Gin T, Gregory M A, Oh T E
Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Prince of Wales Hospital, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, N.T.
Anaesth Intensive Care. 1990 May;18(2):175-9. doi: 10.1177/0310057X9001800203.
Forty Chinese women for elective caesarean section received either propofol 2 mg.kg-1 or thiopentone 4 mg.kg-1 for induction of general anaesthesia. Systolic, mean and diastolic arterial pressures and heart rate were recorded non-invasively every minute for ten minutes. Post-induction arterial pressures were similar to pre-induction values with no differences between thiopentone and propofol. Following intubation, the rise in systolic arterial pressure was greater in the thiopentone group, 32.1 mmHg (SD 23.7) compared with the propofol group, 17.4 mmHg (SD 23.8), (P less than 0.05). In the thiopentone group, arterial pressures were slower in returning to baseline values. Heart rate was initially elevated in both groups to the same degree. At caesarean section, induction with propofol causes less variation in arterial pressure than thiopentone. Hypotension is probably prevented by the coincident stimulus of rapid sequence induction. Neonatal Apgar scores were similar between the two groups.
40名择期剖宫产的中国女性接受了丙泊酚2mg·kg⁻¹或硫喷妥钠4mg·kg⁻¹用于全身麻醉诱导。在10分钟内每分钟无创记录收缩压、平均动脉压、舒张压和心率。诱导后动脉压与诱导前值相似，硫喷妥钠组和丙泊酚组之间无差异。插管后，硫喷妥钠组收缩压升高幅度更大，为32.1mmHg（标准差23.7），而丙泊酚组为17.4mmHg（标准差23.8），（P<0.05）。在硫喷妥钠组，动脉压恢复到基线值的速度较慢。两组心率最初升高程度相同。在剖宫产时，丙泊酚诱导引起的动脉压变化比硫喷妥钠小。低血压可能通过快速顺序诱导的同时刺激得以预防。两组新生儿阿氏评分相似。
