目的:比较舒芬太尼与芬太尼复合七氟烷麻醉在神经外科手术中对血流动力学、拔管时间、苏醒时间及术后疼痛情况的影响。方法:择期开颅手术患者60例,随机分为舒芬太尼(S)组和芬太尼(F)组,每组30例。将S和F的效能比定为10:l,复合咪唑安定、维库溴胺、异丙酚来进行麻醉诱导;麻醉维持均复合七氟烷。分别记录麻醉前、诱导后、插管时和拔管时血压和心率变化;呼吸恢复、睁眼和拔管时间以及拔管后半小时疼痛评分(VAS评分)。结果:两组麻醉诱导后收缩压(SBP)、舒张压(DBP)、心率(HR)均较诱导前有显著性下降(Plt;0．05)。F组插管及拔管时,血流动力学变化均较S组有显著性升高(Plt;0.05)。S组苏醒期呼吸恢复、睁眼、拔管时间较F组明显缩短;拔管后半小时疼痛评分(VAS评分)S组低于F组。结论:与芬太尼相比,等效剂量的舒芬太尼用于脑外科手术患者麻醉诱导可更有效地减轻全麻诱导气管插管时的心血管反应;在麻醉苏醒期,更有利于呼吸管理及术后镇痛。舒芬太尼在神经外科麻醉中具有很好的临床应用价值。
ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine combined with dezocine for patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) in patients after radical operation for abdominal tumor. MethodsBetween September 2012 and May 2013, 60 patients (aged 40-60, American Sociaty of Anesthesiologists physical statusⅠ-Ⅱ) undergoing abdominal tumor surgery and asking for PCIA pumps voluntarily were randomly divided into two groups (group D and group DF) with 30 in each group. Patients in group D were given sufentanil 0.25 μg/kg+ dezocine 0.4 mg/kg, which were added into 100 mL 0.9% normal saline, while in group DF, the patients received dexmedetomidine 1.5 μg/kg+ sufentanil 0.15 μg/kg+ dezocine 0.4 mg/kg, which were added into 100 mL 0.9% normal saline. The changes of mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR), the visual analog scale (VAS), Ramsay sedation scale, Bruggrmann analgesia scale (BCS), the efficacy of postoperative analgesia and adverse effects were observed and recorded at the preoperative time (T0), and 2 (T1), 4 (T2), 8 (T3), 24 (T4) and 48 hours (T5) postoperatively. ResultsHemodynamics in group DF was more stable than that in group D (P<0.05). There were no statically significant differences in terms of VAS and BCS between the two groups at each time point (P>0.05). The Ramsay sedation scale of group DF was better than group D, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). The efficient number of pressing within 48 hours in the two groups was not significantly different (P>0.05). The incidence of nausea, vomiting and drowsiness in group D was more than that of group DF (P<0.05). ConclusionDexmedetomidine combined with dezocine can provide effective postoperative analgesia with less adverse effects for patients after radical surgery of abdominal tumor, which provides higher satisfaction to the abdominal surgery patients.
【摘要】 目的 观察依托咪酯乳剂复合舒芬太尼用于全麻下喉罩置入的血流动力学变化。 方法 选择2009年4月-2010年2月间，46例需全麻手术、适合使用喉罩，美国麻醉医师协会（ASA）Ⅰ～Ⅱ级，年龄18～60岁的患者，随机分为两组:依托咪酯乳剂组（E组）23 例，静脉推注咪达唑仑0.05 mg/kg，依托咪酯乳剂0.3 mg/kg；依托咪酯乳剂+舒芬太尼组（ES组）23 例，静脉推注咪达唑仑0.05 mg/kg，依托咪酯乳剂0.15 mg/kg，加舒芬太尼0.5 mg/kg，诱导后置入喉罩，记录患者诱导前、用药后1 min、喉罩置入后1 min的心率（HR）、平均动脉压（MAP）以及评估喉罩置入条件的6项指标（张口困难分级、置入喉罩困难分级、舌咽反射、干咳干呕反射、肢动反应及喉痉挛分级），同时记录呼吸暂停时间。 结果 ES组能提供更好的喉罩置入条件，且能减少舌咽反射和肢体反应， 更能保证喉罩置入时血流动力学的稳定。 结论 依托咪酯乳剂复合舒芬太尼能为全麻喉罩置入时提供更好的条件，且能保证更好的血流动力学稳定。【Abstract】 Objective To investigate the hemodynamics changes when etomidate combined with sufentanil was applied for laryngeal mask airway insertion under the general anaesthesia. Methods From April 2009 to February 2010, 46 patients requiring general anesthesia using laryngeal mask airway (LMA) (American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA)Ⅰ-Ⅱ) aged 18-60 were randomly divided into two groups: 23 in etomidate emulsion group (group E) underwent the intravenous injection with midazolm (0.3 mg/kg) and etomidate (0.05 mg/kg); 23 in etomidate emulsion + sufentanil group (group ES) underwent the intravenous injection with etomidate (0.15 mg/kg), midazolm (0.05 mg/kg), and sufentanil 0.5 mg/kg. The patients were evaluated by six indexes of LMA insertion (mouth opening, swallowing reflex, cough reflex,vomiting reflex, body motion, and laryngospasm classification). After the anesthesia induction, LMA was inserted. The blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR), and mean arterial pressure (MAP) were recorded before anesthesia induction one minute after the injection and one minute after LMA insertion. Meanwhile, the apnea time was recorded. Results Compared with group E, group ES offered better anesthesia for LMA insertion, less swallowing reflex and body motion, and more stable haemodynamics. Conclusion Etomidate combined with sufentanil provides good condition for LMA insertion under the general anaesthesia with steady haemodynamics.
