Morison D H, Dunn G L, de Graft-Johnson A
Can Anaesth Soc J. 1982 Nov;29(6):622-6. doi: 10.1007/BF03007751.
Etomidate was compared with alfathesin for induction and maintenance of anaesthesia in a double-blind fashion in 48 fit patients undergoing minor gynaecological operations as outpatients. The patients were randomized to receive either etomidate 0.3 mg . kg-1 or alfathesin 75 microliters . kg-1 as intravenous induction agents. All patients received fentanyl 1 microgram . kg-1 and breathed 70 per cent nitrous oxide in oxygen. Cardiovascular changes were minimal in both groups and there was less depression of minute volume with etomidate. The incidence of side effects including pain upon injection, involuntary movements, and postoperative nausea and vomiting was higher following etomidate. Recovery was equally rapid in both groups. No adverse reactions were seen. Alfathesin would appear to be preferable to etomidate as an induction and maintenance agent in unpremedicated fit outpatients undergoing minor gynaecological operations.
在48例身体健康、接受门诊小妇科手术的患者中,以双盲方式比较了依托咪酯和阿法沙辛用于麻醉诱导和维持的效果。患者被随机分为两组,分别接受0.3mg·kg-1的依托咪酯或75微升·kg-1的阿法沙辛作为静脉诱导剂。所有患者均接受1微克·kg-1的芬太尼,并吸入70%氧化亚氮和氧气的混合气体。两组患者的心血管变化均极小,依托咪酯对分钟通气量的抑制作用较小。依托咪酯注射时疼痛、不自主运动以及术后恶心呕吐等副作用的发生率较高。两组患者的恢复速度相同。未观察到不良反应。对于未使用术前药、身体健康的门诊小妇科手术患者,阿法沙辛作为诱导和维持麻醉的药物似乎比依托咪酯更可取。