




【摘要】 目的 探討超聲引導下腹股溝韌帶上髂筋膜阻滯聯合喉罩全身麻醉(全麻)在老年患者大隱靜脈曲張手術中的應用價值。方法 選取擇期行單側大隱靜脈高位結扎點式剝脫聯合激光閉合術的老年患者60例,隨機分為A組(單純喉罩全麻)和B組(超聲引導下腹股溝韌帶上髂筋膜阻滯聯合喉罩全麻),每組30例。記錄術中麻醉藥物用量、血流動力學波動和喉罩拔除時間;評估術后靜態和動態疼痛視覺模擬量表(VAS)評分、15項恢復質量(QoR-15)評分、簡易智力狀態檢查(MMSE)評分以及不良反應情況,并進行比較。結果 B組術后24 h QoR-15和MMSE評分均高于A組(P均<0.05);A組切皮時的平均動脈壓和心率均高于B組(P均<0.05);B組術后5 min、30 min、6 h、12 h靜態和動態疼痛VAS評分均低于A組(P均<0.05);B組丙泊酚用量、瑞芬太尼用量及喉罩拔除時間均低于A組,差異均有統計學意義(P均<0.05)。結論 超聲引導下腹股溝韌帶上髂筋膜阻滯聯合喉罩全麻可改善患者術后恢復質量和認知功能,減少麻醉藥物用量,縮短拔管時間,增強血流動力學穩定性,減輕術后疼痛,從而促進快速康復。
【關鍵詞】 腹股溝韌帶上髂筋膜阻滯;老年患者;大隱靜脈曲張;術后恢復質量;喉罩全麻
Application of ultrasound-guided suprainguinal fascia iliaca block combined with general anesthesia with laryngeal mask in elderly patients undergoing surgery for great saphenous varicose veins
XU Fangsheng, MA Shuyu, LIU Rongguang, WANG Meifang, PU Jianfeng
(Department of Anesthesiology, Affiliated Changshu Hospital of Nantong University, Changshu 215500, China )
Corresponding author: PU Jianfeng, E-mail: pjh61255397@163.com
【Abstract】 Objective To evaluate the application value of ultrasound-guided suprainguinal iliaca fascia block combined with general anesthesia with laryngeal mask in elderly patients undergoing surgery for the great saphenous varicose veins. Methods Sixty elderly patients scheduled for unilateral high ligation and stripping of the great saphenous veins combined with endovenous laser ablation were randomly divided into Group A (general anesthesia with laryngeal mask alone, n = 30) and Group B (ultrasound-guided suprainguinal fascia iliaca block combined with general anesthesia with laryngeal mask, n = 30). Intraoperative anesthetic consumption, hemodynamic fluctuations, and laryngeal mask removal time were recorded. Postoperative changes in static and dynamic Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) pain scores, 15-item Quality of Recovery (QoR-15) scores, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores, and adverse events were also evaluated. Results The QoR-15 and MMSE scores at postoperative 24 h in Group B were significantly higher than those in Group A (both P < 0.05). The mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR) during skin incision in Group A were significantly higher than those in Group B (both P < 0.05). The static and dynamic VAS pain scores at postoperative 5 min, 30 min, 6 h, and 12 h in Group B were significantly lower compared to those in Group A (all P < 0.05). In Group B, the consumption of propofol and remifentanil was significantly less, and the laryngeal mask removal time was significantly shorter than those in Group A, with statistically significant differences (both P < 0.05). Conclusion Ultrasound-guided suprainguinal fascia iliaca block combined with general anesthesia with laryngeal mask improves postoperative quality of recovery and cognitive function, reduces anesthetic consumption, shortens extubation time, enhances hemodynamic stability and alleviates postoperative pain, thereby promoting rapid recovery.
