Sternlo J E, Hägerdal M
Department of Anaesthesiology, Kalmar County Hospital, Sweden.
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1991 Oct;35(7):606-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.1991.tb03357.x.
A 1-year population of anaesthesias for cardioversion of supraventricular tachyarrhythmias was studied. Propofol and thiopentone were used alternately for every other procedure, and the anaesthetic-, and monitoring procedures were prospectively standardized. Twenty-one thiopentone- and 23 propofol-anaesthetized patients, who had been subjected to elective cardioversions of atrial fibrillation were compared, particularly regarding possible differences in the energy requirements for cardioversion and in the time intervals to initial awakening. There were no significant differences between the two drugs in the maximum systolic blood pressure drop, in the total mean energy requirements per kg bodyweight, or in the distribution of the number of patients over the various energy levels needed for restoration of sinus rhythm. Somewhat unexpectedly, however, the mean time interval to initial awakening was significantly longer in the propofol-anaesthetized group. Apart from this minor drawback, propofol proved to be as useful an anaesthetic agent as thiopentone for the cardioversion procedure, and may be considered as an alternative drug in selected cases.
对1年期间室上性快速心律失常复律麻醉情况进行了研究。每隔一次操作交替使用丙泊酚和硫喷妥钠，麻醉和监测程序均进行前瞻性标准化。比较了21例接受硫喷妥钠麻醉和23例接受丙泊酚麻醉且进行择期房颤复律的患者，特别关注复律所需能量以及至初次苏醒的时间间隔方面可能存在的差异。两种药物在最大收缩压下降幅度、每千克体重的总平均能量需求或恢复窦性心律所需不同能量水平患者数量分布上均无显著差异。然而， somewhat unexpectedly（此处“somewhat unexpectedly”直译为“有点出乎意料”，在中文语境中稍显生硬，可意译为“出人意料的是”），丙泊酚麻醉组至初次苏醒的平均时间间隔明显更长。除了这个小缺点外，丙泊酚在复律过程中被证明是一种与硫喷妥钠同样有效的麻醉剂，在某些特定情况下可被视为替代药物。
