CAJ | 학술논문

目的探讨并比较丙泊酚复合雷米芬太尼和芬太尼用于无痛人流手术临床效果。方法选取我院2010年5月至2012年10月行无痛人流手术患者180例，采用随机数字表法分为芬太尼组和雷米芬太尼组，每组各90例；其中芬太尼组患者采用丙泊酚复合芬太尼麻醉；雷米芬太尼组患者采用丙泊酚复合雷米芬太尼麻醉；比较两组患者体动发生率、麻醉前后生命体征变化、阿托品使用率及面罩供氧率等。结果芬太尼组和雷米芬太尼组患者体动发生率分别为35.6%，10.0%；芬太尼组患者体动发生率明显高于雷米芬太尼组，组间比较差异显著(P<0.05)；芬太尼组和雷米芬太尼组患者麻醉前HR、RR、MAP及SpO2等生命体征指标组间比较无显著差异（P>0.05）；麻醉后两组患者RR、MAP指标组间比较无显著差异（P>0.05）；但芬太尼组患者HR、SpO2指标变化明显高于雷米芬太尼组，组间比较差异显著(P<0.05)；同时雷米芬太尼组患者阿托品使用率及面罩供氧率均明显低于芬太尼组，组间比较差异显著(P<0.05)。结论相较于芬太尼，丙泊酚复合雷米芬太尼用于无痛人流手术临床效果确切，可显著降低体动，维持生命体征稳定，具有临床使用价值。
목적탐토병비교병박분복합뢰미분태니화분태니용우무통인류수술림상효과。방법선취아원2010년5월지2012년10월행무통인류수술환자180례，채용수궤수자표법분위분태니조화뢰미분태니조，매조각90례；기중분태니조환자채용병박분복합분태니마취；뢰미분태니조환자채용병박분복합뢰미분태니마취；비교량조환자체동발생솔、마취전후생명체정변화、아탁품사용솔급면조공양솔등。결과분태니조화뢰미분태니조환자체동발생솔분별위35.6%，10.0%；분태니조환자체동발생솔명현고우뢰미분태니조，조간비교차이현저(P<0.05)；분태니조화뢰미분태니조환자마취전HR、RR、MAP급SpO2등생명체정지표조간비교무현저차이（P>0.05）；마취후량조환자RR、MAP지표조간비교무현저차이（P>0.05）；단분태니조환자HR、SpO2지표변화명현고우뢰미분태니조，조간비교차이현저(P<0.05)；동시뢰미분태니조환자아탁품사용솔급면조공양솔균명현저우분태니조，조간비교차이현저(P<0.05)。결론상교우분태니，병박분복합뢰미분태니용우무통인류수술림상효과학절，가현저강저체동，유지생명체정은정，구유림상사용개치。
Objective To investigate and compare the therapeutic effect of propofol combined with remifentanil and fentanyl for painless artiifcial abortion surgery. Methods 180 patients with painless artiifcial abortion surgery were chose in the period from May 2010 to October 2012 in our hospital and randomly divided into two groups including fentanyl group (90 patients) with propofol combined with fentanyl and remifentanil group (60 patients) with propofol combined with remifentanil;and the body movement incidence, changes in vital signs before and after anesthesia, atropine utilization rate and oxygen mask used rate of both groups were compared. Results The body movement incidence of fentanyl group and remifentanil group were separately 35.6%, 10.0%;The body movement incidence of remifentanil group were signiifcantly better than fentanyl group(P<0.05). There was no signiifcant difference in changes in vital signs before anesthesia including HR, RR, MAP and SpO2 between fentanyl group and remifentanil group (P>0.05). There was no signiifcant difference in changes in vital signs after anesthesia including RR and MAP between fentanyl group and remifentanil group (P>0.05). The changes of vital signs after anesthesia including HR and SpO2 of remifentanil group were significantly better than fentanyl group(P<0.05). Conclusion Compared with fentanyl anesthesia, propofol combined with remifentanil possess perfect effects, can efifciently lower body movement risk, maintain vital signs levels, and is worthy of clinical application value.