Comparison of the effects of ultrasound-guided lumbar muscle block and erector spine muscle plane block on stress indicators, inflammatory factors, and T lymphocyte subsets in patients with colorectal cancer after laparoscopic radical surgery

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-2015.2025.04.018

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective

To investigate the effects of ultrasound-guided lumbar muscle block and erector spine muscle plane block on stress indicators, inflammatory factors, and T lymphocyte subsets in patients with colorectal cancer after laparoscopic radical surgery.

Methods

From May 2023 to May 2024, 92 patients who underwent laparoscopic radical surgery for colorectal cancer in Xi'an International Medical Center Hospital were selected for observation and study. All samples were assigned into two groups using a random number table method. The experimental group (n=46) received ultrasound-guided lumbar muscle block, while the control group (n=46) received ultrasound-guided erector spine muscle plane block. The stress indicators, inflammation indicators, T lymphocyte subsets, pain scores, cognitive function, and adverse reaction events of the two groups were compared.

Results

After treatment, the CD4⁺ and CD4⁺/CD8⁺ in the two groups were significantly increased (P<0.05), and the increase in the experimental group was better than that in the control group (P<0.05). After treatment, the levels of cortisol, angiotensin Ⅱ, and CD8⁺ in the two groups were significantly decreased (P<0.05), and the reduction in the experimental group was better than that in the control group (P<0.05). Compared with the control group, the experimental group showed a decrease in tumor necrosis factor-α, interleukin-6, and C-reactive protein levels 12 hours after surgery (P<0.05). The visual analog scale score of the experimental group was obviously lower than that of the control group at 2 and 12 hours after surgery (P<0.05). The Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) of the experimental group was obviously higher than that of the control group 12 hours after surgery (P<0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions was not statistically obviously different between the two groups (P>0.05).

Conclusion

Ultrasound-guided lumbar muscle block is superior to ultrasound-guided erector spine muscle plane block in reducing stress response, inhibiting inflammatory cytokine production, and improving immune regulation in patients with colorectal cancer after minimally invasive radical surgery, with obvious comprehensive effects.

Key words: Colorectal cancer, Laparoscopic surgery, Lumbar muscle block, Erector spine muscle plane block, Stress indicators, T lymphocyte subsets

Yan Li, Xia Hu, Juan Zhao. Comparison of the effects of ultrasound-guided lumbar muscle block and erector spine muscle plane block on stress indicators, inflammatory factors, and T lymphocyte subsets in patients with colorectal cancer after laparoscopic radical surgery[J]. Chinese Journal of Digestion and Medical Imageology(Electronic Edition), 2025, 15(04): 393-397.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://zhxhbyyxzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-2015.2025.04.018

https://zhxhbyyxzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/Y2025/V15/I04/393

