Buhl K, Kersten U, Kramer S, Mischke R, Fedrowitz M, Nolte I
Klinik für kleine Haustiere, Tierärztlichen Hochschule Hannover.
Dtsch Tierarztl Wochenschr. 2003 Oct;110(10):407-12.
Post-anesthetic holter monitoring was performed in 2 patient groups in order to compare the incidence of cardiac arrhythmias as a result of different anesthetic protocols. The 2 groups differed in their anesthetic protocol. Both groups received levomethadone as pre-anesthetic. The dogs in group A (n = 30) additionally received diazepam, the dogs in group B (n = 30) received propofol instead. Anesthesia was maintained by isoflurane in group A and a propofol constant rate infusion in group B. In each patient 2 holter monitorings were performed. The first recording began directly after anesthesia. As a comparison a second recording was performed on the 5th post-operative day. The recorded number of arrhythmias was low and no statistical difference was demonstrated between the 2 patient groups.
为比较不同麻醉方案导致的心律失常发生率，对两组患者进行了麻醉后动态心电图监测。两组的麻醉方案不同。两组均在麻醉前给予左美沙酮。A组（n = 30）的犬还额外给予了地西泮，B组（n = 30）的犬则给予了丙泊酚替代。A组通过异氟烷维持麻醉，B组通过丙泊酚持续静脉输注维持麻醉。对每位患者进行了2次动态心电图监测。第一次记录在麻醉后立即开始。作为对照，在术后第5天进行了第二次记录。记录到的心律失常数量较少，两组患者之间未显示出统计学差异。
