Hall R I, Murphy J T, Moffitt E A, Landymore R, Pollak P T, Poole L
Department of Anaesthesia, Victoria General Hospital, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Can J Anaesth. 1991 Nov;38(8):996-1004. doi: 10.1007/BF03008618.
The purpose of this study was to compare propofol-sufentanil with enflurane-sufentanil anaesthesia for patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery with respect to changes in (1) haemodynamic variables; (2) myocardial blood flow and metabolism; (3) serum cortisol, triglyceride, lipoprotein concentrations and liver function; and (4) recovery characteristics. Forty-seven patients with preserved ventricular function (ejection fraction greater than 40%, left ventricular end diastolic pressure less than or equal to 16 mmHg) were studied. Patients in Group A (n = 24) received sufentanil 0.2 microgram.kg-1 and propofol 1-2 mg.kg-1 for induction of anaesthesia which was maintained with a variable rate propofol (50-200 micrograms.kg-1.min-1) infusion and supplemental sufentanil (maximum total 5 micrograms.kg-1). Patients in Group B (n = 23) received sufentanil 5 micrograms.kg-1 for induction of anaesthesia which was maintained with enflurane and supplemental sufentanil (maximum total 7 micrograms.kg-1). Haemodynamic and myocardial metabolic profiles were determined at the awake-sedated, post-induction, post-intubation, first skin incision, post-sternotomy, and pre-cardiopulmonary bypass intervals. Induction of anaesthesia produced a larger reduction in systolic blood pressure in Group A (156 +/- 22 to 104 +/- 20 mmHg vs 152 +/- 26 to 124 +/- 24 mmHg; P less than 0.05). No statistical differences were detected at any other time or in any other variable including myocardial lactate production (n = 13 events in each group), time to tracheal extubation and time to discharge from the ICU. We concluded that, apart from hypotension on induction of anaesthesia, propofol-sufentanil anaesthesia produced anaesthetic conditions equivalent to enflurane-sufentanil anaesthesia for CABG surgery.
本研究的目的是比较丙泊酚-舒芬太尼与恩氟烷-舒芬太尼麻醉用于择期冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)患者时,在以下方面的变化:(1)血流动力学变量;(2)心肌血流与代谢;(3)血清皮质醇、甘油三酯、脂蛋白浓度及肝功能;(4)恢复特征。研究了47例心室功能正常(射血分数大于40%,左心室舒张末期压力小于或等于16 mmHg)的患者。A组(n = 24)患者麻醉诱导时接受舒芬太尼0.2微克/千克及丙泊酚1 - 2毫克/千克,麻醉维持采用丙泊酚变率输注(50 - 200微克/千克·分钟)及补充舒芬太尼(最大总量5微克/千克)。B组(n = 23)患者麻醉诱导时接受舒芬太尼5微克/千克,麻醉维持采用恩氟烷及补充舒芬太尼(最大总量7微克/千克)。在清醒镇静、诱导后、插管后、首次皮肤切开、胸骨切开后及体外循环前阶段测定血流动力学和心肌代谢指标。麻醉诱导时A组收缩压下降幅度更大(156±22 mmHg降至104±20 mmHg,而152±26 mmHg降至124±24 mmHg;P<0.05)。在其他任何时间或其他变量方面均未检测到统计学差异,包括心肌乳酸生成(每组13例)、气管拔管时间及从重症监护病房出院时间。我们得出结论,除麻醉诱导时的低血压外,丙泊酚-舒芬太尼麻醉用于CABG手术时产生的麻醉条件与恩氟烷-舒芬太尼麻醉相当。