【Key words】 Suprainguinal fascia iliaca block; Elderly patient; Great saphenous varicose vein; Postoperative quality of recovery;
General anesthesia with laryngeal mask
大隱靜脈曲張是一種常見的慢性血管疾病,與長時間站立、缺乏運動等生活方式密切相關,常見于中老年患者,若不及時治療,可能導致皮膚潰爛、血管破裂出血和血栓形成等嚴重并發癥,對患者的健康造成極大影響[1-2]。腔內激光閉合術作為下肢靜脈曲張一種安全有效的微創治療技術已被廣泛應用,聯合點狀剝脫和高位結扎術,不僅可以全面清除異常的靜脈組織,還可降低術后復發率,提高治療成功率和長期臨床療效[3-5]。目前臨床多采用椎管內麻醉方案,但部分老年患者伴有脊柱畸形、凝血功能障礙等,這些因素顯著增加椎管內麻醉的風險[6]。喉罩全身麻醉(全麻)作為一種替代方案,不僅操作簡便易行、對患者刺激小,而且能夠提供全程的氣道保護,具有更高的安全性[7-9]。聯合區域阻滯技術可以有效提升術中血流動力學的穩定性、降低麻醉藥物用量和減輕術后疼痛影響,有助于提升患者的醫療滿意度和加速康復[10-11]。腹股溝韌帶上髂筋膜阻滯是近年來提出的新型區域阻滯技術,具有操作簡便、安全性高等特點,能夠有效地阻滯股神經、閉孔神經和股外側皮神經,可為大隱靜脈曲張手術提供較為滿意的鎮痛[12-14]。
但目前關于超聲引導下腹股溝韌帶上髂筋膜阻滯聯合喉罩全麻在老年大隱靜脈曲張手術中的研究仍較有限。因此,本研究旨在評估這一麻醉方案的臨床效果,為優化老年患者的麻醉策略提供參考。
1 對象與方法
1.1 研究對象
選擇2021年1月至2023年12月于南通大學附屬常熟醫院行擇期單側大隱靜脈高位結扎點式剝脫聯合激光閉合術的老年患者60例。納入標準:年齡≥65歲、體質量指數(body mass index, BMI)18~30 kg/m2、ASA分級Ⅰ~Ⅲ級。排除標準:既往神經精神疾病史、酰胺類局部麻醉藥物過敏史、阿片類藥物成癮史、穿刺部位感染、凝血功能障礙或嚴重肝腎功能不全者。采用隨機數表法將患者分為A組和B組:A組采用單純喉罩全麻,B組采用超聲引導行腹股溝韌帶上髂筋膜阻滯聯合喉罩全麻,每組各30例。本研究經南通大學附屬常熟醫院倫理委員會批準(批件號:2020-KY-021),患者或其授權委托人均簽署了知情同意書。
樣本量的計算根據姜卜維等[15]探討髂筋膜阻滯對全髖置換術患者術后恢復質量影響的研究,使用PASS軟件進行計算,假設α=0.05,1-β=0.8,最終確定每組納入30例患者。
1.2 麻醉方法
術前常規禁飲禁食,入室后開放上肢靜脈通路補液;常規監測患者各項生命體征,如血壓、心率(heart rate,HR)、心電圖(electrocardiogram,ECG)、脈搏血氧飽和度(pulse oxygen saturation,SpO2)和腦電雙頻指數(bispectral index,BIS)。B組于麻醉誘導前先行超聲引導下腹股溝韌帶上髂筋膜阻滯:患者取仰臥位,觸診確定髂前上棘,將高頻線陣探頭置于髂前上棘內側,與臍連線外1/3處,調整探頭使成像清晰,辨別髂骨、髂腰肌、髂筋膜和旋髂深動脈,見圖1。消毒鋪巾后,采用平面內進針技術,從髂前上棘處進針,針尖到達髂肌表面后給予2 mL生理鹽水進行水分離試驗。若液體沿髂腰肌表面呈線性擴散,表明位置正確,給予0.25%羅哌卡因30 mL完成注射。操作完成后間隔5 min測試股神經、股外側皮神經及閉孔神經皮區感覺,以針刺痛覺減退或消失為阻滯成功。
喉罩全麻方案:全麻誘導采用瑞芬太尼靶控輸注,效應室濃度為2 ng/mL,靜脈推注依托咪酯1.5~2.0 mg/kg和羅庫溴銨注射液6 mg/kg。BIS值降至40~60,且肌松滿意后,置入喉罩行機械通氣。術中維持采用丙泊酚和瑞芬太尼效應室濃度靶控輸注,并按需追加肌松藥。調整呼吸參數和麻醉藥物輸注速度,維持術中血流動力學平穩,呼氣末二氧化碳分壓35~45 mmHg,BIS值40~60。手術結束前10 min給予0.1 mg芬太尼用于術后鎮痛,手術結束前5 min停用丙泊酚和瑞芬太尼,并給予1 mg/kg舒更葡糖拮抗肌松。喚醒患者,待其呼吸頻率10~20次/分,潮氣量> 8 mL/kg后拔除喉罩。若術中出現低血壓(收縮壓較基礎值降低30%或< 90 mmHg)或心動過緩(HR< 50次/分),則靜脈注射麻黃堿6 mg/次或阿托品0.5 mg/次,必要時重復給藥。若術后靜態疼痛視覺模擬量表(visual analogue scale,VAS)評分>3分,給予50 mg曲馬多補救鎮痛。
