Peduto V A, Peli S, Amicucci G, Giardina B, Pelaia P, Pasetto A, Occella P, Gravame V, Casati A
Department of Anesthesia, Policlinico Universitario Monteluce, Perugia.
Minerva Anestesiol. 1998 Sep;64(9 Suppl 3):18-25.
The goal of this multicenter, prospective, randomized clinical investigation was to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of sevoflurane and isoflurane during the maintenance of and the recovery from general anaesthesia in elderly patients.
With the approval of the Ethical Committee and the patient informed consent, 104 ASA physical status II-III patients, aged more than 65 years, were randomized in order to receive either isofluorane (n = 54) or sevoflurane (n = 50) as the main general anaesthetic. After an oral diazepam (0.1-0.2 mg kg-1) and intramuscular atropine (0.007-0.01 mg kg-1) premedication, anaesthesia was induced intravenously and then maintained by adjusting the end-tidal concentrations of the inhalation agent for the maintainance of cardiovascular stability. At the moment of the last skin suture the inhalational agents were discontinued and the neuromuscular block was reversed. The following times were recorded: time of extubation, time of eyes opening, time of command response and readiness for discharge. The occurrence of untoward event throughout the study was also recorded. Before surgery and 24 hr after the procedure, blood was collected in order to assess renal function.
No differences in demography, duration of surgery, exposure to the volatile anaesthetic, and renal function laboratory values were observed between the two groups. The time of extubation (median: 8 min versus 11 min, p < 0.01), emergence (median: 8.5 min versus 12.5 min, p < 0.01), command response (median: 10 min versus 15.5 min, p < 0.01), and suitability for discharge from the recovery area (median: 21 min versus 27.5 min, p < 0.01) were shorter in the sevoflurane group than in the isoflurane one. The success rate (absence of any event) during induction and maintenance periods was better in sevoflurane than isoflurane group (p < 0.02 and p < 0.001, respectively). Hypotension (systolic arterial blood pressure decrease > 30% of baseline values) was observed in 16 patients receiving isoflurane (29%) and only in 5 patients receiving sevoflurane (10%) (p < 0.02).
When used in elderly patients undergoing operations of intermediate duration, sevoflurane provides a more rapid emergence from anaesthesia with a faster fulfillment of discharging criteria, and a more stable cardiovascular homeostasis than isoflurane. Renal function also appears to be equally well preserved with both anaesthetics.
这项多中心、前瞻性、随机临床研究的目的是比较七氟醚和异氟醚在老年患者全身麻醉维持期及恢复期的临床疗效和安全性。
经伦理委员会批准并获得患者知情同意后,104例年龄超过65岁、ASA身体状况分级为II - III级的患者被随机分组,分别接受异氟醚(n = 54)或七氟醚(n = 50)作为主要全身麻醉药。在口服地西泮(0.1 - 0.2 mg/kg)和肌肉注射阿托品(0.007 - 0.01 mg/kg)进行术前用药后,静脉诱导麻醉,然后通过调整吸入麻醉药的呼气末浓度来维持麻醉以保持心血管稳定。在最后一针皮肤缝合时停止吸入麻醉药,并逆转神经肌肉阻滞。记录以下时间:拔管时间、睁眼时间、指令反应时间和准备出院时间。还记录了整个研究过程中不良事件的发生情况。在手术前和术后24小时采集血液以评估肾功能。
两组在人口统计学、手术持续时间、挥发性麻醉药暴露量和肾功能实验室值方面均未观察到差异。七氟醚组的拔管时间(中位数:8分钟对11分钟,p < 0.01)、苏醒时间(中位数:8.5分钟对12.5分钟,p < 0.01)、指令反应时间(中位数:10分钟对15.5分钟,p < 0.01)和从恢复区出院的适宜时间(中位数:21分钟对27.5分钟,p < 0.01)均短于异氟醚组。七氟醚组在诱导期和维持期的成功率(无任何事件)优于异氟醚组(分别为p < 0.02和p < 0.001)。16例接受异氟醚的患者(29%)出现低血压(收缩动脉血压下降超过基线值的30%),而接受七氟醚的患者中只有5例(10%)出现低血压(p < 0.02)。
在接受中等时长手术的老年患者中使用时,与异氟醚相比,七氟醚能使患者从麻醉中苏醒更快,更快达到出院标准,且心血管内环境更稳定。两种麻醉药对肾功能的保护似乎同样良好。