1、实用医学杂志2023年第39卷第9期The Journal of Practical Medicine2023 Vol.39 No.9弓状韧带上腰方肌阻滞与肋下腹横肌平面阻滞对开腹肝部分切除术后疼痛与恢复质量影响的比较茆烨赵伟蒿梦潇邢瑞颜明徐州医科大学附属医院麻醉科(江苏徐州 221002)【摘要】目的比较弓状韧带上腰方肌阻滞与肋下腹横肌平面阻滞对开腹肝部分切除术后疼痛及恢复质量的影响。方法选择择期行开腹肝部分切除术的患者60例,随机均分成两组:弓状韧带上腰方肌阻滞组(Q 组)和肋下腹横肌平面阻滞组(T 组)。记录术后 48 h 内吗啡当量总消耗量、数字评定量表(NRS)疼痛评分、首次患者自控
2、静脉镇痛(PCIA)时间、PCIA无效按压次数、补救镇痛率、15项恢复质量量表(QoR15)评分、阿森斯失眠量表(AIS)评分及不良反应等指标。结果与T组比较,Q组术后48 h内吗啡当量总消耗量、术后24 h内NRS评分、PCIA无效按压次数、补救镇痛例数降低,首次PCIA时间延长,术后24、48 h QoR15评分升高,AIS评分降低,差异有统计学意义(P 0.05)。结论与肋下腹横肌平面阻滞相比,弓状韧带上腰方肌阻滞显著降低开腹肝部分切除术患者的围术期镇痛药物需求,有效改善术后镇痛,促进术后早期恢复。【关键词】弓状韧带上腰方肌阻滞;腹横肌平面阻滞;术后镇痛;开腹肝部分切除术【中图分类号】R
3、614.4Comparison of quadratus lumborum block at the lateral supraarcuate ligament and subcostal transversusabdominis plane block on postoperative pain and recovery quality after open partial hepatectomyMAOYe,ZHAO Wei,HAO Mengxiao,XING Rui,YAN Ming.Department of Anesthesia Affiliated Hospital of Xuzho
4、uMedical University,Xuzhou 221000,ChinaCorresponding author:YAN MingEmail:【Abstract】ObjectiveTo compare the effect of quadratus lumborum block at the lateral supraarcuate ligament and subcostal transversus abdominis plane block on postoperative painand recovery quality in patients undergoing open pa
5、rtial hepatectomy.MethodsSixty patients undergoing open partial hepatectomy were enrolled andrandomly allocated into two groups:a quadratus lumborum block at the lateral supraarcuate ligament group(groupQ,n=30)and a subcostal transversus abdominis plane block group(group T,n=30).The cumulative total
6、 morphine equivalent consumption and numerical rating scale(NRS)scores over the 48 hours postoperative period wererecorded.Other outcomes including quality of recovery15(QoR15)scores,Athens insomnia scale(AIS)scores,time to first patientcontrolled intravenous analgesia(PCIA),invalid bolus times in P
7、CIA,the rescue analgesiarate and adverse events were also recorded.ResultsCompared with group T,the cumulative total morphine equivalent consumption in postoperative 48 hours and the NRS pain scores in 24 hours after surgery were decreased significantly in group Q(P 0.05).The rescue analgesia rate a
8、nd invalid bolus times in PCIA were significantly lower in group Q than in group T(P 0.05).Time to first PCIA request were prolonged significantly in group Q thanin group T(P 0.05).There was a significant increase in QoR15 scores and a significant decrease in AIS scoresamong patients in group Q comp
