应用右美托咪定复合罗哌卡因行臂丛神经阻滞效果观察

目的观察上肢骨折手术中应用右美托咪定复合罗哌卡因实施臂丛神经阻滞的效果。方法将择期行上肢骨折手术的76例患者随机分为2组,各38例。均在超声引导下行肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞麻醉。对照组应用0.5%罗哌卡因75 mg。观察组给予0.5%罗哌卡因75 mg+右美托咪定1μg/kg。观察2组患者入室后(T_0)、臂丛麻醉后15 min(T_1)、手术开始即刻(T_2)、手术开始后30 min(T_3)、术毕即刻(T_4)时的心率(HR)及平均动脉压(MAP)变化情况;记录感觉和运动神经阻滞起效时间、持续时间、镇痛持续时间和不良反应发生率。结果 2组患者T_0时HR、MAP差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。与对照组相比,观察组T_1~T_4时间点HR、MAP低,感觉、运动阻滞起效时间短,感觉、运动阻滞维持时间和镇痛持续时间长,差异均有统计学意义(P0.05)。2组不良反应发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论上肢骨折手术应用右美托咪定复合罗哌卡因行超声引导下臂丛阻滞,麻醉起效迅速,镇痛效果好,不良反应无明显增加,安全性高。     

右美托咪定复合甲璜酸罗哌卡因用于臂丛神经阻滞30例

目的：观察右美托咪定复合甲璜酸罗哌卡因用于臂丛神经阻滞的效果。方法：将90例上肢手术患者随机分为3组,Ⅰ组麻醉用药为0．45％甲璜酸罗哌卡因20mL,Ⅱ组在局麻药中加右美托咪定1μg,kg,Ⅲ组阻滞完成后即静脉注射右美托咪定1μg/kg。结果：Ⅱ组感觉和运动阻滞起效时间缩短,作用时间及术后镇痛时间均明显长于Ⅰ、Ⅲ2组（均P〈o．01）。术中、术后VAs疼痛评分低于Ⅰ、Ⅲ组（P〈O．05,P〈O．01）;Ⅲ组不良反应的发生率高于Ⅰ、Ⅱ两组。结论：右美托咪定1μg/kg与局麻药混合用于臂丛神经阻滞,可增强甲璜酸罗哌卡因的镇痛效果,缩短起效时间,延长作时间及术后镇痛时间,不良反应少。     

右美托咪定对左旋布比卡因腋路臂丛神经阻滞的影响

目的观察右美托咪定对左旋布比卡因腋路臂丛神经阻滞的影响。方法 50例ASAⅠ或Ⅱ级需于腋路臂丛神经阻滞下行前臂或手部手术的患者随机均分为两组,分别以40ml0.5%左旋布比卡因联合1ml(100μg)右美托咪定(LD组)和1ml等渗氯化钠(LS组)行腋路臂丛神经阻滞,比较两组感觉和运动阻滞起效时间、持续时间、镇痛时间以及HR、MAP、SpO2等。结果感觉和运动阻滞起效时间LD组明显短于LS组(P<0.05),感觉和运动阻滞持续时间LD组明显长于LS组(P<0.05),镇痛时间LD组长于LS组(P<0.05)。MAP在给药后的15、30、45、60、90和120minLD组较LS组显著下降(P<0.05),HR在给药后所有时点LD组均显著慢于LS组(P<0.05)。结论右美托咪定100μg联合左旋布比卡因在腋路臂丛神经阻滞中可以缩短其感觉和运动阻滞起效时间,延长阻滞持续时间及镇痛时间,但可能导致心动过缓。     

