Korean journal of anesthesiology · 2023
Effect of local anesthetic volume (20 vs. 40 ml) on the analgesic efficacy of costoclavicular block in arthroscopic shoulder surgery: a randomized controlled trial.
Рандомизированное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Jo Yumin, Oh Chahyun, Lee Woo-Yong, Chung Hyung-Jin, Park Hanmi, Park Juyeon, Lee Jieun, Kim Yoon-Hee, Ko Youngkwon, Chung Woosuk, Hong Boohwi
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Among the various diaphragm-sparing alternatives to interscalene block, costoclavicular block (CCB) demonstrated a low hemidiaphragmatic paresis (HDP) occurrence but an inconsistent analgesic effect in arthroscopic shoulder surgery. We hypothesized that a larger volume of local anesthetic for CCB could provide sufficient analgesia by achieving sufficient supraclavicular spreading.
METHODS: Sixty patients scheduled for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair were randomly assigned to receive CCB using one of two volumes of local anesthetic (CCB20, 0.75% ropivacaine 20 ml; CCB40, 0.375% ropivacaine 40 ml). The primary outcome was the rate of complete analgesia (0 on the numeric rating scale of pain) at 1 h postoperatively. The secondary outcomes included a sonographic assessment of local anesthetic spread, diaphragmatic function, pulmonary function, postoperative opioid use, and other pain-related experiences within 24 h postoperatively.
RESULTS: The rates of complete analgesia were not significantly different (23.3% [7/30] and 33.3% [10/30] in the CCB20 and CCB40 groups, respectively; risk difference 10%, 95% CI [-13, 32], P = 0.567). There were no significant differences in other pain-related outcomes. Among the clinical factors considered, the only factor significantly associated with postoperative pain was the sonographic observation of supraclavicular spreading. There were no significant differences in the incidence of HDP and the change in pulmonary function between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Using 40 ml of local anesthetic does not guarantee supraclavicular spread during CCB. Moreover, it does not result in a higher rate of complete analgesia compared to using 20 ml of local anesthetic in arthroscopic shoulder surgery.
METHODS: Sixty patients scheduled for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair were randomly assigned to receive CCB using one of two volumes of local anesthetic (CCB20, 0.75% ropivacaine 20 ml; CCB40, 0.375% ropivacaine 40 ml). The primary outcome was the rate of complete analgesia (0 on the numeric rating scale of pain) at 1 h postoperatively. The secondary outcomes included a sonographic assessment of local anesthetic spread, diaphragmatic function, pulmonary function, postoperative opioid use, and other pain-related experiences within 24 h postoperatively.
RESULTS: The rates of complete analgesia were not significantly different (23.3% [7/30] and 33.3% [10/30] in the CCB20 and CCB40 groups, respectively; risk difference 10%, 95% CI [-13, 32], P = 0.567). There were no significant differences in other pain-related outcomes. Among the clinical factors considered, the only factor significantly associated with postoperative pain was the sonographic observation of supraclavicular spreading. There were no significant differences in the incidence of HDP and the change in pulmonary function between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Using 40 ml of local anesthetic does not guarantee supraclavicular spread during CCB. Moreover, it does not result in a higher rate of complete analgesia compared to using 20 ml of local anesthetic in arthroscopic shoulder surgery.