期刊文献+

超声引导下环肱动脉神经阻滞在手外伤患者中的临床应用 被引量:4

Clinical study of ultrasound-guided nerve block around brachial artery in hand trauma patients
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的:观察在超声引导下环肱动脉神经阻滞技术用于手外伤患者的临床效果。方法:选择麻醉ASA I^I级行急诊手外伤手术病例60例,随机均分为超声引导下环肱动脉阻滞组(I组)和盲探阻滞组(I组)。两组患者均用1%利多卡因和0.375%罗哌卡因混合液进行神经阻滞。观察两组神经阻滞操作时间、起效时间、效果以及并发症的发生情况。结果:两组患者神经阻滞起效时间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);I组神经阻滞操作时间较I组显著缩短,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);两组患者在注药后15 min手部感觉神经支配及运动神经支配区域阻滞效果差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:在超声引导下进行环肱动脉神经阻滞,能够缩短麻醉操作时间,注射较少的局部麻醉药取得满意的阻滞效果,减少并发症,用于手外伤患者安全有效。 Objective: To explore the clinical effect of ultrasound-guided nerve block around brachial artery on the hand trauma patients. Methods: Sixty patients treated with hand trauma surgery were divided into two groups randomly, named the group Ⅰ (ultrasound-guided nerve block group) and the group Ⅱ (blind block group). Mixture by lidocaine 1% and ropivacaine 0.375% as local anesthesia was used for nevre block in two groups. The nerve block operation time, the onset time of anesthesia, the effectireness of nerve block and the complication of the two groups were observed. Results: There was no statistically significant difference of the onset time and the anesthesia effectreness between two groups of patients (P〉0.05). The operation time of group Ⅰ was obviously shorter than that of the group Ⅱ (P〈0.05). The difference of anesthesia effect of hand sensory innervation and mo- tor innervation regional was no statistically significant. Conclusion: Ultrasound-guided nerve block around bra- chial artery on the hand trauma patients can shorten the anesthesia operation time, ensure the satistied anesthetic effect, and is effective and safe.
出处 《温州医学院学报》 CAS 2014年第7期536-538,共3页 Journal of Wenzhou Medical College
基金 温州市科技局科研基金资助项目(Y20130336 Y2013 0320 Y20110165)
关键词 麻醉 肱动脉 超声引导 手外伤 anesthesia brachial artery ultrasound-guided hand trauma
  • 相关文献

参考文献10

二级参考文献75

  • 1唐延先,周宏.周围神经刺激器在闭孔神经阻滞中的应用[J].临床麻醉学杂志,2005,21(11):791-791. 被引量:3
  • 2Auroy Y, benhamou D, Bargues L, et al. Major complications of regional anesthesia in France: The SOS Regional Anesthesia Hotline Service[J].Anesthesiology, 2002,97 (5):1274-1280.
  • 3Marhofer P, Greher M, Kapral S. Ultersound guidance in regional anaesthesia[J]. Br J Anaesth, 2005,94(1):7-17.
  • 4Merle JC, Mazoit JX, Desgranges P, et al. A comparison of two technique for cervical plexus blockade: evaluation of efficacy and systemic toxicity[J]. Anesth Analg,1999,89 (6):1366-1370.
  • 5Carler M,Pulcini A,Macchi P,et al.An evaluation of the brachial plexus block at the humeral canal using a neurostimulator( 1417 patients) :the efficacy, safety ,and predictive criteria of failure[J]. Anesth Analg, 2001,92(1):194-198.
  • 6Perris TM, Watt JM. The road to success: a review of 1000 axillary brachial plexus blocks [J]. Anaesthesia,2003,58(12):1220-1224.
  • 7Franco CD, Vieira ZE. 1001 subclavian pefivascular brachial plexus blocks:success with a nerve stimulator[J]. Reg Anesth Pain Med, 2000,25(1):41-46.
  • 8Sandhu NS, Capan LM. Ultrasound-guided infraclavicular brachial plexus block [J]. Br J Aneaesth,2002,89(2):254-259.
  • 9Williams SR, Chouinard P, Arcand G, et al. Ultresound guidance speeds execution and improves the quality of supraclabvicular block[J]. Anesth Analg,2003,97(5):1518- 1523.
  • 10Marhofer P, Sitzwohl U, Greher M, et al. Ultrasound guidance for Infraclavicular bmchial plexus anaesthesia in children[J]. Anaesthesia, 2004,59(7),642-646.

共引文献130

同被引文献28

  • 1GIRDLER-HARDY T P, WEBB C, MENON G. Improved safety and efficacy of ultrasound-guided interscalene nerve block vs a nerve-stimulator guided technique[J]. Br J An- aesth, 2015, 115(3): 474-475.
  • 2BARRINGTON M J, KLUGER R. Ultrasound guidance re- duces the risk of local anesthetic systemic toxicity following peripheral nerve blockade[J]. Reg Anesth pain Med, 2013,38(4): 289-299.
  • 3SITES B D, TAENZER A H, HERRICK M D, et al. Inci- dence of local anesthetic systemic toxicity and postopera- tive neurologic symptoms associated with 12 668 ultra- sound-guided nerve blocks: an analysis from a prospective clinical registry[J]. Reg Anesth pain Med, 2012, 37(5): 478- 482.
  • 4NEAL J M, BERNARDS C M, BUTTERWORTH J F 4th, et al. ASRA practice advisory on local anesthetic systemic toxicity[J]. Reg Anesth pain Med, 2010, 35(2): 152-161.
  • 5HICKS S D, SALCIDO D D, LOGUE E S, et al. Lipid emul- sion combined with epinephrine and vasopressin does not improve survival in a swine model of bupivacaine-induced cardiac arrest[J]. Anesthesiology, 2009, 111 (1): 138-146.
  • 6HARVEY M, CAVE G. Bupivacaine-induced cardiac arrest: fat is good-is epinephrine really bad[J]? Anesthesiology, 2009, 111 (3): 467-469.
  • 7LIU F, WU B, DU Y, et al. Epinephrine reversed high-con- centration bupivacaine-induced inhibition of calcium chan- nels and transient outward potassium current channels, but not on sodium channel in ventricular myocytes of rats[J]. BMC Anesthesiol, 2015, 15: 66.
  • 8DILLANE D, FINUCANE B T. Local anesthetic systemic toxicity[J]. Can J Anaesth,2010, 57(4): 368-380.
  • 9SCHOLZ A. Mechanisms of (local) anaesthetics on volt- age-gated sodium and other ion channels[J]. Br J Anaesth, 2002, 89(1): 52-61.
  • 10CHEN H, XIA Y, ZHU B, et al. Measurement of the effica- cy of 2% lipid in reversing bupivacaine- induced asystole in isolated rat hearts[J]. BMC Anesthesiol, 2014, 14: 60.

引证文献4

二级引证文献8

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部