9、ared with those in group T(P 0.05).ConclusionCompared with subcostal transversus abdominisplane block,ultrasoundguided quadratus lumborum block at the lateral supraarcuate ligament could provide better postoperative analgesia,reduce perioperative opioid consumption and promote the early recovery qua
10、lity for patients undergoing open partial hepatectomy.【Key words】Quadratus lumborum block at the lateral supraarcuate ligament;Transversus abdominisplane block;Postoperative analgesia;Open partial hepatectomydoi:10.3969/j.issn.10065725.2023.09.008基金项目:江苏省教育厅高校省级重点实验室开放基金资助项目(编号:KJS08004)通信作者:颜明Email
11、:临 床 研 究目前开腹肝部分切除术仍是临床治疗肝脏肿瘤的常用方法,此术式创伤大,患者围术期应激反应强烈,可致严重的术后疼痛,增加术后痛觉过敏以及肺部并发症的风险1。静脉应用阿片类药物1111实用医学杂志2023年第39卷第9期The Journal of Practical Medicine2023 Vol.39 No.9能够减轻疼痛程度,但易引起过度镇静、呼吸抑制、恶 心 呕 吐 等 不 良 反 应,导 致 术 后 恢 复 延迟24。因此,加速康复外科(enhanced recovery after surgery,ERAS)倡导区域神经阻滞联合应用PCIA 的多模式镇痛,以有效缓解疼痛,
12、促进术后早期恢复1,5。腹横肌平面阻滞(transversus abdominis plane block,TAPB)广泛应用于多种腹部手术,可提供有效的腹壁切口镇痛,但对内脏痛效果仍存争议67。作为一项新型的区域神经阻滞技术,弓状韧带上腰方肌阻滞(quadratus lumborumblock at the lateral supra arcuate ligament,QLB LSAL)起效迅速,阻滞平面一般在 T67L12之间,阻滞效果确切,可提供躯体及内脏的双重镇痛作用810。自2020年提出以来,国内外关于QLBLSAL用于腹部手术镇痛的研究较少,本研究旨在比较QLBLSAL与TAPB
13、对开腹肝部分切除术患者术后镇痛及早期恢复的影响,为临床应用提供参考。1资料与方法1.1一般资料本研究经医院伦理委员会批准(编号:XYFY2022KL25601),患者或家属术前均已签署知情同意书。选择 2022 年 8-12 月择期在全身麻醉下行开腹肝部分切除术的患者,性别不限,年龄 1865 岁,体质量指数(BMI)18.530.0kg/m2,ASA分级级。排除标准:(1)严重的呼吸循环系统疾病(NYHA心功能级以上);(2)糖尿病史;(3)慢性疼痛病史;(4)凝血功能障碍,穿刺部位感染或外伤史;(5)明确脊柱畸形或预期的超声解剖异常;(6)外周神经疾病史;(7)局部麻醉药过敏史;(8)拒绝
14、参与。剔除标准:(1)阻滞操作困难或失败者;(2)手术期间失血超过 1 000mL;(3)手术时间超过6 h;(4)术后入ICU者。采用随机数字表法将患者分为两组:QLBLSAL组(Q组)和 TAPB 组(T 组)。本研究初始纳入患者 60例,按照剔除标准排除患者后,最终纳入54例,每组各27例。两组年龄、BMI、ASA分级、基础疾病、手术与苏醒时间等差异无统计学意义(P 0.05),术中舒芬太尼、瑞芬太尼用量差异有统计学意义(P 6分提示失眠,随分值升高失眠情况加重;(5)记录手术及苏醒时间、术中静脉麻醉药物用量、首次下床时间、首次排气时间、镇痛满意度评分;(6)记录不良反应如苏醒期躁动、恶
15、心呕吐(PONV)、下肢无力等。1.5统计学方法采用 SPSS 26.0 统计学软件进行数据分析。正态分布计量资料以均数 标准差表示,组间比较使用独立样本t检验;非正态分布计量资料以中位数(M)和四分位数(P25,P75)表示,组间比较使用 MannWhitney U 检验;计数资料用频数(率)表示,比较使用2检验或Fisher确切概率法;首次 PCIA 时间、首次补救镇痛时间使用 KaplanMeier 生存分析;以 P 0.05 为差异有统计学意义。2结果2.1吗啡当量总消耗量比较与 T 组比较,Q 组术后2、6、12、24、48 h的吗啡当量总消耗量明显降低(P 0.05)。见表2。表2
16、两组患者术后不同时点吗啡当量总消耗量比较Tab.2Comparison of cumulative total morphine equivalent consumption between the two groupsM(P25,P75),mg组别T组Q组z值P值2 h6.00(4.00,6.00)2.00(0.00,4.00)-4.160 0.0016 h11.00(8.00,19.00)6.00(4.00,14.00)-3.4070.00112 h31.00(23.00,36.00)18.00(12.00,24.00)-3.524 0.00124 h54.00(50.00,63.00)3