右美托咪定添加到罗哌卡因中对腰丛-坐骨神经阻滞及镇静的影响

目的观察右美托咪定添加到罗哌卡因中对腰丛-坐骨神经阻滞及镇静的影响。方法择期在腰丛-坐骨神经阻滞下行单侧膝关节检查、美国麻醉医师协会(American Society of Anesthesiology,ASA)分级Ⅰ~Ⅲ级的患者120例,按照数字生成的方法随机分为不使用右美托咪定(R组)、腰丛阻滞给予右美托咪定(RLD组)、坐骨神经阻滞给予右美托咪定(RSD组),腰丛-坐骨神经阻滞均给予右美托咪定(RD组),每组30例。记录腰丛和坐骨神经的感觉和运动阻滞起效时间、阻滞持续时间及患者第一次需要镇痛药的时间(镇痛时间)。记录患者麻醉前(T0)、麻醉后15分钟、30分钟、45分钟、60分钟(T1~T4)的镇静评分(Ramsay评分)、心率、血氧饱和度、平均动脉压及局麻药中毒的发生率。结果四组间腰丛-坐骨神经阻滞起效时间比较,差异无统计学意义,RLD组、RD组、RSD组和R组腰丛感觉和运动维持时间(min)分别为1008.00±104.99、800.00±97.56,922.00±149.05、732.00±139.52,768.00±108.48、602.00±84.09和742.00±129.44、612.00±109.62,差异有统计学意义(P0.01);RLD组、RD组、RSD组和R组坐骨神经阻滞感觉和运动维持时间分别为1006.00±117.58、810.00±105.41,932.00±144.18、744.00±136.09),738.00±120.16、582.00±96.04和708.00±126.45、548.00±111.12,差异有统计学意义(P0.01)。RLD、RSD及RD组在T1~T4点的Ramsay评分高于R组,心率低于R组(P0.05)。RLD组、RD组、RSD组和R组镇痛持续时间分别为1004.00±135.48、918.00±83.60、898.00±131.34和808.00±1 19.72,差异有统计学意义(P0.01)。无局麻药中毒发生。结论右美托咪定能随着剂量的增加而增强罗哌卡因腰丛-坐骨神经阻滞效果。右美托咪定能起到镇静作用,同时导致患者心率下降。     

右美托咪定与肾上腺素作为局部麻醉药佐剂对臂丛神经阻滞效果的对比

目的 对比常用剂量的右美托咪定(dexmedetomidine,Dex)和肾上腺素作为罗哌卡因的佐剂对锁骨上臂丛神经阻滞影响的差异. 方法 选择Colle's骨折患者60例,ASA分级Ⅰ、Ⅱ级,其中男性40例,女性20例;年龄44～68岁,体重50～75kg.采用随机数字表法分为3组(每组20例):生理盐水对照组(C组)、Dex组(D组)和肾上腺素组(E组).各组均在超声引导下行锁骨上臂丛神经阻滞.C组使用1 ml生理盐水,D组将0.75 μg/kg Dex稀释至1 ml,E组将盐酸肾上腺素100 μg稀释至1 ml.上述溶液分别加入10 ml 1％盐酸罗哌卡因和10 ml生理盐水配制的局部麻醉药物中.比较感觉及运动阻滞的起效时间、持续时间、开始静脉镇痛的时间,入室时(T0)及给药后10 min(T1)、20min(T2)、30 min(T3)、40 min (T4)、50 min(T5)、60 min(T6)的HR、MAP、SpO2、BIS以及麻醉并发症的情况. 结果 D组感觉、运动阻滞的起效时间比C、E组短,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05),而C、E两组间差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).D、E两组感觉、运动阻滞的持续时间、静脉镇痛的开始时间均比C组晚,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05),但两组间差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).MAP的组间比较,D组在T4～T5时段低于C组,在T3～T5时段低于E组,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).E组在T3时刻高于C组,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).HR的组间比较,D组在T3～T6时段低于C,E两组,E组在T3～T5时段显著高于C组,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).BIS值的组间比较,D组在T2～T6时段显著低于C、E组,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05). 结论 与100 μg肾上腺素相比,0.75 μg/kg Dex具有类似的增强臂丛神经阻滞的作用,还具有镇静及降低心血管应激的作用,适用于肾上腺素禁忌证者.     

右美托咪定对罗哌卡因半数有效浓度的影响

目的 探讨罗哌卡因复合小剂量右美托咪定局部用药对其用于隐神经阻滞时半数有效浓度的影响.方法 拟行单侧膝关节置换术患者60例,年龄60～80岁,身体质量指数(BMI)<24 kg/m2,美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)分级Ⅰ～Ⅱ级.采用随机数字表法分为两组(n=30).超声引导下行隐神经阻滞,对照组神经阻滞时仅用罗哌卡因20 ...     

