Zhao Yanjun, An Dongjiao, Bi Liang
Department of Anesthesiology, Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
J Invest Surg. 2025 Dec;38(1):2445587. doi: 10.1080/08941939.2024.2445587. Epub 2025 Jan 5.
This study aimed to evaluate the effect of co-administration of midazolam and dexmedetomidine on hemodynamics and stress response in elderly patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
In this prospective, randomized controlled trial, 154 elderly NSCLC patients scheduled for lobectomy in our oncology department from January 2019 to December 2021 were recruited. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either dexmedetomidine (control group) or dexmedetomidine plus midazolam (study group) for anesthesia during lobectomy the random number table method, with 77 patients in each group. Perioperative indicators, hemodynamics, and stress reactions of the patients were recorded and compared between the two groups to investigate the efficacy of the two different anesthetic protocols.
No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of operative time, anesthesia time, and intraoperative bleeding volume ( > 0.05). Preoperative pain, pain at anesthesia recovery, and pain levels 7 days postoperatively were also comparable between the two groups. In the study group, the awakening time was 15 ± 2 min significantly shorter compared to the control group (25 ± 3 min). Cooperation within the first hour was significantly faster by 8.5 ± 0.5 min compared to 6.0 ± 1.0 min in the control group ( < 0.05). The cost of materials used was significantly higher in the study group, with an average of 300 ± 25 USD, compared to 200 ± 20 USD in the control group ( < 0.05). Additionally, the two groups showed no significant difference in the need for experience and surveillance ( > 0.05). Significantly lower visual analog scale (VAS) scores were found one day after the surgery in patients given dexmedetomidine plus midazolam than those anesthetized administered with dexmedetomidine only, suggesting an enhanced pain mitigation effect after incorporating midazolam for anesthetic induction. Patients treated with dexmedetomidine plus midazolam presented with a more stable hemodynamic status than those treated with dexmedetomidine only, as evidenced by the significantly lower variability of mean arterial pressure (MAP), oxygen saturation (SpO2), and heart rate (HR). Co-administration of dexmedetomidine plus midazolam for lobectomy anesthesia resulted in significantly lower serum cortisol (Cor) and norepinephrine (NE) concentrations in patients at anesthesia recovery than dexmedetomidine alone. However, this difference was not observed one day postoperatively. There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions between the two groups.
The combination of midazolam with dexmedetomidine anesthesia in lobectomy improves the intraoperative hemodynamic status of elderly patients with NSCLC and mitigates their stress response. However, further research is required to explore the underlying mechanisms.
本研究旨在评估咪达唑仑与右美托咪定联合应用对老年非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)患者血流动力学及应激反应的影响。
在这项前瞻性随机对照试验中,招募了2019年1月至2021年12月在我院肿瘤科计划行肺叶切除术的154例老年NSCLC患者。采用随机数字表法将患者按1:1随机分为右美托咪定组(对照组)和右美托咪定联合咪达唑仑组(研究组),每组77例。记录并比较两组患者围手术期指标、血流动力学及应激反应,以探讨两种不同麻醉方案的疗效。
两组患者手术时间、麻醉时间及术中出血量比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两组患者术前疼痛、麻醉苏醒时疼痛及术后7天疼痛程度也相当。研究组患者苏醒时间为15±2分钟,明显短于对照组的25±3分钟(P<0.05)。研究组患者术后第1小时的配合时间明显快于对照组,分别为8.5±0.5分钟和6.0±1.0分钟(P<0.05)。研究组使用材料的费用明显高于对照组,平均为300±25美元,而对照组为200±20美元(P<0.05)。此外,两组在经验需求和监测方面差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。右美托咪定联合咪达唑仑组患者术后1天的视觉模拟评分(VAS)明显低于单纯使用右美托咪定麻醉的患者,提示咪达唑仑用于麻醉诱导后疼痛缓解效果增强。右美托咪定联合咪达唑仑组患者血流动力学状态比单纯使用右美托咪定组更稳定,平均动脉压(MAP)、血氧饱和度(SpO2)及心率(HR)的变异性明显更低。肺叶切除麻醉时右美托咪定联合咪达唑仑组患者麻醉苏醒时血清皮质醇(Cor)和去甲肾上腺素(NE)浓度明显低于单纯使用右美托咪定组。然而,术后1天未观察到这种差异。两组不良反应发生率差异无统计学意义。
咪达唑仑与右美托咪定联合麻醉用于肺叶切除术可改善老年NSCLC患者术中血流动力学状态,减轻其应激反应。然而,需要进一步研究探索其潜在机制。