罗哌卡因连续胸椎旁神经阻滞对胸腔镜肺叶切除术患者的影响

doi:10.3760/cma.j.cn441417-20240425-05020

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的　评估罗哌卡因连续胸椎旁神经阻滞（CTPVB）对胸腔镜肺叶切除术患者认知功能、镇痛效果及炎症因子的影响。方法　本研究为随机对照试验。选取2023年1月至12月西安市中心医院行胸腔镜肺叶切除术的80例非小细胞肺癌患者作为研究对象，按信封法分为对照组（40例）和研究组（40例）。对照组男24例，女16例；年龄（43.24±5.79）岁；美国麻醉医师协会（ASA）分级Ⅰ级16例，Ⅱ级24例；病理分期Ⅰa、Ⅰb、Ⅱa、Ⅱb、Ⅲa期各15、11、6、5、3例。研究组男22例，女18例；年龄（44.13±5.62）岁；ASA分级Ⅰ级17例，Ⅱ级23例；病理分期Ⅰa、Ⅰb、Ⅱa、Ⅱb、Ⅲa期各14、13、5、6、2例。对照组给予全身麻醉，研究组给予罗哌卡因CTPVB（麻醉诱导前在超声引导下行患侧CTPVB，探头平行于肋间隙行穿刺点定位，使用平面内穿刺法至T4～T8节段，在各椎旁间隙注射0.5%罗哌卡因5 ml，用针刺皮肤痛觉消退法确定神经阻滞效果，CTPVB起效15 min后开始全身麻醉）联合全身麻醉。比较两组患者术后恢复情况、认知功能［简易智力状态检查量表（MMSE）］、静息和咳嗽时的疼痛程度［视觉模拟评分法（VAS）］、镇痛情况、炎症因子［白细胞介素（IL）-6、IL-8、肿瘤坏死因子-α（TNF-α）］水平、不良反应发生情况。采用χ²、t检验进行统计学分析。结果　研究组术后恢复情况优于对照组［拔管时间：（19.95±7.83）min比（26.36±8.02）min、苏醒时间：（10.96±6.78）min比（21.53±9.24）min、术后监护室停留时间：（52.85±10.23）min比（61.31±10.13）min］，差异均有统计学意义（均P<0.05）。术后24 h，研究组MMSE评分为（26.55±2.42）分，高于对照组的（24.30±2.52）分，差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。术后1 h、6 h、12 h，研究组在静息及咳嗽状态下的VAS评分均低于对照组（均P<0.05）。研究组镇痛情况优于对照组［丙泊酚用量：（582.68±75.31）mg比（674.74±80.95）mg、芬太尼用量：（209.86±28.74）µg比（347.43±30.58）µg、首次按压镇痛泵时间：（11.13±4.86）h比（7.94±5.38）h、镇痛泵按压次数：（2.35±0.86）次比（4.25±1.35）次］（均P<0.05）。术后24 h、48 h，研究组IL-6、IL-8、TNF-α水平均低于对照组（均P<0.05）。研究组不良反应发生率与对照组比较［32.50%（13/40）比47.50%（19/40）］，差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。结论　罗哌卡因CTPVB可改善胸腔镜肺叶切除术患者的术后认知功能、镇痛效果，减轻手术引起的全身炎症反应，对术后恢复有积极影响。

关键词:

连续胸椎旁神经阻滞, 罗哌卡因, 胸腔镜肺叶切除术, 认知功能, 镇痛效果, 炎症因子

Abstract:

