Lebowitz P W, Cote M E, Daniels A L, Martyn J A, Teplick R S, Davison J K, Sunder N
Can Anaesth Soc J. 1983 Jan;30(1):19-23. doi: 10.1007/BF03007711.
The cardiovascular effects of midazolam (0.15 mg kg-1) and thiopentone (3.0 mg kg-1) were compared during induction of anaesthesia in 20 American Society of Anesthesiologists class III patients. In patients given thiopentone (N = 11), cardiac output, mean arterial pressure, heart rate, and systemic vascular resistance all decreased significantly over the course of the study period; mean right atrial pressure rose slightly, and stroke volume remained the same. Patients receiving midazolam (N = 9) experienced similar haemodynamic changes which were significant relative to baseline only for the fall in mean arterial pressure and the rise in mean right atrial pressure at ten minutes. There were no significant differences between the two groups. Midazolam thus appears to be at least as acceptable an induction agent as thiopentone in ill patients, from a haemodynamic point of view.
在20例美国麻醉医师协会III级患者的麻醉诱导过程中,比较了咪达唑仑(0.15毫克/千克)和硫喷妥钠(3.0毫克/千克)的心血管效应。给予硫喷妥钠的患者(N = 11),在研究期间心输出量、平均动脉压、心率和全身血管阻力均显著下降;平均右心房压略有上升,每搏量保持不变。接受咪达唑仑的患者(N = 9)经历了类似的血流动力学变化,仅在十分钟时平均动脉压下降和平均右心房压上升相对于基线有显著变化。两组之间无显著差异。因此,从血流动力学角度来看,在病情较差的患者中,咪达唑仑似乎至少与硫喷妥钠一样是可接受的诱导药物。