1.3 觀察指標
①記錄2組患者麻醉誘導前(T1)、喉罩置入時(T2)、手術切皮時(T3)和手術結束時(T4)的平均動脈壓(mean arterial pressure,MAP)和HR;②記錄術后5 min(T5)、30 min(T6)、6 h(T7)、12 h(T8)、24 h(T9)靜態和動態疼痛VAS評分;③記錄術中丙泊酚、瑞芬太尼用量和喉罩拔除時間;④記錄T1和T9時的15項恢復質量(15-item Quality of Recovery,QoR-15)評分和簡易智力狀態檢查(Mini-mental State Examination,MMSE)評分;⑤記錄術后補救鎮痛情況,蘇醒期躁動、呼吸抑制、惡心嘔吐、咽痛和頭暈等不良反應發生情況。
1.4 統計學方法
應用SPSS 27.0進行數據分析,正態分布的計量資料以表示,2組間比較采用獨立樣本t檢驗,血流動力學資料采用重復測量方差分析,單獨效應分析采用獨立樣本t檢驗和配對t檢驗。偏態分布計量資料以M(P25,P75)表示,VAS評分資料采用廣義估計方程分析,單獨效應分析采用Wilcoxon秩和檢驗及符號秩和檢驗。計數資料以n(%)表示,組間比較采用χ 2檢驗或Fisher確切概率法。以雙側P < 0.05為差異有統計學意義。
2 結 果
2.1 2組患者術前一般資料比較
2組患者性別、年齡、BMI、ASA分級、高血壓及糖尿病比例差異均無統計學意義(P均>0.05),見表1。
2.2 2組患者血流動力學指標比較
MAP比較:重復測量方差分析顯示Mauchly’s球形檢驗P < 0.001,不符合球形性對稱檢驗,采用Greenhouse-Geisser方法進行校正,時間因素和組別因素存在交互作用(F=18.101,P < 0.001),因此分析單獨效應,結果顯示A組T3時的MAP高于B組(P < 0.05),其余時刻比較差異均無統計學意義,A組和B組T2~T4時的MAP均低于T1,差異有統計學意義(P均< 0.05),見表2。
HR比較:重復測量方差分析顯示Mauchly’s球形檢驗P = 0.227,符合球形性對稱檢驗,時間因素和組別因素無交互作用(F=1.444,P = 0.234),分組因素對HR的主效應無統計學意義(F=2.346,P = 0.131),時間因素對HR的主效應有統計學意義(F=19.315,P < 0.001),事后分析顯示A組和B組T2~T4時的HR均低于T1(P均< 0.05),見表2。
2.3 2組患者疼痛VAS評分比較
靜態疼痛VAS評分比較:廣義估計方程分析顯示時間因素和分組因素存在交互作用(F=20.753,P < 0.001);單獨效應分析顯示A組T6~T8靜態疼痛VAS評分高于T5(P < 0.001),B組T7~T9靜態疼痛VAS評分高于T5(P < 0.001),B組T5~T8靜態疼痛VAS評分均低于A組(P < 0.05),見表3。
動態疼痛VAS評分比較:廣義估計方程分析顯示時間因素和分組因素存在交互作用(F=91.347,P < 0.001),單獨效應分析顯示A組和B組T6~T9動態疼痛VAS評分均高于T5(P均< 0.001),B組T5~T8動態疼痛VAS評分均低于A組(P均< 0.05),見表3。
2.4 2組患者術中情況比較
B組喉罩拔除時間、丙泊酚用量及瑞芬太尼用量均低于A組,差異均有統計學意義(P均< 0.05),見表4。
2.5 2組患者術后恢復情況比較
與T1時相比,2組患者T9的QoR-15評分和MMSE評分均降低(P均< 0.05),B組T9的MMSE評分和QoR-15高于A組,差異均有統計學意義(P均< 0.05),見表5。
2.6 2組患者術后不良反應發生情況比較