Figures/Tables 6

References 21

[1]	李珂璇, 孙振, 邱辉忠, 等. 北京协和医院结肠癌专病数据库的建立:单中心数据库经验[J]. 协和医学杂志, 2023, 14(3): 566-574.
[2]	李占稳, 东潇博, 宋光荣, 等. 以颅骨转移为首发症状的结肠癌1例并文献复习[J]. 现代肿瘤医学, 2022, 30(12): 2260-2262.
[3]	周弋晖, 朱美华, 胡海青, 等. 颊针疗法对腹腔镜结肠癌根治术患者围术期镇痛效果的影响[J]. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2024, 40(7): 704-708.
[4]	孙淑芳, 吕容, 魏闯. 超声引导下肋间神经阻滞复合全身麻醉对腹腔镜横结肠癌根治术后康复的影响[J]. 实用医院临床杂志, 2022, 19(2): 151-154.
[5]	徐慧, 马璐璐. 竖脊肌平面阻滞在脊柱外科手术中应用进展[J]. 中国医学科学院学报, 2024, 46(4): 560-564.
[6]	Gazendam AM, Zhu M, Rubinger L, et al. Quadratus lumborum block for postoperative pain management in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Hip Int, 2023, 33(5): 850-857.
[7]	国家卫生健康委员会医政司, 中华医学会肿瘤学分会. 中国结直肠癌诊疗规范(2023版)[J/OL]. 消化肿瘤杂志(电子版), 2023, 15(3): 177-206.
[8]	中华医学会外科学分会腹腔镜与内镜外科学组, 中国抗癌协会大肠癌专业委员会腹腔镜外科学组, 腹腔镜结直肠癌根治手术操作指南(2008版)[J]. 中华胃肠外科杂志, 2009, 12(3): 310-312.
[9]	Pérez-de la Cruz S. Influence of an Aquatic Therapy Program on Perceived Pain, Stress, and Quality of Life in Chronic Stroke Patients: A Randomized Trial[J]. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2020, 17(13): 4796.
[10]	Levine SZ, Yoshida K, Goldberg Y, et al. Linking the Mini-Mental State Examination, the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale and the Severe Impairment Battery: evidence from individual participant data from five randomised clinical trials of donepezil[J]. Evid Based Ment Health, 2021, 24(2): 56-61.
[11]	杨宇飞. 结直肠癌中医临床实践指南的制定及应用策略[J]. 世界中医药, 2023, 18(11): 1493-1497.
[12]	张育葵, 许成. 腹腔镜微创手术治疗结直肠癌的进展[J]. 医学综述, 2021, 27(3): 582-585, 591.
[13]	王迪, 丁颖, 纪木火, 等. 超声引导下区域神经阻滞用于腹腔镜减重手术后镇痛的研究进展[J]. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2024, 40(7): 746-750.
[14]	孙梦, 吴志林, 王婷婷. 超声引导下区域神经阻滞在经皮肾镜碎石术后镇痛的研究进展[J]. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2023, 39(8): 868-871.
[15]	仲明杰, 刘勇, 陈悦, 等. 竖脊肌平面阻滞对胸腔镜下老年肺癌根治术后谵妄及认知功能的影响[J]. 局解手术学杂志, 2024, 33(8): 718-721.
[16]	林道艺, 叶鹏, 龚灿生, 等. 竖脊肌平面阻滞的围术期应用进展[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2024, 32(6): 657-660.
[17]	Huda AU, Minhas R. Quadratus Lumborum Block Reduces Postoperative Pain Scores and Opioids Consumption in Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Meta-Analysis[J]. Cureus, 2022, 14(2): e22287.
[18]	Long X, Yin Y, Guo W, et al. Ultrasound-guided quadratus lumborum block: a powerful way for reducing postoperative pain[J]. Ann Med Surg(Lond), 2023, 85(10): 4947-4953.
[19]	Zajkowska Z, Gullett N, Walsh A, et al. Cortisol and development of depression in adolescence and young adulthood - a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 2022, 136: 105625.
[20]	Correa BHM, Becari L, Fontes MAP, et al. Involvement of the Renin-Angiotensin System in Stress: State of the Art and Research Perspectives[J]. Curr Neuropharmacol, 2022, 20(6): 1212-1228.
[21]	Zhu M, Qi Y, He H, et al. Effect of quadratus lumborum block on postoperative cognitive function in elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic radical gastrectomy: a randomized controlled trial[J]. BMC Geriatr, 2021, 21(1): 238.

组别	对照组	试验组	χ²/t	P
性别(男/女,例)	20/26	27/19	2.131	0.144
年龄(岁, ± s)	57.60±6.51	59.01±7.13	0.900	0.325
体重指数(kg/m², ± s)	23.11±2.45	23.64±2.55	1.017	0.312
ASA分级(例)			0.358	0.836
Ⅰ级	9	11
Ⅱ级	33	32
Ⅲ级	4	3

组别	对照组	试验组	χ²/t	P
性别(男/女,例)	20/26	27/19	2.131	0.144
年龄(岁, ± s)	57.60±6.51	59.01±7.13	0.900	0.325
体重指数(kg/m², ± s)	23.11±2.45	23.64±2.55	1.017	0.312
ASA分级(例)			0.358	0.836
Ⅰ级	9	11
Ⅱ级	33	32
Ⅲ级	4	3

组别	例数	皮质醇		血管紧张素Ⅱ
组别	例数	术前	术后12 h	术前	术后12 h
试验组	46	419.47±46.07	356.42±35.72^a	215.35±25.37	171.44±18.07^a
对照组	46	420.20±46.19	375.48±38.57^a	219.03±26.50	180.63±19.37^a
t		0.076	2.459	0.680	2.353
P		0.940	0.016	0.498	0.021

组别	例数	皮质醇		血管紧张素Ⅱ
组别	例数	术前	术后12 h	术前	术后12 h
试验组	46	419.47±46.07	356.42±35.72^a	215.35±25.37	171.44±18.07^a
对照组	46	420.20±46.19	375.48±38.57^a	219.03±26.50	180.63±19.37^a
t		0.076	2.459	0.680	2.353
P		0.940	0.016	0.498	0.021

组别	例数	肿瘤坏死因子α(pg/mL)		白细胞介素-6(ng/L)		C反应蛋白(pg/mL)
组别	例数	术前	术后12 h	术前	术后12 h	术前	术后12 h
试验组	46	357.60±64.27	365.35±38.95^a	47.42±5.55	51.54±7.57^a	5.38±1.27	7.35±1.74^a
对照组	46	370.92±85.94	403.32±95.56^a	47.61±5.74	70.23±9.60^a	5.42±1.36	10.20±1.81^a
t		0.842	2.496	0.162	10.369	0.146	7.699
P		0.402	0.014	0.872	0.000	0.884	0.000

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export