目的:观察舒芬太尼复合异丙酚自控镇静镇痛在结肠镜检查中的效果及不良反应,从而探讨该方法的安全性和有效性。方法:行无痛纤维结肠镜检查的患者60例,随机分为两组:自控镇痛/镇静组和静脉复合全麻醉组,每组30例。自控镇痛/镇静组首先缓慢静脉注射舒芬太尼0.12 μg/kg,随之接电子自控镇痛泵,负荷量设定为0.5 mg/kg,以4 mg/kg·h的速度持续泵入异丙酚(10 mg/mL),术中按压1次自控手柄可快速推注异丙酚1 mL。静脉复合全麻醉组首先静脉缓慢推注芬太尼1 μg/kg,咪唑安定0.02 mg/kg, 2 min后缓慢推注异丙酚0.8～1 mg/kg。术中间断给予异丙酚以维持听觉诱发电位指数(AAI)于30～40之间。结果:静脉复合全麻醉组的MAP较检查前明显下降且较自控镇痛/镇静组下降更为明显且具有统计学意义(Plt;0.05)。自控镇痛/镇静组的呼吸频率较静脉复合全麻醉组下降明显且在T3时间点具有统计学意义(Plt;0.05)。自控镇痛/镇静组患者OAA/S评分达5分和Aldrete评分达9分的时间均较静脉复合全麻醉组明显缩短(1.4±1.3 VS 3.9±1.7和 2.9±1.7 VS 5.7±1.7)(Plt;0.05)。两组的内镜医师和患者满意度评分无统计学差异(P＞0.05)。结论:自控镇静镇痛能够比传统的静脉全身麻醉提供更良好的循环系统稳定性,更迅速的麻醉后恢复,是结肠镜检查镇静镇痛的理想和安全方法。
Objective To systematically review the clinical effectiveness and safety of sufentanil-propofol versus remifentanil-propofol during total intravenous anesthesia for neurosurgery. Methods Databases including The Cochrane Library (Issue 3, 2013), the database of the Cochrane Anesthesia Group, MEDLINE, EMbase, PubMed, Ovid, Springer, CNKI, VIP and WanFang Data were electronically searched from inception to May 2013 for the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of sufentanil-propofol versus remifentanil-propofol during total intravenous anesthesia for neurosurgery. Two reviewers independently screened literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed the quality of included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.1 software. Results Thirteen trials involving 647 patients were finally included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: a) for hemodynamic changes, MAP decreased in the remifentanil-propofol group after induction and decreased 5 minutes after intubation, but no significant difference was found between the two groups; the two groups were alike in MAP changes during craniotomy and extubation, and in HR changes after induction, 5 minutes after intubation, during craniotomy and extubation, with no significant difference. b) The result of intra-operative wake-up test showed that, there was no significant difference in the sedative effect and the time of awaking between the two groups. c) For emergence time and extubation time, compared with the sufentanil-propofol group, emergence time and extubation time were significantly shorter than those in the remifentanil-propofol group. d) For side effects, there was no significant difference in side effects (such as post-operative nausea, vomiting, respiratory depression, restlessness, chills and hypotension) between the two groups. And e) for post-operative pain, compared with the remifentanil-propofol group, post-operative 1-h and 2-h VAS were lower and the number of who need additional analgesic drugs within 24 h after operation was less in the sufentanil-propofol group, with significant differences. Both groups used the similar dosage of propofol with no significant difference. Conclusion Compared with the remifentanil-propofol group, hemodynamics changes in the sufentanil-propofol group is steadier after induction and during intubation. Patients in the sufentanil-propofol group are better in postoperative awakening quality. But they are alike in the incidence of side effects and propofol dosage.
