Scanlon P, Carey M, Power M, Kirby F
Department of Anaesthesia, St. James' Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Can J Anaesth. 1993 Sep;40(9):816-8. doi: 10.1007/BF03009250.
The response to insertion of the laryngeal mask airway (LMA) following either propofol 2.5 mg.kg-1 or thiopentone 5 mg.kg-1 was assessed in two groups of patients. The purpose of the study was to ascertain which of these two induction agents provided the better conditions for insertion of the LMA. Anaesthesia was induced by propofol in 35 patients and by thiopentone in 37. Following induction, ventilation was assisted for two minutes using 50% oxygen and nitrous oxide and 2% isoflurane, before insertion of the LMA. The presence of gagging, coughing, laryngospasm and movement was noted and graded. Thiopentone was associated with an adverse response in 76% of patients, compared with propofol in 26% (P < 0.01). Gagging, laryngospasm and head movement were more common using thiopentone (P < 0.01, P < 0.05 and P < 0.05 respectively) and in 11% (P < 0.05) of the thiopentone group insertion of the LMA was impossible due to inadequate relaxation. We conclude that, using these doses, propofol is superior to thiopentone as an induction agent for insertion of the laryngeal mask airway.
在两组患者中评估了分别给予丙泊酚2.5mg/kg或硫喷妥钠5mg/kg后插入喉罩气道(LMA)的反应。本研究的目的是确定这两种诱导药物中哪一种为插入LMA提供更好的条件。35例患者用丙泊酚诱导麻醉,37例用硫喷妥钠诱导麻醉。诱导后,在插入LMA之前,使用50%氧气、氧化亚氮和2%异氟烷辅助通气两分钟。记录并分级出现的呛咳、咳嗽、喉痉挛和肢体活动情况。硫喷妥钠组76%的患者出现不良反应,而丙泊酚组为26%(P<0.01)。使用硫喷妥钠时,呛咳、喉痉挛和头部活动更为常见(分别为P<0.01、P<0.05和P<0.05),并且在硫喷妥钠组中有11%(P<0.05)的患者因松弛不足而无法插入LMA。我们得出结论,使用这些剂量时,丙泊酚作为插入喉罩气道的诱导药物优于硫喷妥钠。