目的:探究多模式镇痛(MA)对原发性肝癌(HCC)患者休斯顿疼痛情况调查表(HPOI)评分及血清结合珠蛋白水平的影响。方法:选择原发性肝癌患者78例作为研究对象,按照随机数字表法分组,分为对照组(n=39,给予传统镇痛方式)与观察组(n=39,在对照...目的:探究多模式镇痛(MA)对原发性肝癌(HCC)患者休斯顿疼痛情况调查表(HPOI)评分及血清结合珠蛋白水平的影响。方法:选择原发性肝癌患者78例作为研究对象,按照随机数字表法分组,分为对照组(n=39,给予传统镇痛方式)与观察组(n=39,在对照组的基础上采取多模式镇痛方式)。比较两组患者的HPOI评分、不良反应情况,并测定两组患者血清结合珠蛋白水平。结果:干预后,观察组镇痛药使用少于对照组(P<0.05)。观察组HPOI评分优于对照组(P<0.05)。观察组术后8、12、24 h VAS评分均低于对照组(均P<0.05)。干预后,两组患者血清结合珠蛋白水平均有所降低(P<0.05),且观察组血清结合珠蛋白水平低于对照组(P<0.05)。观察组恶心呕吐、胃肠道不适、呼吸抑制、头晕头痛等不良反应率较对照组低(均P<0.05)。结论:多模式镇痛能够有效提升原发性肝癌患者镇痛满意度,减少术后镇痛药物使用,缓解病情。展开更多
<span style="font-family:Verdana;"><strong>Introduction:</strong></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">Regional anaesthesia combined with general anaesthesia reduc...<span style="font-family:Verdana;"><strong>Introduction:</strong></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">Regional anaesthesia combined with general anaesthesia reduces </span><span style="font-family:;" "=""><span style="font-family:Verdana;">stress response to surgery, duration of ventilation, intensive care unit (ICU) </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">stay and promotes early recovery. Studies on thoracic epidural, caudal analgesi</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">a along wit</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">h general anaesthesia (GA) in paediatric </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">cardiac surgery are limited he</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">nce we aimed to compare efficacy and safety of caudal, thoracic epid</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">ural and intravenous analgesia in paediatric cardiac surgery. </span><b><span style="font-family:Verdana;">Methodology: </span></b><span style="font-family:Verdana;">This study was conducted in the Department of Anaesthesiology in a tertiary care teaching hospital in southern India from February 2019 to December 2019. 90 children were randomised into group A, group B, group C. Children in group A received caudal analgesia along with GA. Group B children received thoracic epidural along with GA. Group C patients received intravenous analgesia along with GA. Rescue analgesia 1 mcg/kg fentanyl given in all 3 groups if p</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">ai</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">n score is more than 4. Primary outcome assessed was post-o</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">p pain sco</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">res. Secondary outcome assessed was duration of ventilation, duration of intensive care unit stay. </span><b><span style="font-family:Verdana;">Results:</span></b><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> All patients were comparable in terms of age, sex, </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">weight, mean RACHS score, baseline heart rate and blood pressure. Pain sco</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">res </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">were significantly lower in thoracic epidural group compared to other two grou</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> ps. Duration of ventilation was lower in thoracic epidural group (91.17</span></span><span style="font-family:;" "=""><span style="font-family:Verdana;">±</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> 43.85) minutes and caudal (199.6 </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">±</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> 723.59) minutes compared to intravenous analgesia groups (436.37 </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">±</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> 705.51) minutes. Duration of ICU stay was significantly low in thoracic epidural group (2.73 </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">±</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> 0.69) days compared to caudal (3.7 </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">±</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> 2.8) and intravenous analgesia groups (4.33 </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">±</span><span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> 0.920). We didn’t have </span><span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">any complications like hematoma, transient or permanent neurological sequelae in regional anesthesia groups. </span><b><span style="font-family:Verdana;">Conclusion:</span></b><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> Regional anaesthesia along with </span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">general anaesthesia was more effective in pain relief than intravenous analgesia with general anaesthesia in paediatric cardiac surgery.</span></span></span>展开更多
文摘目的:探究多模式镇痛(MA)对原发性肝癌(HCC)患者休斯顿疼痛情况调查表(HPOI)评分及血清结合珠蛋白水平的影响。方法:选择原发性肝癌患者78例作为研究对象,按照随机数字表法分组,分为对照组(n=39,给予传统镇痛方式)与观察组(n=39,在对照组的基础上采取多模式镇痛方式)。比较两组患者的HPOI评分、不良反应情况,并测定两组患者血清结合珠蛋白水平。结果:干预后,观察组镇痛药使用少于对照组(P<0.05)。观察组HPOI评分优于对照组(P<0.05)。观察组术后8、12、24 h VAS评分均低于对照组(均P<0.05)。干预后,两组患者血清结合珠蛋白水平均有所降低(P<0.05),且观察组血清结合珠蛋白水平低于对照组(P<0.05)。观察组恶心呕吐、胃肠道不适、呼吸抑制、头晕头痛等不良反应率较对照组低(均P<0.05)。结论:多模式镇痛能够有效提升原发性肝癌患者镇痛满意度,减少术后镇痛药物使用,缓解病情。
文摘<span style="font-family:Verdana;"><strong>Introduction:</strong></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">Regional anaesthesia combined with general anaesthesia reduces </span><span style="font-family:;" "=""><span style="font-family:Verdana;">stress response to surgery, duration of ventilation, intensive care unit (ICU) </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">stay and promotes early recovery. Studies on thoracic epidural, caudal analgesi</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">a along wit</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">h general anaesthesia (GA) in paediatric </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">cardiac surgery are limited he</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">nce we aimed to compare efficacy and safety of caudal, thoracic epid</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">ural and intravenous analgesia in paediatric cardiac surgery. </span><b><span style="font-family:Verdana;">Methodology: </span></b><span style="font-family:Verdana;">This study was conducted in the Department of Anaesthesiology in a tertiary care teaching hospital in southern India from February 2019 to December 2019. 90 children were randomised into group A, group B, group C. Children in group A received caudal analgesia along with GA. Group B children received thoracic epidural along with GA. Group C patients received intravenous analgesia along with GA. Rescue analgesia 1 mcg/kg fentanyl given in all 3 groups if p</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">ai</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">n score is more than 4. Primary outcome assessed was post-o</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">p pain sco</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">res. Secondary outcome assessed was duration of ventilation, duration of intensive care unit stay. </span><b><span style="font-family:Verdana;">Results:</span></b><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> All patients were comparable in terms of age, sex, </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">weight, mean RACHS score, baseline heart rate and blood pressure. Pain sco</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">res </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">were significantly lower in thoracic epidural group compared to other two grou</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> ps. Duration of ventilation was lower in thoracic epidural group (91.17</span></span><span style="font-family:;" "=""><span style="font-family:Verdana;">±</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> 43.85) minutes and caudal (199.6 </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">±</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> 723.59) minutes compared to intravenous analgesia groups (436.37 </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">±</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> 705.51) minutes. Duration of ICU stay was significantly low in thoracic epidural group (2.73 </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">±</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> 0.69) days compared to caudal (3.7 </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">±</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> 2.8) and intravenous analgesia groups (4.33 </span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">±</span><span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> 0.920). We didn’t have </span><span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">any complications like hematoma, transient or permanent neurological sequelae in regional anesthesia groups. </span><b><span style="font-family:Verdana;">Conclusion:</span></b><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> Regional anaesthesia along with </span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">general anaesthesia was more effective in pain relief than intravenous analgesia with general anaesthesia in paediatric cardiac surgery.</span></span></span>