Manninen Pirjo H, Balki Mrinalini, Lukitto Karolinah, Bernstein Mark
Department of Anesthesia, Toronto Western Hospital, Toronto, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Anesth Analg. 2006 Jan;102(1):237-42. doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000181287.86811.5C.
In this study we compared the effectiveness of the use of remifentanil to fentanyl in conjunction with propofol in providing conscious sedation for awake craniotomy for tumor surgery and to assess patient satisfaction with both techniques. The ability to maintain appropriate levels of sedation, adequate analgesia, and hemodynamic stability was assessed in 50 patients randomized to receive either fentanyl or remifentanil. All complications were documented. Patients were interviewed at 1 h, 4 h, and 24 h after surgery to note their recall of procedure and pain and their overall satisfaction. There were no differences in sedation and pain scores or in hemodynamic and respiratory variables between the two groups. The incidence of intraoperative complications was not different (fentanyl, 14; remifentanil, 16). Respiratory complications occurred in 9 (18%) patients (fentanyl 6, remifentanil 3). The recall and satisfaction scores were not different; 93% of all patients were completely satisfied at all interview times. The use of remifentanil infusion in conjunction with propofol is a good alternative to fentanyl and propofol for conscious sedation for the awake craniotomy and these techniques are both well accepted by the patient.
在本研究中,我们比较了瑞芬太尼与芬太尼联合丙泊酚用于清醒开颅肿瘤手术清醒镇静的有效性,并评估患者对这两种技术的满意度。对50例随机接受芬太尼或瑞芬太尼的患者评估了维持适当镇静水平、充分镇痛和血流动力学稳定性的能力。记录所有并发症。术后1小时、4小时和24小时对患者进行访谈,以了解他们对手术过程和疼痛的回忆以及总体满意度。两组之间的镇静和疼痛评分、血流动力学和呼吸变量均无差异。术中并发症发生率无差异(芬太尼组14例,瑞芬太尼组16例)。9例(18%)患者出现呼吸并发症(芬太尼组6例,瑞芬太尼组3例)。回忆和满意度评分无差异;所有患者中有93%在所有访谈时间均完全满意。瑞芬太尼输注联合丙泊酚用于清醒开颅手术的清醒镇静是芬太尼和丙泊酚的良好替代方案,并且这些技术均为患者所接受。