Zuurmond W W, van Leeuwen L
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1986 May;30(4):329-31. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.1986.tb02424.x.
Alfentanil by continuous intravenous infusion and isoflurane have been compared as anaesthetic agents for outpatient arthroscopy. In 42 patients, divided at random into two groups, anaesthesia was induced with methohexitone and vecuronium bromide, and, after intubation, maintained with nitrous oxide 66% in oxygen combined with alfentanil or isoflurane. Alfentanil was given before intubation (1 mg), as a loading dose before starting surgery (50 micrograms kg-1) and by a continuous infusion at a rate of 1 microgram kg-1 min-1. Isoflurane was given in a concentration of 0.9% as a maintenance dose. Awakening from anaesthesia was more rapid with alfentanil than with isoflurane. Recovery tests were applied in the recovery room. Both anaesthetic techniques provided satisfactory anaesthesia and rapid recovery. All patients but one were content with the anaesthesia. The patients who received isoflurane scored better in the recovery tests in the first 3 h, but after 3 h there was no difference between the groups. The alfentanil group showed a higher incidence of nausea and/or vomiting: 45% compared to 14% in the isoflurane group.
持续静脉输注阿芬太尼和异氟烷已被作为门诊关节镜检查的麻醉剂进行比较。42例患者随机分为两组,用美索比妥和溴化维库溴铵诱导麻醉,插管后用66%氧化亚氮与氧气混合并联合阿芬太尼或异氟烷维持麻醉。阿芬太尼在插管前给予(1毫克),作为手术开始前的负荷剂量(50微克/千克),并以1微克/千克·分钟的速率持续输注。异氟烷以0.9%的浓度作为维持剂量给予。阿芬太尼麻醉后苏醒比异氟烷更快。在恢复室进行了恢复测试。两种麻醉技术均提供了满意的麻醉效果和快速恢复。除1例患者外,所有患者对麻醉都很满意。接受异氟烷的患者在前3小时的恢复测试中得分更高,但3小时后两组之间没有差异。阿芬太尼组恶心和/或呕吐的发生率更高:分别为45%和14%,而异氟烷组为14%。