Suppr超能文献

老年合并心脏疾病患者中目标控制椎管内麻醉与 2 种目标控制全身麻醉技术的血液动力学特征比较。

Hemodynamic profile of target-controlled spinal anesthesia compared with 2 target-controlled general anesthesia techniques in elderly patients with cardiac comorbidities.

机构信息

Departments of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Lapeyronie University Hospital, 371 Av. Giraud, Montpellier, France.

出版信息

Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2012 Jul-Aug;37(4):433-40. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0b013e318252e901.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The impact of anesthesia techniques in patients experiencing hip fracture is controversial. This study compares the effects on blood pressure of 3 anesthesia techniques that are considered safe for the elderly.

METHODS

Forty-five patients older than 75 years, with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status III or IV, with cardiac comorbidities, and undergoing surgery for hip fracture, were randomized to receive continuous spinal anesthesia (CSA), propofol target-controlled infusion (TCI), or sevoflurane (SEVO). In CSA patients, a T10 metameric level target was achieved by titration of 2.5 mg of bupivacaine boluses. In patients on TCI and SEVO, a bispectral value target of around 50 guided the concentration of propofol or sevoflurane. Analgesia in the TCI and SEVO groups was provided with remifentanil. Hypotension was defined as a 30% decrease in mean arterial pressure and was treated with an intravenous bolus of ephedrine.

RESULTS

The number of hypotension episodes was lower in the CSA group: 0 (range, 0-6) versus 11.5 (range, 1-25) in the TCI group and 10 (range, 1-23) in the SEVO group (P < 0.001). Both TCI and SEVO patients needed more ephedrine compared with CSA patients (30.5 [15.5], 26 [23], and 1.5 [2.5] mg, respectively, P < 0.001). The maximal decrease in mean arterial pressure was lower in the CSA group (26% [17%]) compared with that in the TCI group (47% [8%]) and the SEVO group (46% [12%]; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In elderly patients, spinal anesthesia using titrated doses of bupivacaine provided better blood pressure stability than propofol or sevoflurane anesthesia.

摘要

背景与目的

麻醉技术对髋部骨折患者的影响存在争议。本研究比较了 3 种被认为对老年人安全的麻醉技术对血压的影响。

方法

45 例年龄大于 75 岁、ASA 分级 III 或 IV 级、合并心脏疾病、行髋部骨折手术的患者,随机分为连续脊麻(CSA)组、丙泊酚靶控输注(TCI)组和七氟醚(SEVO)组。在 CSA 组中,通过滴定 2.5mg 布比卡因实现 T10 节段目标。在 TCI 和 SEVO 组中,双频谱指数(BIS)值目标为 50 左右,指导丙泊酚或七氟醚的浓度。TCI 和 SEVO 组的镇痛采用瑞芬太尼。低血压定义为平均动脉压下降 30%,用静脉注射麻黄碱治疗。

结果

CSA 组低血压发作次数较少:TCI 组 0(0-6)次,SEVO 组 10(1-23)次,CSA 组 11.5(1-25)次(P<0.001)。与 CSA 组相比,TCI 和 SEVO 组患者需要更多的麻黄碱(分别为 30.5[15.5]、26[23]和 1.5[2.5]mg,P<0.001)。CSA 组平均动脉压最大下降幅度低于 TCI 组(26%[17%])和 SEVO 组(46%[12%];P<0.001)。

结论

在老年患者中,使用布比卡因滴定剂量的脊麻比丙泊酚或七氟醚麻醉提供了更好的血压稳定性。

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