17、6.00(24.00,47.00)-3.723 0.00148 h75.00(71.00,92.00)50.00(40.00,72.00)-3.498 0.0012.2静息及运动 NRS 评分比较Q 组术后 2、6、12、24 h 的静息及运动 NRS 评分明显低于 T 组(P 0.05)。见表3。表3两组患者术后不同时点 NRS疼痛评分比较Tab.3Comparison of NRS pain scores between the two groupsx s,分指标静息NRS运动NRS组别T组Q组t值P值T组Q组t值P值2 h4.04 0.853.07 0.963.8990.0015.22
18、0.804.30 1.033.6860.0016 h4.04 0.653.22 0.704.4410.0015.48 0.704.70 0.783.8690.00112 h4.26 0.763.48 0.983.2610.0025.70 0.614.96 0.714.1290.00124 h3.96 0.443.37 0.743.5780.0015.56 0.705.04 0.762.6140.01248 h3.63 0.843.26 0.711.7490.0865.07 0.554.96 0.650.6790.5002.3PCIA 使用情况及补救镇痛比较与 T 组比较,Q 组患者术后首次 P
19、CIA 时间(中位生存时间1.83 h,95%CI 1.342.32)、首次补救镇痛时间(平均生存时间 37.89 h,95%CI 31.2944.48)明显延长,差异有统计学意义(Logrank P 0.05),见图3。Q组术后48 h内PCIA无效按压次数与补救镇痛例数明显减少,镇痛满意度评分更高(P 0.05)。见表4。1114实用医学杂志2023年第39卷第9期The Journal of Practical Medicine2023 Vol.39 No.92.4术后恢复情况比较与 T 组比较,Q 组术后24、48 h 的 QoR15 恢复质量评分明显升高,术后24、48 h 的 AI
20、S 失眠评分明显降低(P 0.05)。Q组术后首次下床时间缩短(P 0.05)。见表4。2.5不良反应比较两组患者不良反应发生情况差异无统计学意义(P 0.05),且均未出现下肢无力的症状。见表4。3讨论开腹肝部分切除术多采用长达 2530 cm 的肋缘下切口或倒L型切口,病灶的切除、多根脊神经前支的横断与肋骨牵引伤等可引起剧烈的术后疼痛,对术后恢复产生显著的消极影响,可能导致患者神经内分泌应激反应、并发症增加和住院时间延长,远期甚至迁延为慢性疼痛,严重降低生活质量23,11。包括胸段硬膜外镇痛(thoracic epidural analgesia,TEA)、TAPB 在内的区域神经阻滞是目
21、前常用的镇痛方法1。不少研究证实TEA是腹部开放性手术术后镇痛的金标准,不仅具有卓越的镇痛作用,同时能够降低中心静脉压,减少术后肺部并发症的发生率,改善胃肠功能1,12。然而,TEA 操作失败率较高(20%30%),且常出现术后体位性低血压,围术期肝功能不全、凝血功能障碍等因素可能导致硬膜外血肿以及急性肾损伤的风险增加。为寻求更加安全、微创的区域神经阻滞技术,有研究提出肋下TAPB 可替代TEA用于上腹部大手术多模式镇痛34,13。肋下TAPB多将局麻药液注射至腹直肌和腹横肌之间,以阻断腹壁前侧相应节段的胸腰神经皮支,从而有效减轻切口疼痛。相较于TEA,其优势在于注药靶点位于前腹壁区域,远离脊
22、神经根与交感干,对血流动力学影响较小,同时超声成像结构简单,易于操作6,14。既往研究1516表明,肋下 TAPB 可降低阿片类药物用量与疼痛评项目术后48 h PCIA无效按压次数 M(P25,P75)术后48 h补救镇痛 例(%)镇痛满意度评分术后24 h QoR15评分术后48 h QoR15评分术后24 h AIS评分术后48 h AIS评分术后首次下床时间(d)术后首次排气时间(d)术后住院时间(d)苏醒期躁动 例(%)恶心呕吐 例(%)T组(n=27)4.00(3.00,6.00)17(62.96)8.04 0.7175.04 15.3885.22 14.7814.67 3.971
23、0.93 3.052.84 0.852.77 0.8111.37 3.143(11.11)4(14.81)Q组(n=27)2.00(0.00,3.00)8(29.63)9.04 0.8589.07 12.2596.07 9.1011.15 4.078.59 2.822.13 0.722.69 0.6710.04 1.831(3.70)2(7.41)t/2/z值-3.8996.033-4.689-3.710-3.2493.2142.9203.3260.4211.9070.2700.188P值0.0010.0140.0010.0010.0020.0020.0050.0020.6750.0620.6
