Purcell-Jones G, Yates A, Baker J R, James I G
Department of Anaesthesia, Hospital for Sick Children, London.
Br J Anaesth. 1987 Nov;59(11):1431-6. doi: 10.1093/bja/59.11.1431.
The induction characteristics of propofol 2.0-2.5 mg kg-1 were compared with those of thiopentone 4-5 mg kg-1 in 60 fit children aged between 3 and 16 yr. All patients received i.m. premedication with papaveretum 0.4 mg kg-1 (maximum dose 15 mg) and hyoscine 0.008 mg kg-1 (maximum dose 0.3 mg). Seven children (24%) complained of pain after injection with propofol, compared with three (10%) after thiopentone. No child in either group complained of severe pain. Excitatory effects were observed in 10 children (33%) receiving propofol as opposed to five children (16%) after thiopentone, but these were transient and minor and all occurred after completion of injection. Apnoea lasting longer than 30 s occurred in only four children (13%) in each group despite the use of opioid premedication. The mean duration of apnoea was similar in both groups. Propofol caused greater decreases in arterial pressures (systolic, diastolic, mean) than thiopentone, but only the difference in systolic arterial pressure achieved significance. There was a significant difference in heart rate, which did not change after propofol, but increased with thiopentone. The overall quality of induction was assessed as being good in all children receiving thiopentone compared with 20 (66%) of those receiving propofol.
在60名3至16岁的健康儿童中,比较了2.0 - 2.5mg/kg丙泊酚与4 - 5mg/kg硫喷妥钠的诱导特征。所有患者均接受了肌肉注射0.4mg/kg(最大剂量15mg)的吗啡和0.008mg/kg(最大剂量0.3mg)的东莨菪碱进行术前用药。注射丙泊酚后,7名儿童(24%)诉说疼痛,而注射硫喷妥钠后有3名儿童(10%)诉说疼痛。两组均无儿童诉说剧痛。接受丙泊酚的10名儿童(33%)出现兴奋效应,而接受硫喷妥钠的有5名儿童(16%)出现兴奋效应,但这些均为短暂且轻微的,且均在注射结束后出现。尽管使用了阿片类药物进行术前用药,但每组仅有4名儿童(13%)出现呼吸暂停持续超过30秒。两组的平均呼吸暂停持续时间相似。丙泊酚导致的动脉压(收缩压、舒张压、平均压)下降幅度大于硫喷妥钠,但仅收缩压的差异具有统计学意义。心率存在显著差异,丙泊酚注射后心率未改变,而硫喷妥钠注射后心率增加。与接受丙泊酚的儿童中的20名(66%)相比,所有接受硫喷妥钠的儿童诱导的总体质量评估为良好。