Suppr超能文献

剖宫产应选用哪种诱导药物?硫喷妥钠、丙泊酚和咪达唑仑的比较。

Which induction drug for cesarean section? A comparison of thiopental sodium, propofol, and midazolam.

作者信息

Celleno D, Capogna G, Emanuelli M, Varrassi G, Muratori F, Costantino P, Sebastiani M

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology, Fatebenefratelli General Hospital, Rome, Italy.

出版信息

J Clin Anesth. 1993 Jul-Aug;5(4):284-8. doi: 10.1016/0952-8180(93)90119-y.

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To determine maternal and neonatal effects of three different induction drugs (thiopental sodium, propofol, and midazolam) for cesarean section.

DESIGN

Randomized, double-blind study.

SETTING

Inpatient obstetric department at a general hospital.

PATIENTS

90 healthy patients undergoing elective cesarean section with general anesthesia.

INTERVENTIONS

3 groups of 30 patients each receiving thiopental 5 mg/kg, propofol 2.4 mg/kg, or midazolam 0.3 mg/kg for induction of anesthesia.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Time to induce anesthesia, hemodynamic changes, depth of anesthesia, recovery after anesthesia, placental transfer, and neonatal outcome (Apgar and neurobehavioral examinations) were studied. In the thiopental and midazolam groups, systolic blood pressure and heart rate rose following endotracheal intubation and skin incision (p < 0.001 and p < 0.0025, respectively), while in the propofol group, there was significant hypotension after induction (p < 0.005). Electroencephalographic patterns showed a light depth of anesthesia with propofol and midazolam between anesthesia induction and delivery, confirmed by the presence of clinical signs of light anesthesia in 50% of propofol patients and 43% of midazolam patients. Time to induce anesthesia was longer with midazolam (p < 0.0001). Neonates in the midazolam and propofol groups had lower Apgar and neurobehavioral scores than those in the thiopental group. Umbilical artery to umbilical vein ratios were above 1 in the propofol and midazolam groups.

CONCLUSION

Thiopental still remains the first-choice induction drug for cesarean section. The slow induction time with midazolam may put the mother at risk for pulmonary inhalation. A plane of anesthesia that may risk awareness and potential neonatal depression is the main drawback of the two newer induction drugs.

摘要

研究目的

确定三种不同的剖宫产诱导药物(硫喷妥钠、丙泊酚和咪达唑仑)对母体和新生儿的影响。

设计

随机双盲研究。

地点

一家综合医院的住院产科。

患者

90例接受择期剖宫产全身麻醉的健康患者。

干预措施

3组,每组30例患者,分别接受5mg/kg硫喷妥钠、2.4mg/kg丙泊酚或0.3mg/kg咪达唑仑进行麻醉诱导。

测量指标及主要结果

研究了麻醉诱导时间、血流动力学变化、麻醉深度、麻醉后恢复、胎盘转运及新生儿结局(阿氏评分和神经行为检查)。在硫喷妥钠组和咪达唑仑组,气管插管和皮肤切开后收缩压和心率升高(分别为p<0.001和p<0.0025),而在丙泊酚组,诱导后出现明显低血压(p<0.005)。脑电图模式显示,丙泊酚组和咪达唑仑组在麻醉诱导至分娩期间麻醉深度较浅,50%的丙泊酚组患者和43%的咪达唑仑组患者存在浅麻醉的临床体征。咪达唑仑组的麻醉诱导时间较长(p<0.0001)。咪达唑仑组和丙泊酚组新生儿的阿氏评分和神经行为评分低于硫喷妥钠组。丙泊酚组和咪达唑仑组脐动脉与脐静脉比值均大于1。

结论

硫喷妥钠仍是剖宫产的首选诱导药物。咪达唑仑诱导时间缓慢可能使母亲面临肺吸入的风险。两种新型诱导药物的主要缺点是麻醉平面可能导致术中知晓风险和潜在的新生儿抑制。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验