24、030.665表4两组患者术后镇痛效果及恢复情况比较Tab.4Comparison of postoperative analgesia and recovery indexes between the two groupsx s024681012141618首次PCIA时间(h)100806040200生存率(%)T组Q组Logrank P 0.001010304050首次补救镇痛时间(h)100806040200生存率(%)T组Q组Logrank P=0.00520图3KaplanMeier生存曲线图Fig.3KaplanMeier survival curve1115实用医学杂志2023
25、年第39卷第9期The Journal of Practical Medicine2023 Vol.39 No.9分,有效改善术后镇痛。然而TURAN等17研究发现,与 TEA 相比,TAPB 能够减少术后低血压的发生率,但两者在降低阿片类药物需求方面并不相当。因此,本研究通过术后镇痛与恢复质量等指标比较 QLBLSAL 是否优于 TAPB,为上腹部手术的多模式镇痛提供更多选择。腰方肌阻滞(quadratus lumborum block,QLB)最初由TAPB发展而来,包括多种入路方式:外侧入路、后侧入路、前侧入路、肌内入路、肋下入路等,广泛应用于腹部以及髋部手术的术后镇痛12,1821。目
26、前认为其主要镇痛作用是通过局麻药液注射在胸腰筋膜并扩散至胸椎旁间隙,阻滞了相应节段的脊神经及交感神经实现的5。WU等22研究发现,染料主要通过内外侧弓状韧带的后方扩散至胸椎旁间隙,这表明弓状韧带一定程度上阻碍了局麻药液向头侧的扩散路径。基于此解剖学特征,我们认为弓状韧带上入路优势在于其注药靶点上移至弓状韧带以上水平,药液可直接避开弓状韧带向低位胸椎旁间隙扩散,起效时间短,阻滞范围广,成功率高10。SHI等9研究发现,注射后5、10 min 所有患者感觉阻滞平面能够达到T912、T7L1水平,最广分别可至T5L2、T4L3水平。本研究测得最终阻滞范围相近,但起效时间稍慢,可能与本研究采用针刺法测
27、定感觉平面,区别于上述研究所用的冰块法有关。此外,AKERMAN 等5报道显示,TAPB 有效镇痛时长为812 h,而 QLB 可达 2448 h,提示 QLB 能够提供更加持久的镇痛作用。由此可见,与 TAPB 相比,QLBLSAL阻滞范围更广,阻滞持续时间更长;另一方面,TAPB 主要提供躯体镇痛,对内脏镇痛几乎无效,而QLBLSAL能够阻滞交感干,有效抑制内脏疼痛,具有显著的镇痛优势。本研究发现Q组术后阿片类药物用量较T组明显减少,并且术后24 h内NRS评分显著降低,这与先前研究中QLB的其他入路与TAPB 的比较结果相一致1819,2324。此外,Q组患者术中舒芬太尼、瑞芬太尼用量低
28、于 T 组,进一步说明与 TAPB 相比,QLBLSAL更能降低开腹肝切除患者的围术期阿片类药物用量,缓解不同状态下的疼痛程度。QoR15恢复质量评分是衡量患者术后早期恢复情况的重要指标,当评分差值超过 8 分提示干预措施具有临床意义25。本研究中 Q 组术后 24、48 h的QoR15评分明显高于T组,且两组差值均超过8 分,具有显著的临床意义,说明 QLBLSAL 更能抑制患者围术期应激反应,提高术后早期恢复质量与舒适程度。虽然两组患者术后PONV发生率差异并无统计学意义,但 Q 组发生率更低,这可能与 QLBLSAL降低了更多的阿片类药物需求有关2。下肢肌无力是QLB不容忽视的并发症之一
29、,在SHI等9的研究中,QLBLSAL 下肢肌无力的发生率为16.7%,可能是局麻药扩散至腰丛并阻滞股神经所致。本研究单侧使用0.5%罗哌卡因20 mL,与SHI等9使用的浓度及剂量相同,却并未发生下肢肌无力,猜测与评估时间点有关。本研究局限性在于,未设置无神经阻滞组以证明两种阻滞方式的有效性;另外,本研究并未与QLB 的其他入路对比以评估 QLBLSAL 应用于此术式的镇痛优势,未来可进一步研究。综上所述,相较于肋下 TAPB,超声引导下QLBLSAL 更能够降低开腹肝部分切除术患者的围术期镇痛药物需求,提供更为确切有效的术后镇痛,促进术后早期恢复。【Author contributions
30、】MAO Ye performed the experiments andwrote the article.ZHAO Wei,HAO Mengxiao and XING Rui performed the experiments.YAN Ming designed the study and revised thearticle.All authors read and approved the final manuscript as submitted.参考文献1DIEU A,HUYNEN P,LAVANDHOMME P,et al.Pain management after open l
31、iver resection:ProcedureSpecific Postoperative Pain Management(PROSPECT)recommendations J.RegAnesth Pain Med,2021,46(5):433445.2AN G,ZHANG Y,CHEN N,et al.Opioidfree anesthesia compared to opioid anesthesia for lung cancer patients undergoingvideoassisted thoracoscopic surgery:A randomized controlled
