAL MEDICINE OF CHINA
2014年
z1期
55-57,58
,共4页
连续股神经阻滞镇痛%连续性硬膜外镇痛%静脉镇痛%全膝关节置换术%疼痛评分
連續股神經阻滯鎮痛%連續性硬膜外鎮痛%靜脈鎮痛%全膝關節置換術%疼痛評分
련속고신경조체진통%련속성경막외진통%정맥진통%전슬관절치환술%동통평분
Femoral Nerve%Epidural%AnalGesia%Total Knee Arthroplasty%Pain score
目的：比较连续股神经阻滞镇痛（ CFNB）、连续性硬膜外镇痛（ CEA）与静脉镇痛（ CIA）对全膝关节置换术患者术后镇痛的效果。方法回顾分析我院20ll年4月至20l2年5月行单侧膝关节置换手术患者l44例的临床资料。根据术后采用的镇痛方式不同分为CFNB组、CEA组与CIA组，其中CFNB组70例，CEA组36例，CIA组38例。记录术后24、48、72 h的疼痛评分和不良反应。结果 CFNB组与CEA组的VAS评分在术后24 h及48 h均显著低于CIA组（P<0.0l）。而在术后72 h 3组VAS评分无显著差异。CFNB组患者在术后消化道及精神神经症状不良反应分别显著低于CEA组及CIA组（ P均<0.0l）。CFNB组患者在术后导管相关问题显著高于CEA组及CIA组（P均<0.05）。结论 CFNB与CEA对全膝关节置换术后镇痛效果较为满意，优于CIA，但CEA与CIA不良反应较大。
目的：比較連續股神經阻滯鎮痛（ CFNB）、連續性硬膜外鎮痛（ CEA）與靜脈鎮痛（ CIA）對全膝關節置換術患者術後鎮痛的效果。方法迴顧分析我院20ll年4月至20l2年5月行單側膝關節置換手術患者l44例的臨床資料。根據術後採用的鎮痛方式不同分為CFNB組、CEA組與CIA組，其中CFNB組70例，CEA組36例，CIA組38例。記錄術後24、48、72 h的疼痛評分和不良反應。結果 CFNB組與CEA組的VAS評分在術後24 h及48 h均顯著低于CIA組（P<0.0l）。而在術後72 h 3組VAS評分無顯著差異。CFNB組患者在術後消化道及精神神經癥狀不良反應分彆顯著低于CEA組及CIA組（ P均<0.0l）。CFNB組患者在術後導管相關問題顯著高于CEA組及CIA組（P均<0.05）。結論 CFNB與CEA對全膝關節置換術後鎮痛效果較為滿意，優于CIA，但CEA與CIA不良反應較大。
목적：비교련속고신경조체진통（ CFNB）、련속성경막외진통（ CEA）여정맥진통（ CIA）대전슬관절치환술환자술후진통적효과。방법회고분석아원20ll년4월지20l2년5월행단측슬관절치환수술환자l44례적림상자료。근거술후채용적진통방식불동분위CFNB조、CEA조여CIA조，기중CFNB조70례，CEA조36례，CIA조38례。기록술후24、48、72 h적동통평분화불량반응。결과 CFNB조여CEA조적VAS평분재술후24 h급48 h균현저저우CIA조（P<0.0l）。이재술후72 h 3조VAS평분무현저차이。CFNB조환자재술후소화도급정신신경증상불량반응분별현저저우CEA조급CIA조（ P균<0.0l）。CFNB조환자재술후도관상관문제현저고우CEA조급CIA조（P균<0.05）。결론 CFNB여CEA대전슬관절치환술후진통효과교위만의，우우CIA，단CEA여CIA불량반응교대。
Objective To compare the effect of postoperative analGesia of the continuous femoral nerve block analGesia( CFNB),continuous epidural analGesia( CEA)and intravenous analGesia( CIA)for patients with total knee arthroplasty. Methods The clinical informations of l44 four patients who underwent line unilateral total knee replacement surGery from April 20ll to May 20l2 were retrospective analyzed. AccordinG to the way of postoperative analGesia,the patients were divided into different CFNB Group( n=70 ),CEA Group( n=36 )and CIA Group(n=38). Record the pain score of 24 h,48 h and 72 h after surGery and adverse reaction. Results VAS score of CFNB Group and CEA Group at 24 h and and 48 h after surGery were siGnificantly lower than in CIA Group( P<0. 0l). While there was no siGnificant difference amonG three Groups in term of VAS score at the 72 h after surGery. Adverse reactions of postoperative Gastrointestinal and spiritual nerve symptoms of CFNB Group were siGnificantly lower than in CEA Group and CIA Group( P<0. 0l ). Postoperative catheter related problems of CFNB Group were siGnificantly hiGher than CEA Group and CIA Group( P<0. 05 ). Conclusion AnalGesic effect of CFNB and CEA for after total knee arthroplasty is Good,and better than that of CIA. But CEA and CIA have Greater adverse reactions.