2組補救鎮痛、惡心、頭暈、譫妄的發生情況差異均無統計學意義(P均> 0.05),均無患者發生嘔吐、咽痛、呼吸抑制、蘇醒期躁動情況,見表6。
3 討 論
大隱靜脈是位于下肢內側的淺表靜脈,起于足背靜脈弓內側端,經過小腿內側伴隱神經上行,進入大腿內側,最終匯入股靜脈。大隱靜脈曲張的手術范圍涉及大腿和小腿的前內側區域,主要受股神經支配,還涉及坐骨神經、生殖股神經及閉孔神經等[16-17]。Li等[18]研究發現,股神經阻滯聯合腫脹麻醉用于大隱靜脈手術可有效減少腫脹麻醉液的使用量、降低皮膚瘀斑的發生率,并且不增加麻醉或其他手術并發癥的風險。李振興等[19]進一步研究表明,采用股神經聯合坐骨神經阻滯可滿足大隱靜脈剝脫聯合高位結扎的手術要求,無需術中追加局部麻醉,其鎮痛效果與椎管內麻醉相當,并且術中血流動力學更加平穩。然而,股神經和坐骨神經與血管毗鄰,聯合阻滯增加了操作難度及復雜度,并且存在神經和血管損傷的風險[20]。隨著舒適化醫療理念的推進,目前多采用喉罩全麻聯合區域阻滯技術,具有更高的舒適性和安全性。吳培培等[10]研究表明,采用股神經阻滯聯合喉罩全麻的鎮痛效果確切,術中血流動力學波動較小,有利于促進患者恢復及提高麻醉安全性。但鑒于股神經阻滯距離大隱靜脈高位結扎的位置較近,注射的局麻藥容易影響手術視野,而腹股溝韌帶上髂筋膜阻滯位置較高,有腹股溝韌帶阻隔局麻藥向尾側擴散,操作更加簡單安全、阻滯范圍更廣,因此本研究采用腹股溝韌帶上髂筋膜阻滯聯合喉罩的全麻方案[13, 21]。本研究結果表明,髂筋膜阻滯聯合喉罩全麻可減少術中鎮痛藥物用量,提升血流動力學的穩定性,縮短喉罩拔除時間及降低術后疼痛評分,有助于老年患者的快速康復。這一結果也與既往研究相一致[22-23]。
Bansal等[24]在髖關節鎮痛的研究中發現,腹股溝韌帶上入路的髂筋膜阻滯能夠提供至少24 h的有效鎮痛效果,并且相較于腹股溝韌帶下入路,其鎮痛滿意度更高。劉緒華等[25]的研究也驗證了髂筋膜阻滯的鎮痛效果,其鎮痛作用甚至可持續至術后48 h。在本研究中,2組患者術后24 h的靜態和動態疼痛VAS評分主要集中在1~2分,表明大隱靜脈手術的疼痛主要發生在術后第1天。而B組患者在T5~T8時的靜態和動態疼痛VAS評分均低于A組,表明髂筋膜阻滯可以有效地緩解術后疼痛。
術后恢復質量是以患者為中心的重要結局指標,而QoR-15是目前使用最廣的評估工具之一,包括身體舒適度、情緒狀態、生理獨立性、心理支持及疼痛5個維度,共計15項主觀參數,具有較高的簡便性和可靠度[26-27]。姜卜維等[15]的研究探討了髂筋膜阻滯對髖關節置換術后恢復質量的影響,結果顯示髂筋膜阻滯能夠顯著提升患者的術后恢復質量,并促進其康復過程。本研究結果顯示,B組患者術后24 h的QoR-15評分高于A組,提示聯合髂筋膜阻滯對促進患者術后恢復質量具有積極作用,可能與術后疼痛程度的減輕有關,不僅緩解了患者術后的緊張和焦慮,而且提升了術后的睡眠質量和滿意度。
老年患者是術后認知功能減退的高危人群,可能與年齡增長、較高的ASA分級、腦血管疾病和低蛋白等因素密切相關[28]。MMSE量表能夠全面、準確、迅速地反映被試者智力狀態及認知功能缺損程度,是臨床評估患者圍術期認知功能的重要手段[29]。本研究結果顯示,與術前相比,2組患者術后24 h的MMSE評分均降低,表明手術創傷和疼痛會對患者術后認知功能有一定的影響。而B組術后24 h的MMSE評分高于A組,提示聯合髂筋膜阻滯可減輕手術對認知功能的負面影響。孫倩倩等[30]研究也得出類似結論,并發現與中樞神經系統炎癥反應、神經功能損傷相關的生物學指標S100B蛋白的升高幅度也隨之降低,這說明聯合髂筋膜阻滯可有效緩解或抑制術后中樞神經炎癥反應,這可能與阿片類藥物用量減少以及術后疼痛應激反應減輕有關。
盡管如此,本研究還存在一些局限性。首先,對術后指標的觀察僅限于術后24 h,缺乏更長時間的隨訪數據。其次,本研究未與其他神經阻滯方法進行比較,限制了對不同阻滯技術效果的全面評估。此外,本研究中的術后鎮痛和補救鎮痛未聯合使用非甾體類鎮痛藥物,未來的研究中需要更好地結合《中國加速康復外科臨床實踐指南》的推薦,進一步優化術后鎮痛方案。最后,由于本研究為單中心研究且樣本量較小,研究結果的普適性可能受到限制,因此,未來需要開展多中心、大樣本量的隨機對照研究,以提供更全面、客觀的評估,為臨床決策提供更高水平的參考依據。