32、study J.PLoS One,2021,16(9):e0257279.3BAILEY J G,MORGAN C W,CHRISTIE R,et al.Continuousperipheral nerve blocks compared to thoracic epidurals or multimodal analgesia for midline laparotomy:a systematic review andmetaanalysis J.Korean J Anesthesiol,2021,74(5):394408.4ABDELKADER A K,ROMANO D N,FOOTE J
33、 JR,et al.Evaluation of the addition of bupivacaine to intrathecal morphinefor intraoperative and postoperative pain management in open liver resections J.HPB(Oxford),2022,24(2):202208.5AKERMAN M,PEJCIC N,VELICKOVIC I.A Review of theQuadratus Lumborum Block and ERASJ.Front Med(Lausanne),2018,5:44.6T
34、RAN D Q,BRAVO D,LEURCHARUSMEE P,et al.Transversus Abdominis Plane Block J.Anesthesiology,2019,131(5):11661190.7KARIM H M R,BHAKTA P,OBRIEN B,et al.Bilateral subcostal transversus abdominis plane block as a component of multimodal analgesia J.Eur J Anaesthesiol,2020,37(1):5859.8LI H,SHI R,SHI D,et al
35、.Anterior quadratus lumborum blockat the lateral supraarcuate ligament versus transmuscular quadratus lumborum block for postoperative analgesia in patients un1116实用医学杂志2023年第39卷第9期The Journal of Practical Medicine2023 Vol.39 No.9dergoing laparoscopic nephrectomy:A randomized controlled trial J.J Cl
36、in Anesth,2021,75:110561.9SHI R,LI H,WANG Y.Dermatomal coverage of singleinjection ultrasoundguided parasagittal approach to anterior quadratus lumborum block at the lateral supraarcuate ligamentJ.JAnesth,2021,35(2):307310.10 LI H,MA D,LIU Y,et al.A transverse approach for ultrasoundguided anterior
37、quadratus lumboru m block at the lateral supraarcuate ligament J.Anaesthesia,2020,75(10):14001401.11 DUDEK P,ZAWADKA M,ANDRUSZKIEWICZ P,et al.Postoperative Analgesia after Open Liver Surgery:Systematic Review of Clinical Evidence J.J Clin Med,2021,10(16):3662.12 ELSHARKAWY H,AHUJA S,SESSLER D I,et a
38、l.SubcostalAnterior Quadratus Lumborum Block Versus Epidural Block forAnalgesia in Open Nephrectomy:A Randomized Clinical TrialJ.Anesth Analg,2021,132(4):11381145.13 MOSTAFA M,MOUSA M S,HASANIN A,et al.Erector spinae plane block versus subcostal transversus abdominis planeblock in patients undergoin
39、g open liver resection surgery:A randomized controlled trial J.Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med,2023,42(1):101161.14 CHEN Q,LIANG C,LIANG J,et al.An Image Study on LocalAnesthetic Spread in Healthy Volunteers Receiving Subcostal Exterior Semilunaris Transversus Abdominis Plane(SE TAP)Block J.J Pain Res,20
