發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-01-16 16:18

  本文關(guān)鍵詞：七氟烷或丙泊酚復(fù)合瑞芬太尼全麻對(duì)腹腔鏡手術(shù)患者麻醉蘇醒期的影響　出處：《中華臨床醫(yī)師雜志(電子版)》2016年21期 　論文類(lèi)型：期刊論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： 七氟烷 二異丙酚 芬太尼

【摘要】：目的觀察比較七氟烷與丙泊酚復(fù)合瑞芬太尼對(duì)腹腔鏡微創(chuàng)手術(shù)患者麻醉后恢復(fù)質(zhì)量的影響,為臨床制定更有效麻醉方案提供參考。方法選擇本院78例氣管插管全麻后行腹腔鏡微創(chuàng)手術(shù)治療的女性患者,隨機(jī)數(shù)字表法予以分兩組:C1組39例(七氟烷復(fù)合瑞芬太尼維持麻醉);C2組39例(丙泊酚復(fù)合瑞芬太尼維持麻醉)。記錄且比較兩組圍手術(shù)期各時(shí)間點(diǎn)收縮壓(SBP)、舒張壓(DBP)、心率(HR),拔氣管導(dǎo)管時(shí)呼吸頻率、手術(shù)結(jié)束至拔氣管導(dǎo)管時(shí)間、惡心嘔吐評(píng)分、最大Ricker鎮(zhèn)靜躁動(dòng)評(píng)分、疼痛數(shù)字評(píng)分(NRS)評(píng)分、咳嗽評(píng)分及恢復(fù)質(zhì)量評(píng)分(Qo R-40評(píng)分)。結(jié)果兩組患者的SBP、DBP、HR在各時(shí)間點(diǎn)上比較差異均無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(均P0.05);兩組患者拔管時(shí)呼吸頻率差異無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05);與C1組比較,C2組手術(shù)結(jié)束至拔管時(shí)間短[(5.60±2.20)min vs.(10.40±2.50)min,t=9.140,P=0.000],咳嗽評(píng)分、惡心嘔吐評(píng)分、NRS評(píng)分均低(P0.05);C2組最大Ricker鎮(zhèn)靜躁動(dòng)評(píng)分低于C1組,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05);C2組Qo R-40評(píng)分明顯低于C1組,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05)。結(jié)論丙泊酚復(fù)合瑞芬太尼與七氟烷復(fù)合瑞芬太尼在腹腔鏡微創(chuàng)手術(shù)中,均具有穩(wěn)定的麻醉效果,丙泊酚較七氟烷麻醉后恢復(fù)質(zhì)量高,具有臨床推廣應(yīng)用的價(jià)值。
[Abstract]:Objective to observe the effect of sevoflurane and propofol combined with remifentanil on the recovery quality of patients undergoing laparoscopic minimally invasive surgery. Methods 78 female patients undergoing laparoscopic minimally invasive surgery after tracheal intubation were selected. They were randomly divided into two groups: group C 1 (n = 39) (sevoflurane combined with remifentanil); Group C2 (propofol combined with remifentanil for maintenance anesthesia. Systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), heart rate (HRR) were recorded and compared between the two groups at different time points during perioperative period. Respiratory rate of trachea catheter, time from operation to trachea catheter, nausea and vomiting score, maximum Ricker sedative restlessness score, pain number score and NRS score. Results there was no significant difference in SBPnDBPHR between the two groups at each time point (P 0.05). There was no significant difference in respiratory frequency between the two groups during extubation (P 0.05). The time from operation to extubation in C2 group is shorter than that in C1 group. [5. 60 鹵2. 20 minutes vs.(10.40 鹵2. 50 vs.(10.40 鹵9. 140 vs.(10.40, score of cough, score of nausea and vomiting, and 5. 60 鹵2. 20??? NRS scores were all low (P 0.05); The maximum Ricker sedative restlessness score of C2 group was lower than that of C1 group (P 0.05). The Qo R-40 score in C2 group was significantly lower than that in C1 group (P 0.05). Conclusion propofol combined with remifentanil and sevoflurane combined with remifentanil in laparoscopic minimally invasive surgery. Propofol has higher recovery quality than sevoflurane and has the value of clinical application.
【作者單位】： 香港大學(xué)深圳醫(yī)院麻醉科;南方醫(yī)科大學(xué)深圳醫(yī)院麻醉科;深圳市第二人民醫(yī)院麻醉科;南方醫(yī)科大學(xué)深圳醫(yī)院手術(shù)室;
【基金】：深圳市科創(chuàng)委項(xiàng)目(JCYJ20140414092023240)
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：R614
【正文快照】： 現(xiàn)代麻醉不但要讓患者無(wú)痛、安全,也要讓患者舒適、滿(mǎn)意地恢復(fù)。腹部微創(chuàng)手術(shù)創(chuàng)傷小、恢復(fù)快,有些患者當(dāng)日即可下床活動(dòng),絕大多數(shù)患者第二天即到處行走,并進(jìn)流質(zhì)飲食,因此患者和家屬對(duì)手術(shù)和麻醉后恢復(fù)的舒適度要求較高,目前麻醉醫(yī)師對(duì)微創(chuàng)手術(shù)后患者舒適性的關(guān)注尚少。手術(shù)結(jié)，

本文編號(hào)：1433868