Department of Anesthesiology, Surugadai Nihon University Hospital, 1-8-13, Kanda-Surugadai, Chiyoda-Ku, Tokyo, Japan.
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2009 Nov;53(10):1336-40. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2009.02073.x. Epub 2009 Jul 22.
The aim of this study is to compare the infusion rates required to maintain a constant neuromuscular block and the reversibility of rocuronium at the corrugator supercilii muscle (CSM) and the adductor pollicis muscle (APM).
We randomly allocated 30 female patients into two groups of 15 patients each to monitor neuromuscular block at either the CSM or the APM. After induction of anaesthesia and laryngeal mask insertion, contraction of the CSM to the facial nerve stimulation or that of the APM to the ulnar nerve stimulation was quantified using an acceleromyograph during 1.0-1.5% end-tidal sevoflurane anaesthesia. All the patients received a bolus of 1 mg/kg rocuronium. When the first twitch (T1) of train-of-four (TOF) recovered to 10% of the control, rocuronium infusion was commenced and maintained at T1 of 10% of the control at the CSM or APM for 120 min. Immediately after rocuronium infusion was discontinued, the time required for 0.04 mg/kg neostigmine-facilitated recovery to a TOF ratio of 0.9 was recorded.
Rocuronium infusion dose after a lapse of 120 min was significantly larger in the CSM than in the APM [7.1 (2.3) vs. 4.7 (2.6) microg/kg/min; P=0.001]. The time for facilitated recovery was shorter in the CSM than in the APM [11.4 (3.8) vs. 16.2 (6.0) min; P=0.016].
A larger rocuronium infusion dose was required to maintain a constant neuromuscular block at the CSM. Neostigmine-mediated reversal was faster at the CSM.
本研究旨在比较维持恒定神经肌肉阻滞所需的输注率,以及罗库溴铵在皱眉肌(CSM)和拇内收肌(APM)的逆转情况。
我们将 30 名女性患者随机分为两组,每组 15 名,分别监测 CSM 或 APM 的神经肌肉阻滞情况。在麻醉诱导和喉罩插入后,在 1.0-1.5%呼气末七氟醚麻醉下,使用肌电图仪记录面神经刺激引起的 CSM 收缩或尺神经刺激引起的 APM 收缩,所有患者均给予 1mg/kg 罗库溴铵负荷量。当四成串刺激(TOF)的第一个颤搐(T1)恢复至对照的 10%时,开始输注罗库溴铵,并维持 CSM 或 APM 的 T1 为对照的 10%达 120 分钟。罗库溴铵输注停止后,立即记录 0.04mg/kg 新斯的明促进恢复至 TOF 比值为 0.9 所需的时间。
120 分钟后,CSM 中的罗库溴铵输注剂量明显大于 APM[7.1(2.3)比 4.7(2.6)μg/kg/min;P=0.001]。CSM 中的促进恢复时间明显短于 APM[11.4(3.8)比 16.2(6.0)min;P=0.016]。
在 CSM 中需要更大的罗库溴铵输注剂量来维持恒定的神经肌肉阻滞。新斯的明介导的逆转在 CSM 更快。