40、21,14:20132019.15 YOON S,SONG G Y,LEE J,et al.Ultrasoundguided bilateralsubcostal transversus abdominis plane block in gastric cancer patients undergoing laparoscopic gastrectomy:a randomisedcontrolled doubleblinded studyJ.Surg Endosc,2022,36(2):10441052.16 HUANG H M,CHEN R X,ZHU L M,et al.Combined
41、use oftransversus abdominis plane block and laryngeal mask airwayduring implementing ERAS programs for patients with primaryliver cancer:a randomized controlled trial J.Sci Rep,2020,10(1):14892.17 TURAN A,COHEN B,ELSHARKAWY H,et al.Transversusabdominis plane block with liposomal bupivacaine versus c
42、ontinuous epidural analgesia for major abdominal surgery:The EXPLANE randomized trial J.J Clin Anesth,2022,77:110640.18 HUANG D,SONG L,LI Y,et al.Posteromedial quadratus lumborum block versus transversus abdominal plane block for postoperative analgesia following laparoscopic colorectal surgery:Aran
43、domized controlled trial J.J Clin Anesth,2020,62:109716.19 XUE Q,CHU Z,ZHU J,et al.Analgesic Efficacy of TransverseAbdominis Plane Block and Quadratus Lumborum Block in Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy:A Randomized Double BlindedClinical Trial J.Pain Ther,2022,11(2):613626.20 PANG M,SUN G,YAO W,et al
44、.Ultrasoundguided transmuscular quadratus lumborum block reduced postoperative opioidsconsumptions in patients after laparoscopic hepatectomy:a threearm randomized controlled trial J.BMC Anesthesiol,2021,21(1):45.21 HU J,WANG Q,ZENG Y,et al.The impact of ultrasoundguided transmuscular quadratus lumb
45、orum block combined with localinfiltration analgesia for arthroplasty on postoperative pain reliefJ.J Clin Anesth,2021,73:110372.22 WU J,QIN Y,SHE H,et al.Review of the injectate dispersionpattern during anterior quadratus lumborum block J.Medicine(Baltimore),2022,101(48):e32038.23 杨晓丽,龙飞宇,王茂华.腰方肌阻滞
46、与腹横肌平面阻滞对剖宫产术后镇痛效果比较的Meta分析 J.实用医学杂志,2021,37(5):611615.24 ELBOGHDADLY K,DESAI N,HALPERN S,et al.Quadratuslumborum block vs.transversus abdominis plane block for caesarean delivery:a systematic review and network metaanalysis J.Anaesthesia,2021,76(3):393403.25 DEMUMIEUX F,LUDES P O,DIEMUNSCH P,et al.Validation of the translated Quality of Recovery15 questionnaire in aFrenchspeaking population J.Br J Anaesth,2020,124(6):761767.(收稿:20230220编辑:王舒仪)1117