罗哌卡因在前列腺周围神经阻滞麻醉中的效果和安全性

Comparison between ropivacaine and lidocaine in prostatic peripheral nerve block anesthesia

本研究回顾性分析2020年6月至2021年5月于苏北人民医院行前列腺穿刺的137例患者的病例资料,穿刺均采用前列腺周围神经阻滞麻醉(PPNB),观察组采用1%罗哌卡因32 ml,对照组采用相同剂量的利多卡因。两组穿刺前一般资料比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。137例均由同一名术者进行穿刺,观察组和对照组穿刺针数分别为(20.2±2.8)针和(20.2±2.9)针,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。观察组和对照组穿刺时的疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS-1)分别为(2.62±0.74)分和(2.48±0.79)分;视觉数字评分(VNS-1)分别为(3.03±0.88)分和(3.15±0.80)分,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。穿刺后30 min的VAS-2分别为(0.48±0.53)分和(0.30±0.47)分,VNS-2分别为(3.31±0.48)分和(3.55±0.71)分,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组的总体并发症发生率差异无统计学意义(P=0.661)。

The present study retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 137 patients who underwent prostate in North Jiangsu People's Hospital from June 2020 to May 2021.All patients underwent peripheral prostatic nerve block anesthesia(PPNB).The observation group received 1%ropivacaine 32 ml local,and the control group received the same dose of lidocaine.There was no significant difference in general data before puncture between the two groups(P>0.05).All 137 cases were performed by the same surgeon.The number of puncture needles in the observation group and the control group was(20.2±2.8)and(20.2±2.9),respectively,and the difference was not statistically significant(P>0.05).The visual analogue scores(VAS-1)of pain during puncture in the observation group and the control group were(2.62±0.74)and(2.48±0.79)points,respectively.The visual numeric score(VNS-1)was(3.03±0.88)points and(3.15±0.80)points,respectively,and there was no significant difference(P>0.05).30 min after puncture,VAS-2 was(0.48±0.53)points and(0.30±0.47)points,VNS-2 was(3.31±0.48)points and(3.55±0.71)points,respectively.The differences were statistically significant(P<0.05).There was no significant difference in overall complication rate between the two groups(P=0.661).