Objective　To evaluate the effects of continuous thoracic paravertebral block (CTPVB) with ropivacaine on cognitive function, analgesia, and inflammatory factors in patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy. Methods　This study was a randomized controlled trial. A total of 80 patients with non-small cell lung cancer who underwent video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy in Xi'an Central Hospital from January to December 2023 were selected as the study objects, and were divided into a control group (40 cases) and a study group (40 cases) according to the envelope method. There were 24 males and 16 females in the control group, aged (43.24±5.79) years, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade Ⅰ in 16 cases and grade Ⅱ in 24 cases, and the pathological stages of Ⅰa, Ⅰb, Ⅱa, Ⅱb, and Ⅲa were 15, 11, 6, 5, and 3 cases, respectively. There were 22 males and 18 females in the study group, aged (44.13±5.62) years, ASA grade Ⅰ in 17 cases and grade Ⅱ in 23 cases, and the pathological stages of Ⅰa, Ⅰb, Ⅱa, Ⅱb, and Ⅲa were 14, 13, 5, 6, and 2 cases, respectively. The control group was given general anesthesia, and the study group was given CTPVB with ropivacaine (before anesthesia induction, CTPVB on the affected side was guided by ultrasound, the probe was located parallel to the intercostal space for puncture points, the intraplane puncture method was used to reach T4 - T8 segments, 5 ml of 0.5% ropivacaine was injected into each paravertebral space, and the nerve block effect was determined by the method of skin pain attenuation by acupuncture. General anesthesia was performed 15 min after CTPVB took effect) combined with general anesthesia. Postoperative recovery, cognitive function [Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE)], pain levels at rest and during coughing [Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)], analgesia, levels of inflammatory factors [interleukin (IL-6), IL-8, and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α)], and occurrence of adverse reactions were compared between the two groups. χ² and t tests were used for statistical analysis. Results　The postoperative recovery of the study group was superior to the control group [extubation time: (19.95±7.83) min vs. (26.36±8.02) min, awakening time: (10.96±6.78) min vs. (21.53±9.24) min, postoperative ICU stay: (52.85±10.23) min vs. (61.31±10.13) min], with statistically significant differences (all P<0.05). At 24 h after surgery, the MMSE score of the study group was (26.55±2.42) points, which was higher than that of the control group [(24.30±2.52) points], with a statistically significant difference (P<0.05). At 1 h, 6 h, and 12 h after surgery, the VAS scores of the study group at rest and during coughing were lower than those of the control group (all P<0.05). The analgesia of the study group was superior to the control group [propofol dosage: (582.68±75.31) mg vs. (674.74±80.95) mg, fentanyl dosage: (209.86±28.74) µg vs. (347.43±30.58) µg, first analgesic pump press time: (11.13±4.86) h vs. (7.94±5.38) h, number of analgesic pump presses: (2.35±0.86) times vs. (4.25±1.35) times] (all P<0.05). The levels of IL-6, IL-8, and TNF-α in the study group were lower than those in the control group 24 h and 48 h after surgery (all P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions between the study group and the control group [32.50% (13/40) vs. 47.50% (19/40)] (P>0.05). Conclusion　CTPVB with ropivacaine significantly improves postoperative cognitive function and analgesic effect, and reduces systemic inflammatory responses induced by surgery, indicating that this anesthetic method positively impacts postoperative recovery.

Key words:

Continuous thoracic paravertebral block, Ropivacaine, Video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy, Cognitive function, Analgesic effect, , Inflammatory factors

李楠孙双春延育强张勤.

罗哌卡因连续胸椎旁神经阻滞对胸腔镜肺叶切除术患者的影响 [J]. 国际医药卫生导报, 2025, 31(5): 801-805.

Li Nan, Sun Shuangchun, Yan Yuqiang, Zhang Qin.

Effect of continuous thoracic paravertebral block with ropivacaine on patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy [J]. International Medicine and Health Guidance News, 2025, 31(5): 801-805.

