国际麻醉学与复苏杂志
國際痳醉學與複囌雜誌
국제마취학여복소잡지
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ANESTHESIOLOGY AND RESUSCITATION
2010年
1期
16-18
,共3页
丙泊酚%七氟醚%瑞芬太尼%靶控输注%麻醉%腹腔镜胆囊切除术
丙泊酚%七氟醚%瑞芬太尼%靶控輸註%痳醉%腹腔鏡膽囊切除術
병박분%칠불미%서분태니%파공수주%마취%복강경담낭절제술
Propofol%Sevoflurane%Remifentanil%Target control infusion%Anaesthesia%Laparoscopic cholecystectomy
目的 比较瑞芬太尼-丙泊酚靶控输注麻醉和瑞芬太尼七氟醚麻醉用于腹腔镜胆囊切除术(laparoscopic chdecystectomy,LC)对患者血流动力学及术后苏醒的影响.方法 48例行择期LC患者,年龄21岁～73岁,ASA Ⅰ级～Ⅱ级,采用完全随机的设计分为2组:瑞芬太尼-丙泊酚靶控输注麻醉组(RP组,n=24)和瑞芬太尼七氟醚维持麻醉组(RP组,n=24).分别记录2组手术期间麻醉用药维持量,麻醉过程各时点的平均动脉压(MAP)和心率(HR)及术毕患者苏醒各时段时间.结果 RP组与RS组血流动力学变化差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).苏醒时间RS组(7.0±3.4)min比RP组(13.1±7.8)min明显缩短(P<0.01).结论 七氟醚-端芬太尼维持麻醉与丙泊酚-瑞芬太尼靶控输注麻醉对患者术中血流动力学效应相当,然而七氟醚-瑞芬太尼维持麻醉患者苏醒更快,更适合用于快通道麻醉.
目的 比較瑞芬太尼-丙泊酚靶控輸註痳醉和瑞芬太尼七氟醚痳醉用于腹腔鏡膽囊切除術(laparoscopic chdecystectomy,LC)對患者血流動力學及術後囌醒的影響.方法 48例行擇期LC患者,年齡21歲～73歲,ASA Ⅰ級～Ⅱ級,採用完全隨機的設計分為2組:瑞芬太尼-丙泊酚靶控輸註痳醉組(RP組,n=24)和瑞芬太尼七氟醚維持痳醉組(RP組,n=24).分彆記錄2組手術期間痳醉用藥維持量,痳醉過程各時點的平均動脈壓(MAP)和心率(HR)及術畢患者囌醒各時段時間.結果 RP組與RS組血流動力學變化差異無統計學意義(P>0.05).囌醒時間RS組(7.0±3.4)min比RP組(13.1±7.8)min明顯縮短(P<0.01).結論 七氟醚-耑芬太尼維持痳醉與丙泊酚-瑞芬太尼靶控輸註痳醉對患者術中血流動力學效應相噹,然而七氟醚-瑞芬太尼維持痳醉患者囌醒更快,更適閤用于快通道痳醉.
목적 비교서분태니-병박분파공수주마취화서분태니칠불미마취용우복강경담낭절제술(laparoscopic chdecystectomy,LC)대환자혈류동역학급술후소성적영향.방법 48례행택기LC환자,년령21세～73세,ASA Ⅰ급～Ⅱ급,채용완전수궤적설계분위2조:서분태니-병박분파공수주마취조(RP조,n=24)화서분태니칠불미유지마취조(RP조,n=24).분별기록2조수술기간마취용약유지량,마취과정각시점적평균동맥압(MAP)화심솔(HR)급술필환자소성각시단시간.결과 RP조여RS조혈류동역학변화차이무통계학의의(P>0.05).소성시간RS조(7.0±3.4)min비RP조(13.1±7.8)min명현축단(P<0.01).결론 칠불미-단분태니유지마취여병박분-서분태니파공수주마취대환자술중혈류동역학효응상당,연이칠불미-서분태니유지마취환자소성경쾌,경괄합용우쾌통도마취.
Objective To examine recovery profile and haemodynamic differences using remifentanil infusion with either propofol target controlled infusion system or sevoflurane inhalation for laparoscopic choleeystectomy. Methods Forty-eight adult patients, ASAⅠ～Ⅱgrade, undergoing elective laparoseopie cholecystectomy were randomly divided into two groups(n=24). Group R P received propofol target controlled infusion system and remifentanil; Group RS received sevoflurane and remifentanil for maintenance of anaesthesia. The amount of narcotie medication during the oporation, mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR) at each time point during anesthesia and awake time for patients after surgery of the two grous were recorded. Results No statistically significant differences between the two groups with tegards to the haemodynamic changes(P>O.05). Recovery times were considerably shorter after remifentanil-sevoflurane (7.0±3.4)min in comparison with remifentanil-prpofol (13.1±7.8) min target controlled infusion system group (P<0.01). Conclusion Remifentanil-propofol and sevoflurane-remifentanil combinations provide a similar adequate haemodynamic stability. However, sevoflurane-remifentanil gives a faster recovery compared with propofol target controlled infusion system with remifentanil for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
