Suppr超能文献

顺式阿曲库铵药效学的比较研究:持续输注或间断推注。

Comparative study on the pharmacodynamics of cisatracurium: continuous infusion or intermittent bolus injection.

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang 110004, China.

出版信息

Contemp Clin Trials. 2012 May;33(3):482-5. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2012.01.002. Epub 2012 Jan 18.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To explore a better administration way through comparison of the pharmacodynamics of cisatracurium administered by continuous infusion or intermittent bolus injection.

METHODS

Thirty patients (ASAI-II) who had no neuromuscular disease and underwent selective surgery under general anesthesia were randomly divided into group I and II (each group with 15 patients). In group I, patients received cisatracurium by continuous infusion and in group II, by intermittent bolus injection. The responses of adductor pollicis to train-of-four (TOF) stimulation were monitored. The duration of neuromuscular blockade, recovery index and total dose of cisatracurium consumption were recorded in the two groups. Intravenous anesthesia was used for anesthesia induction and sevoflurane inhalation for maintenance of anesthesia.

RESULTS

The mean infusion rate was significantly lower in group I (0.78 ± 0.15 μg.kg(-1).min(-1)) than in group II (1.09 ± 0.33 μg.kg(-1).min(-1)) (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in duration of neuromuscular blockade between the two groups (P>0.05). The recovery index was 13.13 ± 3.36 min in group I and 14.38 ± 4.48 min in group II, which indicated that the recovery was faster in group I than in group II, but without statistical significance (P>0.05). During the duration of neuromuscular blockade, 8 patients had T(1)<3%, 4 T(1) of 3%-7% and 3 T(1) of 7%-10% in group I; T(1) was maintained between 0 and 20% in group II.

CONCLUSIONS

Although cisatracurium consumption was significantly lower in continuous infusion than in intermittent bolus injection, continuous infusion can obtain more stable neuromuscular blockade than intermittent bolus injection.

摘要

目的

通过比较顺式阿曲库铵持续输注和间断推注的药效学,探索一种更好的给药方式。

方法

选择 30 例无神经肌肉疾病的择期全麻手术患者,ASA 分级Ⅰ-Ⅱ级,随机分为Ⅰ组和Ⅱ组,每组 15 例。Ⅰ组患者给予顺式阿曲库铵持续输注,Ⅱ组间断推注。采用四脉冲刺激(TOF)监测拇内收肌的反应。记录两组患者的神经肌肉阻滞时间、恢复指数和顺式阿曲库铵总用量。两组均采用静脉麻醉诱导,吸入七氟醚维持麻醉。

结果

Ⅰ组的平均输注速度(0.78±0.15μg·kg-1·min-1)明显低于Ⅱ组(1.09±0.33μg·kg-1·min-1)(P<0.05)。两组患者的神经肌肉阻滞时间无明显差异(P>0.05)。Ⅰ组的恢复指数为 13.13±3.36min,Ⅱ组为 14.38±4.48min,Ⅰ组的恢复速度明显快于Ⅱ组,但无统计学意义(P>0.05)。在神经肌肉阻滞期间,Ⅰ组有 8 例 T1<3%,4 例 T1为 3%-7%,3 例 T1为 7%-10%;Ⅱ组 T1维持在 0%-20%之间。

结论

与间断推注相比,持续输注顺式阿曲库铵的用量明显减少,但持续输注可获得比间断推注更稳定的神经肌肉阻滞。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验