参考文献

[1] 翟振州,赵军,李畅,等.胸腔镜肺叶切除术后肺容积减少与患者肺功能丢失的相关性分析[J].中国肺癌杂志,2022,25(1):21-25. DOI:10.3779/j.issn.1009-3419.2021.103.15.
[2] 张磊,袁海军,乐新会,等.超声引导下两种神经阻滞方式对胸腔镜下肺叶切除术患者炎症反应及免疫功能的影响[J].中国内镜杂志,2022,28(11):8-14. DOI:10.12235/E20220007.
[3] 殷国江,魏蓬骁,颜玉琴,等.弓状韧带上腰方肌阻滞对全麻机器人辅助腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术患者术后肺功能的影响[J].中华麻醉学杂志,2024,44(2):160-166. DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn131073.20231019.00208.
[4] Vinsard PA, Niesen AD. Regional anesthesia for scapulothoracic fixation surgery: anatomic review and case series[J]. Clin Anat, 2023, 36(6):896-899. DOI: 10.1002/ca.24029.
[5] 胡春华,赵晓艳,吴黎黎,等.术中多模式镇痛对终末期头颈部癌症患者开腹胃造瘘术后早期恢复质量的影响:前瞻性随机对照研究[J].协和医学杂志,2024,15(2):359-365. DOI:10.12290/xhyxzz.2024-0072.
[6] 肖国华,陈辉国.罗哌卡因复合地塞米松胸椎旁神经阻滞对胸腔镜肺叶切除术患者的镇痛效果[J].临床合理用药,2023,16(36):85-88. DOI:10.15887/j.cnki.13-1389/r.2023.36.024.
[7] 王凯,李宝强,葛磊,等.超声引导下罗哌卡因联合艾司氯胺酮椎旁阻滞技术在胸腔镜肺叶切除术中的应用价值[J].生物医学工程与临床,2023,27(3):310-315. DOI:10.13339/j.cnki.sglc.20230420.011.
[8] 刘艳君,王海英,赵洋,等.地塞米松联合罗哌卡因胸椎旁神经阻滞对胸腔镜肺叶切除术患者镇痛效果和术后恢复的影响[J].临床与病理杂志,2023,43(4):734-740. DOI:10.11817/j.issn.2095-6959.2023.222134.
[9] 赵林,徐亚谦.脑外伤患者高压氧治疗对认知功能、MMSE评分及脑血流动力学的影响[J].河北医药,2021,43(12):1851-1854. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1002-7386.2021.12.022.
[10] 张静,蒋茜,孙琳琳.破窗效应联合一体化护理模式在晚期肺癌患者中的应用[J].齐鲁护理杂志,2023,29(6):130-133. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1006-7256.2023.06.042.
[11] 赵聪,尹泓,李红梅,等.不同剂量右美托咪定复合罗哌卡因胸椎旁神经阻滞对老年胸腔镜手术患者术后镇痛的影响[J].中国老年学杂志,2022,42(9):2140-2143. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-9202.2022.09.029.
[12] 张萌,覃道锐,杨博,等.氢吗啡酮复合罗哌卡因骶管阻滞在儿童尿道下裂手术中的应用效果[J].天津医药,2023,51(3):274-277. DOI:10.11958/20221210.
[13] 董麦娟,袁伟,邢静瑶,等.罗哌卡因联合右美托咪定竖脊肌阻滞在减重手术中的镇痛效果观察[J].重庆医学,2023,52(2):210-214. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1671-8348.2023. 02.010.
[14] 查善辉,刘杰,任洁,等.腹腔镜手术治疗老年子宫内膜癌疗效及对患者应激、疼痛和术后恢复的影响[J].陕西医学杂志,2023,52(5):536-540. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1000-7377. 2023.05.009.
[15] 李苹,王逸骏.规范化疼痛护理联合功能锻炼对Schatzker Ⅳ胫骨平台骨折患者术后恢复的影响[J].中国医药导报,2024,21(6):155-158,180. DOI:10.20047/j.issn1673- 7210.2024.06.36.
[16] 李冰斯,牛骊,刘丽.阿片类药物对围术期微生物组及认知功能变化的影响[J].黑龙江医学,2023,47(19):2309-2312. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1004-5775.2023.19.001.
[17] 王科润,邓佩云.集束化疼痛管理联合正念减压疗法对混合痔患者术后应激和自护能力的影响[J].中国健康心理学杂志,2023,31(6):862-868. DOI:10.13342/j.cnki.cjhp.2023. 06.013.
[18] 许川,刘迪,金星,等.胸椎旁神经阻滞联合全身麻醉对肺叶切除术后患者血清cTnI及心肌酶水平的影响[J].河北医药,2023,45(1):56-59. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1002-7386.2023. 01.012.
[19] Ma H, Song X, Li J, et al. Postoperative pain control with continuous paravertebral nerve block and intercostal nerve block after two-port video-assisted thoracic surgery[J]. Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne, 2021, 16(1):273-281. DOI: 10.5114/wiitm.2020.99349.
[20] 王晴晴,王灵通,白斌,等.腹腔镜妇科手术患者麻醉诱导前静脉推注纳美芬对围术期炎症反应的影响[J].中国医刊,2023,58(10):1107-1110. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1008-1070. 2023.10.017.
[21] 刘勇,杨恒,郑汉,等.不同浓度丙泊酚全身麻醉对择期腹部手术患者围术期胰岛素抵抗及炎症反应的影响[J].局解手术学杂志,2022,31(6):537-540. DOI:10.11659/jjssx.12E021073.
[22] 唐佳,张慕春,王朵朵,等.右美托咪定联合罗哌卡因腹横肌平面阻滞对老年腹腔镜胃癌根治术患者应激反应、炎症反应及术后谵妄的影响[J].现代生物医学进展,2021,21(19):3743-3747. DOI:10.13241/j.cnki.pmb.2021. 19.029.
[23] 彭洪,郑东,刘洪.超声引导下PVB在PCNL手术中的应用效果及对患者炎症应激反应的影响[J].医学临床研究,2019,36(6):1090-1092. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1671-7171.2019. 06.017.
[24] 卢洁,潘鑫福,方仁秀.不同肋间神经阻滞方案对肺癌根治术患者围术期镇痛及炎症反应的影响[J].浙江医学,2023,45(19):2076-2079. DOI:10.12056/j.issn.1006-2785. 2023.45.19.2023-724.