目的 评价舒芬太尼复合艾司洛尔对腹腔镜胆囊切除术二氧化碳气腹期间心血管反应和脑电双频指数（BIS）的影响。 方法 2010年1月－2011年12月间，选择美国麻醉医师协会分级Ⅰ～Ⅱ级择期腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者90例，随机分为芬太尼组（A组）、舒芬太尼组(B组）和舒芬太尼+艾司洛尔组（C组）。A组用芬太尼4 μg/kg，B、C组用舒芬太尼0.6 μg/kg麻醉诱导后气管插管，机械通气；C组在气腹前加用艾司洛尔。3组均常规静脉注射咪达唑仑0.1 mg/kg、丙泊酚2 mg/kg和维库溴铵0.1 mg/kg。分别记录各组在气腹前（T1）、气腹30 s（T2）、气腹5 min（T3）、气腹15 min（T4）时的收缩压、舒张压、平均动脉压、心率、血氧饱和度和BIS值。 结果 T1时C组收缩压、舒张压、心率、BIS值最低，各组间差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）；T2、T3、T4时A组收缩压、舒张压、心率、BIS明显增加，B组有所上升，ⅢC组各时段变化不明显。A组与B组、B组与C组间差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。 结论 舒芬太尼复合艾司洛尔能更好地预防腹腔镜胆囊切除术二氧化碳气腹期间心血管反应和抑制BIS的增加。
ObjectivesTo systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of dezocine combine with sufentanil (DS) versus sufentanil (S) for postoperative analgesia.MethodsCNKI, WanFang Data, VIP, PubMed, Wiley Online Library and ScienceDirect databases were searched online to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of DS versus S for postoperative analgesia from January 2011 to July 2017. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies, then, meta-analysis was performed by using Stata13.0 software.ResultsA total of 39 RCTs were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: DS group had higher scores on VAS at 2 h, 6 h, 12 h, 24 h and 48 h points than S group at the dezocine level of 0.2 mg/kg. At the dezocine level of 0.3 mg/kg, there were no significant differences in scores on VAS at 2 h and 4 h. However, DS group had higher scores at 6 h, 12 h, 24 h and 48 h points. At the dezocine level of 10 mg/kg, there were no significant differences in scores on VAS at each time point in both groups. DS group was superior to S group in " excellent rate” and " good rate” of the analgesic satisfaction of patients. For safety, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting of DS group was lower than S group.ConclusionsThe current evidence shows that dezocine combine with sufentanil have more effects of postoperative analgesia than sufentanil alone, and its incidence of adverse reactions is lower. Due to limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high-quality studies are needed to verify above conclusions.
Objective To systematically evaluate effectiveness, dosage and adverse reaction of sufentanil versus fentanyl for postoperative patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA), so as to provide evidence for rational drug use in clinic. Methods Databases including The Cochrane Library, the special trials registered in the Cochrane anesthesia group, MEDLINE, EMbase, CBM, CNKI, VIP and WanFang Data were searched by the end of 2012, and the relevant periodicals were also manually searched to collect the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on sufentanil versus fentanyl for postoperative patient-controlled epidural analgesia. According to the Cochrane Handbook 5.0, literature was screened, data were extracted, and quality of the included studies was critically assessed. Then meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.1 software. Results A total of 25 RCTs involving 1 944 patients were included. The results of meta-analyses showed that: a) as for visual analog scale (VAS), compared with the fentanyl group, the postoperative VAS at 2-hour, 4-hour, 8-hour, 12-hour, 24-hour and 48-hour was decreased in the sufentanil group; b) as for sedation scale, the fentanyl group, the postoperative sedation at 12-hour and 24-hour was lower in the sufentanil group when adopting 0 to 3 points scoring method, but there were no significant differences at other time points; c) as for drug dosage, compared with the fentanyl group, the postoperative drug consumption at 24-hour and 48-hour was less in the sufentanil group; d) as for adverse reaction, the incidence of postoperative nausea, vomiting, dizziness and somnolence in the sufentanil group was lower than those in the fentanyl group. But there was no significant difference in other adverse reactions such as skin itching, limbs numbness and motor disturbance between the two groups; and e) as for the demands of additional analgesic drugs, compared with the fentanyl group, the incidence of demanding additional analgesic drugs was lower in the sufentanil group. Conclusion Compared with fentanyl, sufentanil has better effects of analgesia and sedation for PCEA; Its dosage and incidence of adverse reactions are lower, so sufentanil is safer in clinic.
【摘要】目的观察低浓度罗哌卡因复合舒芬太尼用于分娩镇痛的效果。方法2007年5月8月按入选标准选择100例产妇,随机分成试验组和对照组,每组50例。试验组分娩前给予低浓度罗哌卡因加舒芬太尼,对照组不行无痛分娩,通过视觉模拟评分法等指标观察镇痛效果。结果试验组镇痛后视觉模拟评分较对照组低(Plt;0.05);两组镇痛期间血压、心率差异有统计学意义（Plt;0.05），新生儿Apgar评分比较无统计学意义(Pgt;0.05)。结论联合应用罗哌卡因和舒芬太尼用于硬膜外分娩镇痛能取得较好的效果,值得在临床中推广应用。
目的 通过对腹部手术后自控静脉镇痛（PCIA）不同药物配方的研究，探讨酒石酸布托啡诺与舒芬太尼用于术后PCIA临床效果。 方法 将2012年2月－8月收治的60例麻醉分级为Ⅰ～Ⅲ级需术后镇痛的腹部手术患者（均无心、肺、肝、肾、脑、内分泌疾病及过敏史）随机分成两组：酒石酸布托啡诺组（N组，n=30），舒芬太尼组（S组，n=30）。观察镇痛效果和不良反应发生率。 结果 两组镇痛效果差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05），不良反应（包括恶心、呕吐、头晕、嗜睡、皮肤瘙痒、呼吸抑制、尿潴留等），N组发生率均低于S组（P＜0.05）。 结论 酒石酸布托啡诺用于PCIA安全、有效，不良反应少。