Objective To investigate the efficacy and safety of paracervical block combined with alfentanil in hysteroscopic day surgery under total intravenous anesthesia. Methods This study used a prospective randomized controlled study approach. A total of 60 day surgery patients requiring hysteroscopic surgery under general anesthesia admitted to Weifang People’s Hospital between October and December 2020 were randomly selected. All patients were divided into trial group and control group by completely random number table method, with 30 patients in each group. The trial group received paracervical block combined with total intravenous anesthesia with alfentanil, and the control group received total intravenous anesthesia with alfentanil. The general condition, operation time, recovery time, intraoperative propofol dosage, postoperative pain score, intraoperative motion response and postoperative nausea and vomiting incidence were compared between the two groups. Results There was no significant difference in age, body mass index and incidence of comorbidities between the two groups (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in the operation time, recovery time, pain score at 2 hours after operation, and incidence of nausea and vomiting between the two groups (P>0.05). In the control group, the dose of propofol [(34.07±12.67) vs. (28.33±9.10) mL], the pain score on awakening (1.50±0.78 vs. 0.77±0.50), and the incidence of body movement response (20.0 % vs. 0.0%) were higher than the trial group (P<0.05). Conclusion The use of paracervical block combined with alfentanil in hysteroscopic day surgery under total intravenous anesthesia can reduce the amount of propofol during the operation, reduce postoperative pain, and reduce perioperative adverse reactions, which has a good efficacy and safety.
目的:观察等效剂量瑞芬太尼和芬太尼诱导气管插管对小儿血流动力学的影响。方法:40例择期行全麻患儿随机分为瑞芬太尼组和芬太尼组,麻醉诱导使用咪唑安定0.15mg/kg、丙泊酚2.5mg/kg、芬太尼2.5μg/kg或瑞芬太尼2μg/kg和维库溴铵0.1mg/kg。分别于麻醉诱导前(T0)、诱导后2min(T1)、插管后1、2min(T2、T3)记录心率、收缩压和舒张压。结果:两组诱导前血流动力学指标相似。与T0时比较,两组患儿T1时收缩压、舒张压均降低(Plt;0.05或Plt;0.01),心率均减慢(Plt;0.05或Plt;0.01);瑞芬太尼组T2.T3时收缩压、舒张压降低(Plt;0.05或Plt;0.01),心率减慢(Plt;0.05);芬太尼组T2、T3时收缩压、舒张压升高(Plt;0.05),心率增快(Plt;0.05)。与芬太尼组比较,瑞芬太尼组T1、T2和T3时收缩压、舒张压均降低(Plt;0.05),心率减慢(Plt;0.05)。结论:瑞芬太尼比等效剂量芬太尼能更好地抑制小儿全麻诱导气管插管时的心血管反应。
目的 通过对腹部手术后自控静脉镇痛（PCIA）不同药物配方的研究，探讨酒石酸布托啡诺与舒芬太尼用于术后PCIA临床效果。 方法 将2012年2月－8月收治的60例麻醉分级为Ⅰ～Ⅲ级需术后镇痛的腹部手术患者（均无心、肺、肝、肾、脑、内分泌疾病及过敏史）随机分成两组：酒石酸布托啡诺组（N组，n=30），舒芬太尼组（S组，n=30）。观察镇痛效果和不良反应发生率。 结果 两组镇痛效果差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05），不良反应（包括恶心、呕吐、头晕、嗜睡、皮肤瘙痒、呼吸抑制、尿潴留等），N组发生率均低于S组（P＜0.05）。 结论 酒石酸布托啡诺用于PCIA安全、有效，不良反应少。
目的 系统评价瑞芬太尼用于全身麻醉下剖宫产时对新生儿的影响。 方法 检索Cochrane Library、PubMed、OVID、EMbase、CNKI、万方等中外数据库，收集1990年－2012年关于瑞芬太尼用于全身麻醉下剖宫产的临床随机对照研究。按Cochrane系统评价方法评估文献质量，用Revman 5.1软件对提取的数据进行Meta分析。 结果 共纳入10项研究，包括342例产妇。与空白对照组相比，瑞芬太尼降低新生儿1 min Apgar评分[WMD=?0.46，95%CI（?0.65，?0.27），P＜0.000 01]，提高出生时脐动脉pH值[WMD=0.01，95%CI（0.00，0.02），P=0.004]，增加出生时窒息发生率[RR=1.76，95%CI（1.06，2.95），P=0.03]；当诱导剂量为1.0～1.5 μg/kg时，对5 min Apgar评分无影响[WMD=?0.14，95%CI（?0.32，0.04），P=0.13]。 结论 瑞芬太尼用于全身麻醉剖宫产可减轻新生儿酸中毒，但是会对新生儿产生一过性的呼吸抑制。
目的 评价舒芬太尼复合艾司洛尔对腹腔镜胆囊切除术二氧化碳气腹期间心血管反应和脑电双频指数（BIS）的影响。 方法 2010年1月－2011年12月间，选择美国麻醉医师协会分级Ⅰ～Ⅱ级择期腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者90例，随机分为芬太尼组（A组）、舒芬太尼组(B组）和舒芬太尼+艾司洛尔组（C组）。A组用芬太尼4 μg/kg，B、C组用舒芬太尼0.6 μg/kg麻醉诱导后气管插管，机械通气；C组在气腹前加用艾司洛尔。3组均常规静脉注射咪达唑仑0.1 mg/kg、丙泊酚2 mg/kg和维库溴铵0.1 mg/kg。分别记录各组在气腹前（T1）、气腹30 s（T2）、气腹5 min（T3）、气腹15 min（T4）时的收缩压、舒张压、平均动脉压、心率、血氧饱和度和BIS值。 结果 T1时C组收缩压、舒张压、心率、BIS值最低，各组间差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）；T2、T3、T4时A组收缩压、舒张压、心率、BIS明显增加，B组有所上升，ⅢC组各时段变化不明显。A组与B组、B组与C组间差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。 结论 舒芬太尼复合艾司洛尔能更好地预防腹腔镜胆囊切除术二氧化碳气腹期间心血管反应和抑制BIS的增加。
【摘要】目的观察低浓度罗哌卡因复合舒芬太尼用于分娩镇痛的效果。方法2007年5月8月按入选标准选择100例产妇,随机分成试验组和对照组,每组50例。试验组分娩前给予低浓度罗哌卡因加舒芬太尼,对照组不行无痛分娩,通过视觉模拟评分法等指标观察镇痛效果。结果试验组镇痛后视觉模拟评分较对照组低(Plt;0.05);两组镇痛期间血压、心率差异有统计学意义（Plt;0.05），新生儿Apgar评分比较无统计学意义(Pgt;0.05)。结论联合应用罗哌卡因和舒芬太尼用于硬膜外分娩镇痛能取得较好的效果,值得在临床中推广应用。
