Li Xiuman, Wang Lixiang
Clinical Medical College, Hunan University of Medicine, Huaihua 418000, Hunan, China (Li XM); Department of Emergency, General Hospital of Chinese People's Armed Police Forces, Beijing 100039, China (Wang LX). Corresponding author: Wang Lixiang, Email:
Zhonghua Wei Zhong Bing Ji Jiu Yi Xue. 2017 Jul;29(7):629-632. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.2095-4352.2017.07.011.
To investigate the effect of external abdominal aorta compression on circulation during anesthetic induction in elderly patients.
A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted. Patients with age of 60-75 years old, requiring a general anesthesia for non-abdominal surgery, and with II-III class of American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification, and admitted to General Hospital of Chinese People's Armed Police Forces from January to April in 2017 were enrolled. They were divided into abdominal aorta pressure group and control group according to random number method, with 20 patients in each group. In both groups, anesthesia was induced with midazolam, propofol, fentanyl and cisatracurium, and was maintained with propofol, remifentanil and cisatracurium. After successful intubation, the anesthesia machine was changed into mechanical ventilation. The patients in abdominal aorta pressure group were given abdominal aorta pressure 1 minute after induction of general anesthesia with midazolam till 5 minutes after intubation. The mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR) and blood oxygen saturation (SpO) were observed before anesthesia induction, immediately after anesthesia induction, immediately after intubation, 5 minutes and 10 minutes after intubation, respectively. The incidence of hypotension or bradycardia, and usage of ephedrine or atropine were recorded.
There were no significant differences in MAP [mmHg (1 mmHg = 0.133 kPa): 83.6±4.7 vs. 82.9±4.7], HR (bpm: 67.3±5.9 vs. 65.9±5.7) and SpO (0.962±0.007 vs. 0.960±0.009) before anesthesia induction between abdominal aorta pressure group and control group (all P > 0.05). Immediately after anesthesia induction, the MAP and HR in control group were significantly decreased as compared with those before anesthesia induction [MAP (mmHg): 70.0±8.7 vs. 82.9±4.7, HR (bpm): 60.7±6.7 vs. 65.9±5.7, both P < 0.05], and they were also significantly lower than those of abdominal aorta pressure group [MAP (mmHg): 83.1±3.9, HR (bpm): 66.8±4.9, both P < 0.05]. Immediately after intubation, the MAP and HR in control group were significantly increased as compared with those immediately after anesthesia induction [MAP (mmHg): 78.9±7.9 vs. 70.0±8.7, HR (bpm): 67.3±2.7 vs. 60.7±6.7, both P < 0.05], but the changes in MAP and HR in abdominal aorta pressure group were not obvious. During the anesthesia induction period, there was no statistical difference in SpO change between the two groups. During induction of anesthesia, no adverse reaction was found in the abdominal aorta pressure group, but 4 patients with hypotension and 2 patients with bradycardia were found in the control group. Two patients with hypotension were treated with ephedrine, and 2 patients with bradycardia were treated with atropine.
Anesthesia induction of elderly patients with abdominal aorta pressure can help maintain hemodynamic stability.
探讨腹部主动脉外部压迫对老年患者麻醉诱导期间循环的影响。
进行一项前瞻性随机对照试验。纳入2017年1月至4月在中国人民武装警察部队总医院收治的年龄在60 - 75岁、因非腹部手术需要全身麻醉且美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)身体状况分级为Ⅱ - Ⅲ级的患者。根据随机数字法将他们分为腹主动脉压迫组和对照组,每组20例。两组均采用咪达唑仑、丙泊酚、芬太尼和顺式阿曲库铵诱导麻醉,并采用丙泊酚、瑞芬太尼和顺式阿曲库铵维持麻醉。成功插管后,将麻醉机改为机械通气。腹主动脉压迫组在咪达唑仑全身麻醉诱导后1分钟给予腹主动脉压迫,直至插管后5分钟。分别在麻醉诱导前、麻醉诱导后即刻、插管后即刻、插管后5分钟和10分钟观察平均动脉压(MAP)、心率(HR)和血氧饱和度(SpO)。记录低血压或心动过缓的发生率以及麻黄碱或阿托品的使用情况。
腹主动脉压迫组和对照组在麻醉诱导前的MAP[mmHg(1 mmHg = 0.133 kPa):83.6±4.7 vs. 82.9±4.7]、HR(次/分:67.3±5.