Scaglione M, Battaglia A, Di Donna P, Peyracchia M, Bolzan B, Mazzucchi P, Muro M, Caponi D
Division of Cardiology, Cardinal G. Massaia Hospital, Asti, Italy.
Pain Therapy and Palliative Care, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Citta` della Salute e della Scienza di Torino.
Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc. 2019 Jul 27;24:100405. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcha.2019.100405. eCollection 2019 Sep.
Hypnosis is a therapeutic strategy for pain control. We aimed at investigating the use of this technique in a large population undergoing atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation.
70 consecutive AF patients referred for transcatheter ablation, underwent hypnotic communication for periprocedural analgesia (Group A), were compared with 70 patients undergoing conventional analgesia (Group B). Procedural data, anxiety, perceived pain, perceived procedural duration and the dosages of administered analgesic drugs were compared using validated score scales.
Hypnotic communication (Group A) resulted in a significant procedural-related anxiety reduction (Pre procedural 4.7 ± 2.9 Vs Intra Procedural 0.8 ± 1.2, < 0.001) and perceived procedural duration (Real length 108 ± 33 min Vs Perceived Length 77 ± 39 min, < 0.001). Group A patients reported a painless procedure in 78% (Pain scale ≤2). Regarding analgesic drug, Group A used only Fentanyl and Paracetamol. The Fentanyl dosage was similar in Group A and B (mean 0.142 Vs 0.146 mg, = 0.65) while higher Paracetamol dosage was reported in Group A (mean 853 Vs 337 mg, < 0.001). Group B also used Midazolam (mean 1.8 mg), Propofol (mean 43.8 mg) and narcosis was required in 2 patients. Total radiofrequency (RF) delivered time did not differ between the two groups (mean 28.9 Vs 27.6 min, = 0.623) as well as mean RF power (mean 35.3 Vs 35.5 W, = 0.424). No complications occurred.
Hypnotic communication during AF ablation was related to a significant reduction of intra-procedural anxiety, perceived pain, procedural analgesic drugs dosage and perceived procedural duration without affecting total RF delivered time and procedural safety.
催眠是一种控制疼痛的治疗策略。我们旨在研究该技术在大量接受房颤(AF)消融术的患者中的应用。
连续70例接受经导管消融术的房颤患者接受催眠交流以进行围手术期镇痛(A组),并与70例接受传统镇痛的患者(B组)进行比较。使用经过验证的评分量表比较手术数据、焦虑程度、疼痛感受、手术持续时间感知以及所使用镇痛药物的剂量。
催眠交流(A组)导致与手术相关的焦虑显著降低(术前4.7±2.9 vs术中0.8±1.2,<0.001)以及手术持续时间感知降低(实际时长108±33分钟vs感知时长77±39分钟,<0.001)。A组患者中有78%报告手术过程无痛(疼痛量表≤2)。关于镇痛药物,A组仅使用芬太尼和对乙酰氨基酚。A组和B组的芬太尼剂量相似(平均0.142 vs 0.146毫克,=0.65),而A组报告的对乙酰氨基酚剂量更高(平均853 vs 337毫克,<0.001)。B组还使用了咪达唑仑(平均1.8毫克)、丙泊酚(平均43.8毫克),并且有2例患者需要麻醉。两组之间的总射频(RF)发放时间没有差异(平均28.9 vs 27.6分钟,=0.623),平均RF功率也没有差异(平均35.3 vs 35.5瓦,=0.424)。未发生并发症。
房颤消融术中的催眠交流与术中焦虑、疼痛感受、手术镇痛药物剂量以及手术持续时间感知的显著降低相关,且不影响总RF发放时间和手术安全性。