Matters R M, Beckett W G, Kirkby K C, King T E
Royal Hobart Hospital, Tasmania, Australia.
Br J Anaesth. 1995 Sep;75(3):297-300. doi: 10.1093/bja/75.3.297.
We have studied prospectively 39 patients receiving a course of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) for major depressive disorder; they were allocated randomly to receive either propofol or methohexitone for anaesthesia. Recovery after the third ECT treatment was assessed by finger tap and digit symbol substitution tests at 15, 30, 45, 60 and 90 min after induction. Seizure duration (median (interquartile range)) was shorter with propofol (24 (10) s) than methohexitone (29 (17) s) (P = 0.08). There was no significant difference in psychometric recovery for drug type, duration of the seizure or initial severity of depression. These results suggest that the more rapid recovery rates noted with propofol in other procedures are not evident after electrically induced seizures.
我们对39例接受电休克治疗（ECT）疗程以治疗重度抑郁症的患者进行了前瞻性研究；他们被随机分配接受丙泊酚或甲己炔巴比妥麻醉。在第三次ECT治疗后，于诱导后15、30、45、60和90分钟通过手指轻敲和数字符号替代测试评估恢复情况。丙泊酚组的癫痫发作持续时间（中位数（四分位间距））为24（10）秒，短于甲己炔巴比妥组的29（17）秒（P = 0.08）。在心理测量恢复方面，药物类型、癫痫发作持续时间或抑郁症初始严重程度之间无显著差异。这些结果表明，丙泊酚在其他手术中观察到的更快恢复率在电诱导癫痫发作后并不明显。