右美托咪定对比地塞米松在罗哌卡因腰丛阻滞中的应用

目的 比较右美托咪定和地塞米松混合于罗哌卡因用于腰丛阻滞的临床效果。方法 选择单侧膝部或股骨手术的成年患者90例,ASAⅠ或Ⅱ级,随机分为三组：对照组、地米组和右美组,每组30例。三组患者均在超声联合神经刺激仪引导下行后路腰丛阻滞,对照组注入浓度为0.375%（3.75 mg/mL）的盐酸罗哌卡因0.5 mL/kg,地米组注入相同浓度、等效容量的局麻药和地塞米松0.1 mg/kg,右美组注入相同浓度、等效容量的局麻药和右美托咪定1 μg/kg。比较感觉、运动阻滞的起效时间和持续时间,记录术后24 h内VAS疼痛评分和镇痛药用量,观察并发症的发生情况。结果 感觉和运动阻滞的起效时间：右美组<地米组<对照组（P<0.05）;感觉和运动阻滞的持续时间：右美组>地米组>对照组（P<0.05）。地米组和右美组术后24 h的VAS疼痛评分低于对照组（P<0.05）;地米组和右美组术后24 h内的镇痛药用量少于对照组（P<0.05）,右美组少于地米组（P<0.05）。三组患者并发症的发生率无统计学差异。结论 右美托咪定或地塞米松与罗哌卡因混合应用均能加快腰丛阻滞的起效时间、延长持续时间和降低患者术后疼痛程度,但右美托咪定的作用更为显著。     

曲马多联合0．33％罗哌卡因用于腋路臂丛神经阻滞

曲马多是阿片类中枢镇痛药,主要通过静脉给药缓解中重度疼痛,但静脉用药常有恶心呕吐等不良反应发生。近年来的研究表明曲马多具有局部麻醉药的特性。本文旨在通过了解曲马多联合局麻药对臂丛神经阻滞效果观察,来评价曲马多对外周神经的阻滞作用。     

不同剂量右美托咪定复合罗哌卡因胸椎旁神经阻滞在非插管胸腔镜手术中的比较

目的比较不同剂量右美托咪定复合罗哌卡因胸椎旁神经阻滞在非插管胸腔镜手术中的效果。方法择期行胸腔镜肺大泡切除术的患者114例,男90例,女24例,年龄25～60岁,BMI25 kg/m~2,ASAⅠ或Ⅱ级,随机分为四组。麻醉诱导前行胸椎旁神经阻滞,C组注入0.375%罗哌卡因20 ml, D1、D2、D3组分别注入右美托咪定0.5、1.0、2.0μg/kg复合0.375%罗哌卡因20 ml。记录感觉阻滞起效时间和持续时间;入室时(T_0)、注药后30 min(T_1)、手术开始时(T_2)、手术开始后30 min(T_3)的RR、PaO_2和PaCO_2;术毕全麻药的用量;术中低血压、心动过缓和使用麻黄碱与阿托品的情况。结果与C、D1组比较,D2、D3组感觉阻滞起效时间明显缩短(P0.05),持续时间明显延长(P0.05),T_2、T_3时PaCO_2明显降低(P0.05),RR、PaO_2明显升高(P0.05),术毕丙泊酚和瑞芬太尼的用量明显减少(P0.05);D3组心动过缓和低血压的发生率明显高于其他三组(P0.05)。结论右美托咪定1.0μg/kg复合罗哌卡因行胸椎旁神经阻滞可缩短感觉阻滞起效时间,延长持续时间,减少全麻药用量,无明显血流动力学不良反应发生。     

Ropivacaine-induced toxicity with overdose suspected after axillary brachial plexus block

Ropivacaine has a high threshold for systemic toxicity. We report and highlight a rare case in which an overdose of ropivacaine was suspected of leading to a generalized convulsion following the injection of this agent for axillary brachial plexus block (ABPB). A 25-year-old woman (height, 153 cm; weight, 48 kg; American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I) was scheduled for finger surgery with ABPB. The perivascular sheath was identified by fascial clicks. We administered 300 mg (6.25 mg·kg⁻¹) ropivacaine, while confirming that no blood flow was observed in the injection line by repeated negative aspiration tests. Ten minutes after the injection, most sensory and motor nerves were blocked effectively. Thirteen minutes after the administration, the patient lost consciousness and convulsed suddenly. No severe symptoms of cardiovascular toxicity occurred. The concentration of ropivacaine in a venous blood sample taken 28 min after the ropivacaine injection was 3.65 μg·ml⁻¹. She recovered with no sequelae. Limited cases have indicated high efficacy and sufficient safety for the use of 300 mg ropivacaine for ABPB. However, the toxic threshold of ropivacaine remains unclear, and the dose should be calculated in relation to the weight of the patient to prevent severe toxic complications.     

