Suppr超能文献

[静脉注射阿芬太尼、芬太尼与硬膜外利多卡因用于体外冲击波碎石术的比较]

[Comparison of intravenous alfentanil, fentanyl and epidural lidocaine for extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy].

作者信息

Lin I S, Liu C H, Susetio L, Lin C S, Wang C F, Wu H S, Rau R H

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology, Provincial Tao-Yuan General Hospital, Taiwan, R.O.C.

出版信息

Ma Zui Xue Za Zhi. 1993 Dec;31(4):225-32.

PMID:8302147
Abstract

Due to the development of newer generation of lithotriptor, the anesthesia for extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) was variable recently. To compare opioid analgesia with epidural lidocaine for their efficacy in pain control, hemodynamic changes, side effects and patient acceptance during ESWL, sixty unpremedicated patients undergoing elective ESWL for upper urinary calculi with second generation Dornier MFL 5000 nonimmersion lithotriptor were randomly assigned equally into one of the following managements: Group E: 1% epidural lidocaine with 1:200000 epinephrine; Group A: 15 micrograms/kg alfentanil initially and 7 micrograms/kg on demand intravenously; Group F: 4 micrograms/kg fentanyl initially and 2 micrograms/kg on demand intravenously. Significant hypotension and bradycardia occurred in Gp.E as compared to baseline value (p < 0.05). Early respiratory depression was observed in both Gp. A and Gp. F, but Gp. A showed significantly shorter period (2 to 5 minutes) as compared to Gp.F (2 to 15 minutes). Under the insufflation of oxygen by nasal cannula, mean PaCO2 increased maximally to 50 mmHg, but no arterial oxygen desaturation (< 90%) was noted in Gp.A and Gp.F. The incidence of post-ESWL nausea was higher in Gp.F (p < 0.05), shivering and delayed recovery time were the main disturbing problems in Gp.E (p < 0.01). Although five-point verbal pain scale was significantly higher in Gp.A and Gp.F (at 30 to 45 minutes during ESWL) as compared to Gp.E, acceptance among patients was high throughout the course. We conclude that different anesthetic plans should be determined on different lithotriptors settings and patient's physical condition.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

摘要

由于新一代碎石机的发展,近年来体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)的麻醉方式有所不同。为比较阿片类镇痛与硬膜外利多卡因在ESWL期间的疼痛控制效果、血流动力学变化、副作用及患者接受度,60例未接受术前用药、因上尿路结石接受择期ESWL治疗且使用第二代多尼尔MFL 5000非浸入式碎石机的患者被随机等分为以下治疗组之一:E组:1%含1:200000肾上腺素的硬膜外利多卡因;A组:初始静脉注射15微克/千克阿芬太尼,按需追加7微克/千克;F组:初始静脉注射4微克/千克芬太尼,按需追加2微克/千克。与基线值相比,E组出现显著低血压和心动过缓(p<0.05)。A组和F组均观察到早期呼吸抑制,但A组的持续时间(2至5分钟)明显短于F组(2至15分钟)。经鼻导管吸氧时,平均动脉二氧化碳分压最高升至50 mmHg,但A组和F组未出现动脉血氧饱和度降低(<90%)。F组ESWL后恶心发生率较高(p<0.05),E组寒战和恢复时间延迟是主要问题(p<0.01)。尽管在ESWL期间30至45分钟时,A组和F组的五点口述疼痛量表评分明显高于E组,但患者在整个过程中的接受度较高。我们得出结论,应根据不同的碎石机设置和患者身体状况确定不同的麻醉方案。(摘要截断于250字)

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验