Lam A M, Pavlin E G, Visco E, Taraday J
Department of Anesthesiology, Harborview Medical Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98104, USA.
J Clin Anesth. 2000 Sep;12(6):449-53. doi: 10.1016/s0952-8180(00)00191-4.
To compare the onset and offset time (clinical duration), and intubating conditions obtained with rocuronium bromide 0.6 mg/kg and succinylcholine 1.0 mg/kg after induction with propofol and fentanyl; and to compare rocuronium with atracurium for maintenance during propofol anesthesia.
Prospective, open-label, parallel group comparative, randomized study.
Operating rooms of a university hospital.
30 ASA physical status I and II adult patients scheduled for elective surgeries with general anesthesia.
Patients premedicated with midazolam 2 mg were anesthetized with fentanyl 2 microg/kg followed by propofol 2.5 mg/kg and muscle relaxants. Group 1 (n = 15) received succinylcholine 1.5 mg/kg and Group 2 (n = 16) received rocuronium bromide 0.6 mg/kg. Intubation was performed 60 seconds after the administration of muscle relaxant. Patients in Group 1 received atracurium and patients in Group 2 received rocuronium for maintenance if required.
The ease of intubation was scored using a scale of 1 to 4. Onset and offset time monitored with evoked twitch response of the adductor pollicis were recorded.
Intubation was successful in all patients and there was no difference in scores between the two groups. Although onset time was shorter with succinylcholine than with rocuronium, neuromuscular blockade was successfully antagonized in both groups, and the recovery profile was not different between the two groups.
Rocuronium bromide at a dose of 0.6 mg/kg, when used with propofol and fentanyl for induction, provides intubating conditions similar to succinylcholine 1.0 mg/kg at 1 minute. The actual onset time and offset time, however, are significantly longer with rocuronium. There was no difference between atracurium and rocuronium as a maintenance drug. Rocuronium is suitable for surgical procedures greater than 30 minutes, eliminating the need for an additional relaxant to succinylcholine.
比较在丙泊酚和芬太尼诱导后,0.6mg/kg 罗库溴铵与 1.0mg/kg 琥珀胆碱的起效和作用消失时间(临床持续时间)以及插管条件;并比较在丙泊酚麻醉维持期间罗库溴铵与阿曲库铵的效果。
前瞻性、开放标签、平行组比较、随机研究。
大学医院手术室。
30 例 ASA 身体状况 I 级和 II 级、计划接受全身麻醉择期手术的成年患者。
用 2mg 咪达唑仑进行术前用药的患者,先给予 2μg/kg 芬太尼麻醉,随后给予 2.5mg/kg 丙泊酚和肌肉松弛剂。第 1 组(n = 15)给予 1.5mg/kg 琥珀胆碱,第 2 组(n = 16)给予 0.6mg/kg 罗库溴铵。在给予肌肉松弛剂 60 秒后进行插管。如果需要,第 1 组患者给予阿曲库铵,第 2 组患者给予罗库溴铵用于维持麻醉。
使用 1 至 4 分的量表对插管的难易程度进行评分。记录通过拇内收肌的诱发肌颤搐反应监测的起效和作用消失时间。
所有患者插管均成功,两组评分无差异。虽然琥珀胆碱的起效时间比罗库溴铵短,但两组的神经肌肉阻滞均成功被拮抗,且两组的恢复情况无差异。
0.6mg/kg 剂量的罗库溴铵与丙泊酚和芬太尼联合用于诱导时,在 1 分钟时提供的插管条件与 1.0mg/kg 琥珀胆碱相似。然而,罗库溴铵的实际起效时间和作用消失时间明显更长。作为维持药物,阿曲库铵和罗库溴铵之间无差异。罗库溴铵适用于大于 30 分钟的手术,无需额外补充琥珀胆碱以外的松弛剂。