Gupta A, Lennmarken C, Vegfors M, Tydén H
Department of Anaesthesiology, University Hospital, Linköping, Sweden.
Anaesthesia. 1990 Oct;45(10):872-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.1990.tb14576.x.
This study compares the induction and recovery characteristics, haemodynamic changes and side effects of propofol, thiopentone and midazolam when used as the anaesthetic agents for cardioversion. Recovery after midazolam was significantly longer (p less than 0.05) than with either thiopentone or propofol. There was no difference in the recovery times between thiopentone and propofol. There was a significant decrease in mean arterial pressure 2 minutes after induction with propofol and midazolam. Three patients each in the thiopentone and propofol groups needed assisted ventilation because of apneoea, and four patients each in the propofol and midazolam groups had low Spo2 values (less than 95%). Flumazenil was used to reverse the effects of midazolam in eight patients and five of these were still drowsy 4 hours after the procedure. This study indicates that thiopentone is the most satisfactory agent for anaesthesia for cardioversion.
本研究比较了丙泊酚、硫喷妥钠和咪达唑仑用作心脏复律麻醉剂时的诱导和恢复特征、血流动力学变化及副作用。咪达唑仑后的恢复时间显著长于硫喷妥钠或丙泊酚（p小于0.05）。硫喷妥钠和丙泊酚之间的恢复时间无差异。丙泊酚和咪达唑仑诱导后2分钟平均动脉压显著降低。硫喷妥钠组和丙泊酚组各有3例患者因呼吸暂停需要辅助通气，丙泊酚组和咪达唑仑组各有4例患者SpO2值低（低于95%）。8例患者使用氟马西尼逆转咪达唑仑的作用，其中5例在术后4小时仍嗜睡。本研究表明硫喷妥钠是心脏复律麻醉最满意的药物。
