Suppr超能文献

门诊手术单独使用咪达唑仑或地西泮镇静,或与芬太尼联合使用后的恢复情况。

Recovery following sedation with midazolam or diazepam alone or in combination with fentanyl for outpatient surgery.

作者信息

Ochs M W, Tucker M R, White R P, Anderson J A

出版信息

Anesth Prog. 1986 Sep-Oct;33(5):230-4.

Abstract

Midazolam is a new water-soluble benzodiazepine with a much shorter pharmacologic half-life than diazepam. Despite this shorter pharmacologic half-life, several reports indicate that patients do not recover more rapidly after sedation with midazolam than with diazepam. The purpose of this study was to compare recovery of patients sedated with either midazolam or diazepam alone or in combination with fentanyl using the digit symbol substitution test (DSST) and Trieger test. Patients were randomly divided into treatment groups and recovery tests were administered to the patients prior to sedation and at 60, 120, and 180 minutes after achieving a standardized sedative endpoint. Patients who received midazolam alone had significantly fewer numbers of correct reponses on the DSST than patients who received midazolam plus fentanyl or diazepam with or without fentanyl. When midazolam was combined with fentanyl there was no significant difference between results obtained on the DSST when compared with either diazepam group. Comparisons between all groups using dots missed or millimeter deviation on the Trieger test showed no statistical difference between any groups. These data indicate that midazolam as a single IV agent has a slightly prolonged recovery phase compared to diazepam. The addition of fentanyl to the sedation regimen allows reduction in the midazolam dose resulting in a recovery time comparable to that of diazepam.

摘要

咪达唑仑是一种新型水溶性苯二氮䓬类药物,其药理半衰期比地西泮短得多。尽管药理半衰期较短,但有几份报告表明,使用咪达唑仑镇静的患者与使用地西泮镇静的患者相比,恢复速度并没有更快。本研究的目的是使用数字符号替换测试(DSST)和特里格测试比较单独使用咪达唑仑或地西泮或与芬太尼联合使用镇静的患者的恢复情况。患者被随机分为治疗组,并在镇静前以及达到标准化镇静终点后60、120和180分钟对患者进行恢复测试。单独接受咪达唑仑治疗的患者在DSST上的正确反应次数明显少于接受咪达唑仑加芬太尼或接受地西泮(无论是否加芬太尼)治疗的患者。当咪达唑仑与芬太尼联合使用时,与任何一个地西泮组相比,DSST结果没有显著差异。使用特里格测试中漏点或毫米偏差对所有组进行比较,结果显示任何组之间均无统计学差异。这些数据表明,与地西泮相比,单一静脉注射咪达唑仑的恢复阶段略有延长。在镇静方案中加入芬太尼可减少咪达唑仑的剂量,从而使恢复时间与地西泮相当。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

2
Psychomotor function and psychoactive drugs.精神运动功能与精神活性药物。
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1980 Sep;10(3):189-209. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.1980.tb01745.x.
3
A comparison of midazolam and diazepam for intravenous sedation in dentistry.
Anaesthesia. 1984 Jun;39(6):589-93. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.1984.tb07370.x.
5
A randomized comparison of midazolam and diazepam for sedation in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.
Br J Anaesth. 1983 Nov;55(11):1095-101. doi: 10.1093/bja/55.11.1095.
9
Pharmacokinetics and bioavailability of midazolam in man.咪达唑仑在人体中的药代动力学和生物利用度。
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1983;16 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):43S-49S. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.1983.tb02270.x.
10
Preclinical pharmacology of midazolam.咪达唑仑的临床前药理学
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1983;16 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):17S-27S. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.1983.tb02267.x.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验