Silbert B S, Kluger R, Meads A C, Stasytis K
Department of Anaesthesia, St. Vincent's Hospital, Victoria, Australia.
Anaesth Intensive Care. 1989 Feb;17(1):9-15. doi: 10.1177/0310057X8901700104.
A randomised double-blind trial was undertaken to compare epidural lignocaine 1.5% with adrenaline to epidural fentanyl (100 micrograms in saline 10 ml) in forty unpremedicated patients undergoing extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy without ancillary procedures. Midazolam only was used for sedation. There was no significant difference in intraoperative pain scores with several patients in each group complaining of pain. Decreases in blood pressure occurred in both groups but were more pronounced in the lignocaine groups (36% vs 25% maximum decrease from control, P = 0.004). Heart rate was increased in the lignocaine group compared with control and to the fentanyl group, but there was no difference in respiratory rates within or between groups. Pruritus was more common in the fentanyl group and leg heaviness in the lignocaine group, but neither was troublesome. There was no difference in urological outcome at one month. Both techniques were satisfactory for the majority of patients, but the fentanyl group had a shorter preparation time and less cardiovascular changes.
对40例未使用术前药、接受体外冲击波碎石术且无辅助操作的患者进行了一项随机双盲试验,比较1.5%含肾上腺素的硬膜外利多卡因与硬膜外芬太尼(100微克溶于10毫升盐水中)的效果。仅使用咪达唑仑进行镇静。术中疼痛评分无显著差异,每组均有几名患者主诉疼痛。两组均出现血压下降,但利多卡因组更明显(与对照组相比,最大降幅分别为36%和25%,P = 0.004)。与对照组及芬太尼组相比,利多卡因组心率升高,但组内及组间呼吸频率无差异。瘙痒在芬太尼组更常见,腿部沉重感在利多卡因组更常见,但两者均不严重。术后1个月时泌尿外科结局无差异。两种技术对大多数患者都令人满意,但芬太尼组准备时间更短,心血管变化更少。