綜上所述,與單純喉罩全麻相比,術前聯合應用超聲引導下腹股溝韌帶上髂筋膜阻滯可有效減少術中阿片類鎮痛藥物的用量,增加患者血流動力學的穩定性,縮短麻醉恢復時間,減少術后疼痛評分,提升術后恢復質量并改善術后認知功能,具有較高的應用價值。
參 考 文 獻
[1] 何川, 丁洋, 顧俊菲, 等. 原發性大隱靜脈曲張傳統開放性手術與激光治療聯合泡沫硬化術對機體免疫系統影響的比較[J]. 新醫學, 2023, 54(9): 639-643. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.
0253-9802.2023.09.006.
HE C, DING Y, GU J F, et al. Comparison of the effects between traditional open surgery and laser treatment combined with foam sclerotherapy on immune system in patients with primarygreat saphenous varicose veins. J New Med, 2023, 54(9): 639-643. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-9802.2023.09.006.
[2] MOHAMED A H, HOWITT A, RAE S, et al. Ten-year outcomes of a randomized clinical trial of endothermal ablation versus conventional surgery for great saphenous varicose veins[J].
Br J Surg, 2024, 111(8): znae195. DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znae195.
[3] BARALDI C, BISSACCO D. Safety and efficacy of combining saphenous endovenous laser ablation and varicose veins foam sclerotherapy: an analysis on 5500 procedures in patients with advance chronic venous disease (C3-C6)[J]. Vasc Endovascular Surg, 2024, 58(1): 60-64. DOI: 10.1177/
15385744231188804.
[4] HUANG Y, ZHANG D, ZHOU C, et al. The first meta-analysis research on the effects of endovenous laser ablation combined with sapheno-femoral junction high ligation of the great saphenous vein[J]. Lasers Med Sci, 2023, 38(1): 175. DOI: 10.1007/s10103-023-03833-y.
[5] JIANG W, LIANG Y, LONG Z, et al. Endovenous radiofrequency ablation vs laser ablation in patients with lower extremity varicose veins: a meta-analysis [J]. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord, 2024, 12(5): 101842. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2
024.101842.
