• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

瑞芬太尼与哌替啶用于结肠镜检查期间患者自控镇痛的随机双盲试验

Remifentanil vs. meperidine for patient-controlled analgesia during colonoscopy: a randomized double-blind trial.

作者信息

Fanti Lorella, Agostoni Massimo, Gemma Marco, Gambino Giulia, Facciorusso Antonio, Guslandi Mario, Torri Giorgio, Testoni Pier Alberto

机构信息

Department of Gastroenterology, Vita-Salute University of Milano, IRCCS H. San Raffaele, Milano, Italy.

出版信息

Am J Gastroenterol. 2009 May;104(5):1119-24. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2009.53. Epub 2009 Mar 31.

DOI:10.1038/ajg.2009.53
PMID:19337241
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to compare patients' and endoscopists' satisfaction in terms of efficacy and safety of remifentanil patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) during colonoscopy with that of a combination of midazolam and meperidine.

METHODS

Sixty patients undergoing colonoscopy were randomly assigned to two groups. All of the patients received midazolam 0.03 mg/kg intravenously for premedication. In the remifentanil group, a bolus dose of remifentanil was given, and a patient-controlled sedation analgesia (PCSA) pump was set to inject further bolus doses with no "lockout" time. Patients in the meperidine group received a bolus of meperidine and sham PCSA. Non-invasive arterial blood pressure, electrocardiography, and pulse oximetry were monitored throughout the study. The Observer's Assessment of Alertness and Sedation Scale (OAA/S) was performed at baseline, every 5 min during, and after colonoscopy. Assessment of pain and satisfaction with sedoanalgesia was scheduled after colonoscopy and 24-72 h later by a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS). The technical difficulty of the examination and the gastroenterologist's satisfaction were assessed similarly.

RESULTS

The degree of pain, the level of satisfaction with sedoanalgesia by patients and gastroenterologists, and the degree of difficulty experienced by the endoscopist were not different in the two groups. The time to reach an Aldrete score > or = 9 was significantly shorter in the remifentanil group (P < 0.0001); discharge times did not differ between the groups (P = 0.36). There was no difference between the groups regarding the duration of colonoscopy (P = 0.82) and the stability of vital signs. At the end of the procedure, OAA/S was significantly higher in the remifentanil group (P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Remifentanil PCA is safe and effective to induce sedoanalgesia during colonoscopy. Further studies should address the optimization of dosing and lock out setting.

摘要

目的

旨在比较瑞芬太尼患者自控镇痛(PCA)与咪达唑仑和哌替啶联合使用在结肠镜检查期间的疗效和安全性方面患者及内镜医师的满意度。

方法

60例行结肠镜检查的患者被随机分为两组。所有患者均静脉注射咪达唑仑0.03mg/kg进行术前用药。在瑞芬太尼组,给予负荷剂量的瑞芬太尼,并设置患者自控镇静镇痛(PCSA)泵以注射额外的负荷剂量且无“锁定”时间。哌替啶组患者接受负荷剂量的哌替啶及假PCSA。在整个研究过程中监测无创动脉血压、心电图和脉搏血氧饱和度。在基线、结肠镜检查期间每5分钟及检查后采用观察者警觉与镇静评分量表(OAA/S)进行评估。结肠镜检查后以及24 - 72小时后通过100mm视觉模拟量表(VAS)评估疼痛及对镇静镇痛的满意度。同样评估检查的技术难度及胃肠病学家的满意度。

结果

两组在疼痛程度、患者及胃肠病学家对镇静镇痛的满意度水平以及内镜医师所经历的困难程度方面无差异。瑞芬太尼组达到Aldrete评分≥9分的时间显著更短(P < 0.0001);两组出院时间无差异(P = 0.36)。两组在结肠镜检查持续时间(P = 0.82)及生命体征稳定性方面无差异。在操作结束时,瑞芬太尼组的OAA/S显著更高(P = 0.03)。

