Suppr超能文献

用于白内障摘除术的表面麻醉联合或不联合丙泊酚镇静与球后/球周麻醉的比较:前瞻性随机试验

Topical anesthesia with or without propofol sedation versus retrobulbar/peribulbar anesthesia for cataract extraction: prospective randomized trial.

作者信息

Kallio H, Uusitalo R J, Maunuksela E L

机构信息

Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Helsinki University Central Hospital, and Helsinki University Eye Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.

出版信息

J Cataract Refract Surg. 2001 Sep;27(9):1372-9. doi: 10.1016/s0886-3350(01)00800-8.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To evaluate the feasibility of intravenous sedation in addition to topical anesthesia during cataract extraction.

SETTING

Helsinki University Eye Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.

METHODS

Three hundred seventeen eyes of 291 consecutive patients having cataract surgery were prospectively randomized to receive topical (oxybuprocaine 0.4%, n = 96), combined (topical anesthesia and propofol sedation, n = 107), or retrobulbar/peribulbar (prilocaine 1.5%, n = 114) anesthesia. The intraoperative conditions were judged by the surgeon. A numerical scale (0 to 10) was used to assess the degree of pain during surgery. Outcome measures were the number of complications and adverse events registered perioperatively and 1 week postoperatively as well as Snellen visual acuity.

RESULTS

The success of posterior chamber intraocular lens (IOL) implantation through a self-sealing clear corneal incision was 97.9%, 96.3%, and 98.2% in the topical, combined, and retrobulbar/peribulbar groups, respectively. There was no difference among the groups in pain during surgery, frequency of complications, or outcome measures. One week postoperatively, visual acuity was 20/40 or better in 81.7%, 78.5%, and 77.5% of eyes in the topical, combined, and retrobulbar/peribulbar groups, respectively. The surgeon reported significantly fewer difficulties in the retrobulbar/peribulbar group (9.8%) than in the topical (26.0%) (P =.004) or combined (21.0%) (P =.036) groups. Additional sedative/analgesic medication given intraoperatively was required significantly more often in the topical (15.6%) than in the retrobulbar/peribulbar group (2.6%) (P =.002). Patients with bilateral surgery preferred combined anesthesia over retrobulbar/peribulbar anesthesia; however, there was no significant difference in patient acceptance among groups in patients having unilateral surgery.

CONCLUSION

Intravenous propofol sedation added to topical anesthesia did not improve the operative conditions or surgical outcome. Retrobulbar/peribulbar anesthesia ensured the best surgical conditions. Patients in all anesthesia groups reported high satisfaction. However, patients having bilateral surgery seemed to prefer combined anesthesia over retrobulbar/peribulbar anesthesia.

摘要

目的

评估白内障摘除术中除表面麻醉外静脉镇静的可行性。

地点

芬兰赫尔辛基大学眼科医院。

方法

对连续291例白内障手术患者的317只眼进行前瞻性随机分组,分别接受表面麻醉(0.4%奥布卡因,n = 96)、联合麻醉(表面麻醉加丙泊酚镇静,n = 107)或球后/球周麻醉(1.5%丙胺卡因,n = 114)。术中情况由外科医生判断。采用数字评分量表(0至10分)评估手术期间的疼痛程度。观察指标为围手术期及术后1周记录的并发症和不良事件数量以及斯内伦视力。

结果

在表面麻醉组、联合麻醉组和球后/球周麻醉组中,通过自闭性透明角膜切口植入后房型人工晶状体的成功率分别为97.9%、96.3%和98.2%。三组在手术期间的疼痛、并发症发生率或观察指标方面无差异。术后1周,表面麻醉组、联合麻醉组和球后/球周麻醉组分别有81.7%、78.5%和77.5%的眼视力达到20/40或更好。外科医生报告球后/球周麻醉组(9.8%)的困难明显少于表面麻醉组(26.0%)(P = 0.004)或联合麻醉组(21.0%)(P = 0.036)。术中需要额外给予镇静/镇痛药物的情况在表面麻醉组(15.6%)明显多于球后/球周麻醉组(2.6%)(P = 0.002)。接受双侧手术的患者比球后/球周麻醉更喜欢联合麻醉;然而,在接受单侧手术的患者中,各组间患者接受度无显著差异。

结论

表面麻醉加静脉丙泊酚镇静并未改善手术条件或手术结果。球后/球周麻醉确保了最佳手术条件。所有麻醉组的患者满意度都很高。然而,接受双侧手术的患者似乎比球后/球周麻醉更喜欢联合麻醉。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验