Comparison of two different techniques for brachial plexus block: infraclavicular versus axillary technique

BACKGROUND: Brachial plexus block via the axillary approach is problematic in patients with limited arm mobility. In such cases, the infraclavicular approach may be a valuable alternative. The purpose of our study was to compare axillary and infraclavicular techniques for brachial plexus block in patients undergoing arm or forearm surgery. METHODS: After institutional approval and informed consent were obtained, 30 patients (ASA physical status I or II) scheduled for forearm and hand surgery under brachial plexus anesthesia were included in the study. Patients were randomly allocated into two groups. Brachial plexus block was performed via the axillary approach in the Group A patients and via the infraclavicular approach in the Group I patients using a peripheral nerve stimulator. All blocks were performed with a total dose of 40 ml 0.375% bupivacaine. RESULTS: In each nerve territory (radial, ulnar, median, and musculocutaneous), the mean values of the degree and the duration of the sensory block and motor block were not significantly different between the two groups (P > 0.05). Inadvertent vessel puncture was significantly more frequent in the axillary approach (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Brachial plexus block performed via the infraclavicular approach is as safe and effective as the axillary approach. Infraclavicular approach may be preferred to the axillary approach when the upper arm mobility is impaired or not desired.     

罗哌卡因复合不同剂量地塞米松行肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞在患儿上肢手术后的镇痛效果

目的 观察罗哌卡因复合不同剂量地塞米松行肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞(ISBPB)对患儿上肢骨折手术后镇痛效果的影响。方法 选择上肢骨折手术患儿73例,男46例,女27例,年龄3～7岁,ASAⅠ或Ⅱ级。随机分为三组：单纯罗哌卡因组(R组,n=24)、罗哌卡因复合地塞米松0.1 mg/kg组(D1组,n=24)和罗哌卡因复合地塞米松0.2 mg/kg组(D2组,n=25),三组药液容量均为0.3 ml/kg。患儿在麻醉后行超声引导下ISBPB,均保留自主呼吸。记录痛觉阻滞时间、运动阻滞时间、阻滞后24 h内镇痛药物(布洛芬混悬液、氢吗啡酮)的使用情况。记录膈神经阻滞、Horner综合征、声带麻痹、阻滞侧感觉异常等术后并发症的发生情况。结果 D2组痛觉阻滞时间明显长于R组(P<0.05)。R组和D1组痛觉阻滞时间差异无统计学意义。三组运动阻滞时间差异无统计学意义。D1组和D2组阻滞后24 h内布洛芬混悬液使用次数、氢吗啡酮使用率明显低于R组(P<0.01),D1组和D2组差异无统计学意义。三组膈神经阻滞率差异无统计学意义。三组术后未出现其余并发症。结论 与单纯罗哌卡因比较,0.25%罗哌...     

不同浓度罗哌卡因用于腋路臂丛神经阻滞的研究

目的探讨0.25%、0.3%、0.375%罗哌卡因用于臂丛神经阻滞的有效性和安全性,并与0.25%布比卡因对照.方法选择ASAⅠ-Ⅱ级准备行上肢手术的病人80例,随机分为4组,每组20例,分别用0.25%、0.3%、0.375%罗哌卡因和0.25%布比卡因40ml行臂丛神经阻滞,观察病人有无不适症状,并分别对感觉和运动进行评价.结果随着浓度增加罗哌卡因麻醉强度依次增加,40m10.25%罗哌卡因麻醉强度明显低于0.25%布比卡因,且满意率低,仅为85%;将罗哌卡因浓度提高到0.375%,显示出与0.25%布比卡因相当的麻醉强度,满意率则提高到100%.结论 0.25%罗哌卡因用于臂丛神经阻滞起效慢、满意率低,不是临床使用的适宜浓度;0.3%、0.375%罗哌卡因起效快,作用完善,副作用少,可推荐用于长时间臂丛神经阻滞,而以0.375%罗哌卡因最为适宜.     