[6] MARTIN-FLORES M. Epidural and spinal anesthesia[J]. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract, 2019, 49(6): 1095-1108. DOI: 10.1016/j.cvsm.2019.07.007.
[7] DONG W, ZHANG W, ER J, et al. Comparison of laryngeal mask airway and endotracheal tube in general anesthesia in children[J]. Exp Ther Med, 2023, 26(6): 554. DOI: 10.3892/etm.2023.12253.
[8] KATAOKA N, IMAMURA T. Clinical advantage of laryngeal mask airway over conventional endotracheal intubation during pulmonary vein isolation[J]. J Interv Card Electrophysiol, 2024 Feb 12. DOI: 10.1007/s10840-024-01766-2.
[9] LI X, LIU B, WANG Y, et al. The effects of laryngeal mask airway versus endotracheal tube on atelectasis in patients undergoing general anesthesia assessed by lung ultrasound: a protocol for a prospective, randomized controlled trial[J]. PLoS One, 2022, 17(9): e0273410. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0273410.
[10] 吳培培, 蔣強. 超聲引導下股神經阻滯復合全身麻醉對大隱靜脈高位結扎加點式剝脫術患者術后鎮痛的影響[J]. 重慶醫學, 2017, 46(31): 4408-4410. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-
8348.2017.31.031.
WU P P, JIANG Q. Effect of ultrasound-guided femoral nerve block combined with general anesthesia on postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing high ligation and point stripping of great saphenous vein[J]. Chongqing Med, 2017, 46(31): 4408-4410. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-8348.2017.31.031.
[11] YANG X, BAO L, GONG X, et al. Impacts of ultrasound-guided nerve block combined with general anesthesia with laryngeal mask on the patients with lower extremity fractures[J].
J Environ Public Health, 2022, 2022: 3603949. DOI: 10.1155/2022/3603949.
[12] GENC C, AKDENIZ S, CANIKLI S, et al. Ultrasound-guided suprainguinal fascia iliaca block as part of anesthesia management for lower extremity surgeries: a single-center retrospective cohort feasibility study [J]. Cureus, 2023, 15(10): e47795. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.47795.
[13] WEN G, FENG W, FU B. Clinical effect of ultrasound-guided inguinal ligament iliac fascia block anesthesia and its effect on postoperative analgesia and stress level[J]. Minerva Med, 2022, 113(3): 591-592. DOI: 10.23736/S0026-4806.20.07175-X.
[14] YAO F, SHUI Y H, XIANG J L, et al. Application of superior iliac fascia block of inguinal ligament combined with patient controlled intravenous analgesia in elderly patients after hip arthroplasty[J]. China J Orthop Traumatol, 2024, 37(5): 482-487. DOI: 10.12200/j.issn.1003-0034.20220753.
[15] 姜卜維, 馬鳳丹, 黃瑾, 等. 超聲引導下髂腰肌平面阻滯對髖關節置換術患者術后恢復質量的影響[J]. 臨床麻醉學雜志, 2024, 40(2): 133-138. DOI: 10.12089/jca.2024.02.005.
JIANG B W, MA F D, HUANG J, et al. Effect of ultrasound-guided iliopsoas plane block on quality of postoperative recovery in patients un-dergoing hip arthroplasty[J]. J Clin Anesthesiol, 2024, 40(2): 133-138. DOI: 10.12089/jca.2024.02.005.
[16] ANTANI M R, DATTILO J B. Varicose Veins [M]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing, 2023.
[17] BISSACCO D, CALLIARI F M, SETTEMBRINI A M. Great saphenous vein idiopathic dissection[J]. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord, 2023, 11(6): 1286. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvsv.
2023.05.007.
[18] LI Y H, WANG T, QIAN C, et al. Application of femoral nerve block in treating great saphenous vein insufficiency by endovenous radiofrequency ablation combined with punctate stripping[J]. Clin Appl Thromb Hemost, 2023, 29: 10760296231220054. DOI: 10.1177/10760296231220054.
[19] 李振興, 吳秀玲. 股神經聯合坐骨神經阻滯麻醉在大隱靜脈曲張剝脫術中的應用[J]. 上海醫學, 2019, 42(5): 269-272. DOI: CNKI: SUN: SHYX.0.2019-05-003.