结论

瑞芬太尼PCA在结肠镜检查期间诱导镇静镇痛是安全有效的。进一步的研究应关注给药剂量及锁定设置的优化。

相似文献

1
Remifentanil vs. meperidine for patient-controlled analgesia during colonoscopy: a randomized double-blind trial.瑞芬太尼与哌替啶用于结肠镜检查期间患者自控镇痛的随机双盲试验
Am J Gastroenterol. 2009 May;104(5):1119-24. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2009.53. Epub 2009 Mar 31.
2
Two dosages of remifentanil for patient-controlled analgesia vs. meperidine during colonoscopy: a prospective randomized controlled trial.两种剂量瑞芬太尼用于结肠镜检查时患者自控镇痛与哌替啶的比较:一项前瞻性随机对照试验。
Dig Liver Dis. 2013 Apr;45(4):310-5. doi: 10.1016/j.dld.2012.11.003. Epub 2012 Dec 12.
3
Safer colonoscopy with patient-controlled analgesia and sedation with propofol and alfentanil.采用丙泊酚和阿芬太尼患者自控镇痛镇静实现更安全的结肠镜检查。
Gastrointest Endosc. 2001 Jul;54(1):1-7. doi: 10.1067/mge.2001.116174.
4
Can remifentanil be a better choice than propofol for colonoscopy during monitored anesthesia care?在麻醉监护下进行结肠镜检查时,瑞芬太尼会比丙泊酚是更好的选择吗?
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2006 Jul;50(6):736-41. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2006.01047.x.
5
Combining physostigmine with meperidine for sedation and analgesia during colonoscopy.结肠镜检查期间将毒扁豆碱与哌替啶联合用于镇静和镇痛。
Endoscopy. 2005 Dec;37(12):1205-10. doi: 10.1055/s-2005-870217.
6
Nurse-administered propofol versus midazolam and meperidine for upper endoscopy in cirrhotic patients.护士给予丙泊酚与咪达唑仑和哌替啶用于肝硬化患者上消化道内镜检查的比较
Am J Gastroenterol. 2003 Nov;98(11):2440-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2003.08668.x.
7
Patient-controlled sedation for colonoscopy: a randomized trial comparing patient-controlled administration of propofol and alfentanil with physician-administered midazolam and pethidine.结肠镜检查的患者自控镇静:一项随机试验,比较丙泊酚和阿芬太尼的患者自控给药与医生给予的咪达唑仑和哌替啶。
Endoscopy. 2003 Aug;35(8):683-7. doi: 10.1055/s-2003-41519.
8
Sedation for colonoscopy using a single bolus is safe, effective, and efficient: a prospective, randomized, double-blind trial.结肠镜检查单次推注镇静是安全、有效且高效的:一项前瞻性、随机、双盲试验。
Am J Gastroenterol. 2000 Sep;95(9):2242-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2000.02308.x.
9
Midazolam with meperidine or fentanyl for colonoscopy: results of a randomized trial.咪达唑仑联合哌替啶或芬太尼用于结肠镜检查:一项随机试验的结果
Gastrointest Endosc. 2009 Mar;69(3 Pt 2):681-7. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.09.033.
10
Remifentanil/midazolam versus tramadol/midazolam use for colonoscopy.瑞芬太尼/咪达唑仑与曲马多/咪达唑仑用于结肠镜检查的比较。
Hepatogastroenterology. 2003 Dec;50 Suppl 2:cclxxxiii-cclxxxvi.

引用本文的文献

1
Safe outpatient discharge after gastrointestinal endoscopy with sedation and analgesia: a systematic literature review.胃肠内镜检查镇静镇痛后安全出院:一项系统文献综述
Ann Gastroenterol. 2024 Sep-Oct;37(5):499-508. doi: 10.20524/aog.2024.0899. Epub 2024 Jul 12.
2
Safety, Efficacy and High-Quality Standards of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Procedures in Personalized Sedoanalgesia Managed by the Gastroenterologist: A Retrospective Study.胃肠病学家实施的个性化镇静镇痛中胃肠内镜检查程序的安全性、有效性及高质量标准:一项回顾性研究
J Pers Med. 2022 Jul 19;12(7):1171. doi: 10.3390/jpm12071171.
3
Efficacy and Safety of Non-Anesthesiologist Administration of Propofol Sedation in Endoscopic Ultrasound: A Propensity Score Analysis.
非麻醉医生在内镜超声检查中实施丙泊酚镇静的有效性和安全性:一项倾向评分分析
Diagnostics (Basel). 2020 Oct 6;10(10):791. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics10100791.
4
Continuous intravenous versus intermittent bolus midazolam with remifentanil during arteriovenous fistula placement with monitored anesthesia care in chronic renal failure patients: a randomized controlled trial.在慢性肾衰竭患者中,使用监测麻醉护理进行动静脉瘘成形术时,连续静脉注射与间断推注咪达唑仑联合瑞芬太尼的效果比较:一项随机对照试验。
Ann Saudi Med. 2020 May-Jun;40(3):175-182. doi: 10.5144/0256-4947.2020.175. Epub 2020 Jun 4.
5
Comparison of the Sedation Quality of Etomidate, Propofol, and Midazolam in Combination with Fentanyl During Phacoemulsification Cataract Surgery: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Controlled, Clinical Trial.依托咪酯、丙泊酚和咪达唑仑联合芬太尼在白内障超声乳化手术中的镇静质量比较:一项双盲、随机、对照临床试验
Anesth Pain Med. 2019 Apr 27;9(2):e87415. doi: 10.5812/aapm.87415. eCollection 2019 Apr.
6
Female Patients Require a Higher Propofol Infusion Rate for Sedation.女性患者镇静时需要更高的丙泊酚输注速率。
Anesth Prog. 2016 Summer;63(2):67-70. doi: 10.2344/0003-3006-63.2.67.
7
Systematic review and meta-analysis of patient-controlled sedation versus intravenous sedation for colonoscopy.结肠镜检查中患者自控镇静与静脉镇静的系统评价和荟萃分析
Int J Clin Exp Med. 2015 Nov 15;8(11):19793-803. eCollection 2015.
8
Brain measures of nociception using near-infrared spectroscopy in patients undergoing routine screening colonoscopy.在接受常规筛查结肠镜检查的患者中,使用近红外光谱技术对伤害感受进行脑部测量。
Pain. 2016 Apr;157(4):840-848. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000446.
9
Sedation with etomidate-fentanyl versus propofol-fentanyl in colonoscopies: A prospective randomized study.依托咪酯-芬太尼与丙泊酚-芬太尼用于结肠镜检查镇静的前瞻性随机研究。
Caspian J Intern Med. 2015 Winter;6(1):15-9.
10
Sedation and monitoring for gastrointestinal endoscopy.胃肠内镜检查的镇静与监测
World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2013 Feb 16;5(2):47-55. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v5.i2.47.