不同剂量右美托咪定混合罗哌卡因用于臂丛神经阻滞的效果

目的 评价不同剂量右美托咪定混合罗哌卡因用于臂丛神经阻滞的效果.方法 选择上肢手术患者120例,ASA分级Ⅰ或Ⅱ级,性别不限,年龄20 ～ 60岁,体重40 ～ 70 kg.采用随机数字表法,将其分为6组(n=20):罗哌卡因组(R组)、不同剂量右美托咪定混合罗哌卡因组(RD1-5组).采用经肌间沟法行臂丛神经阻滞,R组单次注射0.5％罗哌卡因25 ml;RD1-5组单次注射含右美托咪定[0.25 μg/kg(RD1组)、0.50 μg/kg(RD2组)、0.75 μg/kg(RD3组)、1.00 μg/kg(RD4组)、1.25 μg/kg(RD5组)]的0.5％罗哌卡因25 ml.记录感觉和运动神经阻滞起效时间、持续时间及心血管事件、过度镇静、气胸等不良反应的发生情况.结果 与R组比较,RD1-5组感觉和运动神经阻滞起效时间缩短,持续时间延长(P＜0.05).与RD组和RD2组比较,RD3-5组感觉和运动神经阻滞起效时间缩短,持续时间延长(P＜0.05).RD1-2组间上述指标差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).RD3-5组间上述指标差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).RD4组和RD5组少数患者出现心动过缓、低血压和过度镇静.其余各组未见不良反应发生.结论 右美托咪定0.75 μg/kg混合0.5％罗哌卡因25 ml可安全、有效地用于臂丛神经阻滞.     

甲磺酸罗哌卡因和盐酸罗哌卡因肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞的比较

目的 观察0.596%甲磺酸罗哌卡因和0.5%盐酸罗哌卡因在超声引导下行肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞的效果.方法 60例上肢手术行肌间沟臂丛麻醉的患者,随机均分成两组:A组给予0.596%甲磺酸罗哌卡因30 ml;B组给予0.5%盐酸罗哌卡因30 ml.比较两组感觉及运动阻滞起效时间、阻滞程度、运动恢复时间、镇痛持续时间和不良反应.结果 A组尺神经感觉阻滞起效时间显著快于B组[(38.30±14.65)min vs.(48.03±22.34)min](P<0.05).注药60 min A组尺神经感觉完全阻滞29例(96.7%),显著多于B组的20例(66.7%)(P<0.05).结论 0.596%甲磺酸罗哌卡因的尺神经感觉阻滞优于0.5%盐酸罗哌卡因.     

Quality of axillary brachial plexus block

A perivascular catheter technique (PVT) and a nerve stimulator technique (NST) for axillary brachial plexus block were compared in terms of quality: complete, incomplete or failed blocks. In a randomised series, 30 PVT blocks and 30 NST blocks were performed by three staff anaesthetists. In the NST group, surgical anaesthesia was always achieved, whereas in the PVT group, four blocks required supplementation with general anaesthesia. In both groups eight patients needed supplementation with additional conduction blocks of 1-3 peripheral nerves. It is concluded that a nerve stimulator technique may increase the success rate of axillary brachial plexus block to some extent.     

Clonidine does not improve quality of ropivacaine axillary brachial plexus block in children

Background: The addition of clonidine to peripheral nerve blocks is controversial in children. Objective: The aim of our study was to evaluate the effect of clonidine added to ropivacaine in pediatric axillary brachial plexus block (ABPB). Methods: Children aged 1–6 years, scheduled to undergo forearm or hand surgery, were recruited into this prospective, double‐blind controlled trial. Patients were randomly allocated to receive an ABPB either with ropivacaine 0.2% 0.4 ml·kg^?1 plus saline in 1 ml (RS) or ropivacaine 0.2% 0.4 ml·kg^?1 plus clonidine 1 μg·kg^?1 in 1 ml (RC). Primary endpoints were quality of postoperative analgesia as assessed by pain scores and total 24‐h postoperative analgesia requirements. Secondary outcomes were time to first analgesia request and duration of motor blockade. Results: Sixty patients were recruited (n = 30 per group) into the study. Pain scores were comparable throughout the first 24 h between the two groups. Ten children in the (RS) and six in (RC) groups required supplementary analgesia during the first 24 h (P = 0.24). Children who required further analgesia did so after 288 ± 94 min in the (RS) and 437 ± 204 min in the (RC) group (P = 0.06). There was no difference in the duration of motor block [186 ± 71 and 154 ± 56 min, P = 0.12 for (RS) and (RC), respectively]. Conclusion: Ropivacaine (0.2% 0.4 ml·kg^?1) for ABPB provides sufficient postoperative analgesia in children scheduled for forearm or hand surgery. The addition of clonidine to ABPB does not improve overall postoperative analgesia but may increase the time to first analgesia request.