LI Z X, WU X L. Application of femoral nerve combined with sciatic nerve block in great saphenous vein stripping[J]. Shanghai Med J, 2019, 42(5): 269-272. DOI: CNKI: SUN: SHYX.0.2019-05-003.
[20] WITAYAKOM W, SUKHONTHAMARN K, KOSUWON W, et al.
An anatomic consideration of the femoral nerve during direct anterior hip approach: a cadaveric study[J]. Surg Rad3BzQ3nlQ6N77dzE9hsp4CV4w7gLv8n3/RwJFSBy44Kc=iol Anat, 2024, 46(6): 733-738. DOI: 10.1007/s00276-024-03364-3.
[21] PU M, XU J, XU X, et al. Comparative analysis of analgesic effect of iliac fascial block with vertical and horizontal inguinal approach for total hip arthroplasty[J]. Am J Transl Res, 2021, 13(8): 9593-9599.
[22] VERGARI A, FRASSANITO L, TAMBURELLO E, et al. Supra-inguinal fascia iliaca compartment block for postoperative analgesia after Acetabular fracture surgery[J]. Injury, 2020,
51(12): 2996-2998. DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2020.10.001.
[23] ZHENG T, HU B, ZHENG C Y, et al. Improvement of analgesic efficacy for total hip arthroplasty by a modified ultrasound-guided supra-inguinal fascia iliaca compartment block[J]. BMC Anesthesiol, 2021, 21(1): 99. DOI: 10.1186/s12871-021-01314-9.
[24] BANSAL K, SHARMA N, SINGH M R, et al. Comparison of suprainguinal approach with infrainguinal approach of fascia iliaca compartment block for postoperative analgesia[J]. Indian J Anaesth, 2022, 66(Suppl 6): S294-S299. DOI: 10.4103/ija.ija_823_21.
[25] 劉緒華, 謝玨, 袁從旺, 等. 超聲引導下髂筋膜間隙阻滯在老年患者全髖關節置換術中的應用[J]. 臨床麻醉學雜志, 2022, 38(4): 356-360. DOI: 10.12089/jca.2022.04.004.
LIU X H, XIE J, YUAN C W, et al. Application of ultrasound-guided fascia iliaca compartment block in elderly patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty[J]. J Clin Anesthesiol, 2022, 38(4): 356-360. DOI: 10.12089/jca.2022.04.004.
[26] ASLANLAR E, ASLANLAR D A, DO?ANAY C, et al. The validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the quality of recovery-15 (QoR-15) questionnaire[J]. Medicine, 2024,
103(16): e37867. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000037867.
[27] CHHABRA A, DAVE M, JEENGER L, et al. Comparison of Quality of Recovery (QoR-15) following the administration of intravenous lignocaine and fentanyl in patients undergoing septoplasty under general anaesthesia: a double-blinded, randomised, controlled trial[J]. Indian J Anaesth, 2023,
67(4): 388-393. DOI: 10.4103/ija.ija_479_22.
[28] BRAMLEY P, MCARTHUR K, BLAYNEY A, et al. Risk factors for postoperative delirium: an umbrella review of systematic reviews[J]. Int J Surg, 2021, 93: 106063. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.106063.
[29] ZHU Q, JIANG G, ZHENG Y, et al. The effect of cognitive impairment based on Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) on suicidal tendency in patients with schizophrenia: a large cross-sectional study[J]. Schizophr Res, 2024, 269: 48-55. DOI: 10.1016/j.schres.2024.05.004.
[30] 孫倩倩, 余健, 程震. 連續髂筋膜間隙阻滯對老年患者髖部手術后認知功能及應激反應的影響[J]. 臨床麻醉學雜志, 2021, 37(6): 603-606. DOI: 10.12089/jca.2021.06.010.
SUN Q Q, YU J, CHENG Z. Effects of continuous fascial iliac compartment block on postoperative cognitive function and stress in elderly patients undergoing hip surgery[J]. J Clin Anesthesiol, 2021, 37(6): 603-606. DOI: 10.12089/jca.2021.06.010.
(責任編輯:鄭巧蘭)