目的:观察舒芬太尼复合异丙酚自控镇静镇痛在结肠镜检查中的效果及不良反应,从而探讨该方法的安全性和有效性。方法:行无痛纤维结肠镜检查的患者60例,随机分为两组:自控镇痛/镇静组和静脉复合全麻醉组,每组30例。自控镇痛/镇静组首先缓慢静脉注射舒芬太尼0.12 μg/kg,随之接电子自控镇痛泵,负荷量设定为0.5 mg/kg,以4 mg/kg·h的速度持续泵入异丙酚(10 mg/mL),术中按压1次自控手柄可快速推注异丙酚1 mL。静脉复合全麻醉组首先静脉缓慢推注芬太尼1 μg/kg,咪唑安定0.02 mg/kg, 2 min后缓慢推注异丙酚0.8～1 mg/kg。术中间断给予异丙酚以维持听觉诱发电位指数(AAI)于30～40之间。结果:静脉复合全麻醉组的MAP较检查前明显下降且较自控镇痛/镇静组下降更为明显且具有统计学意义(Plt;0.05)。自控镇痛/镇静组的呼吸频率较静脉复合全麻醉组下降明显且在T3时间点具有统计学意义(Plt;0.05)。自控镇痛/镇静组患者OAA/S评分达5分和Aldrete评分达9分的时间均较静脉复合全麻醉组明显缩短(1.4±1.3 VS 3.9±1.7和 2.9±1.7 VS 5.7±1.7)(Plt;0.05)。两组的内镜医师和患者满意度评分无统计学差异(P＞0.05)。结论:自控镇静镇痛能够比传统的静脉全身麻醉提供更良好的循环系统稳定性,更迅速的麻醉后恢复,是结肠镜检查镇静镇痛的理想和安全方法。
ObjectiveTo evaluate the feasibility and efficiency of patient-controlled analgesia and sedation (PCAS) with propofol and remifentanil for colonoscopy in elderly patients. MethodsSixty elderly patients preparing for painless colonoscopy between May and September 2015 were randomly allocated into PCAS group and total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) group with 30 patients in each. In the PCAS group, the mixture of remifentanil and propofol at 0.6 mL/(kg·h) was pumped continuously after an initial bolus of 0.05 mL/kg mixture. The examination began three minutes after the infusion was finished. Patients could press the self-control button. Each bolus delivered 1 mL and the lockout time was 1 minute. In the TIVA group, patients received fentanyl at 1 μg/kg and midazolam at 0.02 mg/kg intravenously, and accepted intravenous propofol at 0.8-1.0 mg/kg two minutes later. The examination began when the patients lost consciousness. ResultsA significant decline of mean arterial blood pressure was detected within each group after anesthesia (P < 0.05). The decrease of mean blood pressure in the TIVA group was more significant than that in the PCAS group (P < 0.05). The heart rate, pulse oxygen saturation and respiratory rate decreased significantly after anesthesia in both the two groups (P < 0.05), while end-tidal CO2 increased after anesthesia without any significant difference between the two groups (P > 0.05). The induction time, time to insert the colonoscope to ileocecus, and total examination time were not significantly different between the two groups (P > 0.05). As for the time from the end of examination to OAA/S score of 5 and to Aldrete score of 9, the PCAS group was significantly shorter than the TIVA group (P < 0.05). ConclusionPCAS with remifentanil and propofol can provide sufficient analgesia, better hemodynamic stability, lighter sedation, and faster recovery compared with TIVA.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy of transdermal fentanyl versus oral morphine for moderate/severe cancer pain. MethodsDatabases such as The Cochrane Library (Issue 1, 2014), PubMed, Web of Science, CNKI, VIP, CBM and WanFang Data were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy of transdermal fentanyl versus oral morphine for moderate/severe cancer pain up to January 2014. According to inclusion and exclusion criteria, two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and assessed methodological quality of included studies. Then meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.1.0 software. ResultsA total of 35 RCTs involved 3 406 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that, there was no significant difference in effectiveness between transdermal fentanyl and oral morphine for moderate/severe cancer pain (OR=1.00, 95%CI 0.80 to 1.27, P=0.99). Compared with oral morphine, transdermal fentanyl was better in lowering the incidences of constipation, nausea and vomiting, lethargy and urinary retention; but transdermal fentanyl increased the incidences of skin rashes and itch (P < 0.05). ConclusionTransdermal fentanyl is as effective as oral morphine in the treatment of moderate/severe cancer pain, and transdermal fentanyl causes less side effects. Due to poor quality of the included studies, the above conclusion should be verified by further conducting more high quality RCTs.