安徽医科大学学报
安徽醫科大學學報
안휘의과대학학보
ACTA UNIVERSITY MEDICINALIS ANHUI
2014年
2期
222-224
,共3页
余骏马%张野%陆姚%董春山%徐瑞好
餘駿馬%張野%陸姚%董春山%徐瑞好
여준마%장야%륙요%동춘산%서서호
丙泊酚注射痛%芬太尼诱发呛咳%血流动力学%右美托咪啶%全身麻醉%儿童
丙泊酚註射痛%芬太尼誘髮嗆咳%血流動力學%右美託咪啶%全身痳醉%兒童
병박분주사통%분태니유발창해%혈류동역학%우미탁미정%전신마취%인동
propofol injection pain%fentanyl induced cough%hemodynamic%dexmedetomidine%general anesthe-sia%pediatric
目的观察右美托咪啶对小儿全麻诱导期不良反应的影响。方法选择40例全麻下行择期外科手术的患儿,美国麻醉医师协会( ASA)分级玉级,随机数字表法分为2组(n=20):对照组(C组,泵注生理盐水0.15 ml/kg)、右美托咪啶组( D组,泵注右美托咪啶0.6μg/kg)。之后,静脉15 s注射咪达唑仑0.06 mg/kg,2 min后静脉注射丙泊酚2 mg/kg,1 min后静脉注射芬太尼2.5μg/kg。记录丙泊酚注射痛、芬太尼诱发呛咳的发生情况和强度,以及全麻诱导前(T0)、气管插管前(T1)和气管插管后(T2)的平均动脉压(MAP)和心率(HR)。结果C组丙泊酚注射痛发生率为85%,D组无丙泊酚注射痛发生( P<0.01);两组患儿均无芬太尼诱发呛咳发生;与C组比较,T1时D组MAP升高,T2时D组MAP降低(P<0.01);与T0时比较,T1时C组MAP降低,T2时C组MAP、HR升高(P<0.01);与T1时比较,T2时C组MAP、HR均升高( P<0.01)。结论右美托咪啶复合咪达唑仑应用于小儿全麻诱导,无丙泊酚注射痛及芬太尼诱发呛咳发生,且患儿血流动力学稳定。
目的觀察右美託咪啶對小兒全痳誘導期不良反應的影響。方法選擇40例全痳下行擇期外科手術的患兒,美國痳醉醫師協會( ASA)分級玉級,隨機數字錶法分為2組(n=20):對照組(C組,泵註生理鹽水0.15 ml/kg)、右美託咪啶組( D組,泵註右美託咪啶0.6μg/kg)。之後,靜脈15 s註射咪達唑崙0.06 mg/kg,2 min後靜脈註射丙泊酚2 mg/kg,1 min後靜脈註射芬太尼2.5μg/kg。記錄丙泊酚註射痛、芬太尼誘髮嗆咳的髮生情況和彊度,以及全痳誘導前(T0)、氣管插管前(T1)和氣管插管後(T2)的平均動脈壓(MAP)和心率(HR)。結果C組丙泊酚註射痛髮生率為85%,D組無丙泊酚註射痛髮生( P<0.01);兩組患兒均無芬太尼誘髮嗆咳髮生;與C組比較,T1時D組MAP升高,T2時D組MAP降低(P<0.01);與T0時比較,T1時C組MAP降低,T2時C組MAP、HR升高(P<0.01);與T1時比較,T2時C組MAP、HR均升高( P<0.01)。結論右美託咪啶複閤咪達唑崙應用于小兒全痳誘導,無丙泊酚註射痛及芬太尼誘髮嗆咳髮生,且患兒血流動力學穩定。
목적관찰우미탁미정대소인전마유도기불량반응적영향。방법선택40례전마하행택기외과수술적환인,미국마취의사협회( ASA)분급옥급,수궤수자표법분위2조(n=20):대조조(C조,빙주생리염수0.15 ml/kg)、우미탁미정조( D조,빙주우미탁미정0.6μg/kg)。지후,정맥15 s주사미체서륜0.06 mg/kg,2 min후정맥주사병박분2 mg/kg,1 min후정맥주사분태니2.5μg/kg。기록병박분주사통、분태니유발창해적발생정황화강도,이급전마유도전(T0)、기관삽관전(T1)화기관삽관후(T2)적평균동맥압(MAP)화심솔(HR)。결과C조병박분주사통발생솔위85%,D조무병박분주사통발생( P<0.01);량조환인균무분태니유발창해발생;여C조비교,T1시D조MAP승고,T2시D조MAP강저(P<0.01);여T0시비교,T1시C조MAP강저,T2시C조MAP、HR승고(P<0.01);여T1시비교,T2시C조MAP、HR균승고( P<0.01)。결론우미탁미정복합미체서륜응용우소인전마유도,무병박분주사통급분태니유발창해발생,차환인혈류동역학은정。
Objective To evaluate the efficacy of dexmedetomidine on adverse reaction to anesthesia induction in children. Methods Forty ASA physical status class, undergoing elective surgery pediatric patients were random-ized into two groups of 20 each, using computer-generated random numbers. Group C:normal saline 0.15 ml/kg;Group D:dexmedetomidine 0. 6μg/kg. After aforementioned treatments in each group, midazolam 0.06 mg/kg by injection for 15 s;2 min later, all patients received propofol 2 mg/kg by injection over 20 s, then fentanyl 2.5μg/kg over 5 s. Another anesthesiologist, blind to the pre-treatment, recorded injection pain and fentanyl induced cough;in addition, mean arterial pressure ( MAP) and heart rate ( HR) before anesthesia ( T0 ) , before intubation (T1) and after intubation (T2) were recorded also. Results Seventeen (85%) patients in Group C (control) had pain, and none of patients in Group D had any injection pain (P<0.01). However, there was no fentanyl in-duced cough in all patients. Hemodynamics of Group D were more stable than Group C (P<0.01). ConclusionInjection pain of propofol and fentanyl induced cough can be completely supressed by pretreatment dexmedetomi-dine-midazolam during anesthesia induction in children, and the hemodynamic is stable.