舒芬太尼与瑞芬太尼分别复合丙泊酚对小儿麻醉诱导期血压和脑电双频指数的影响比较

目的:探讨舒芬太尼复合丙泊酚与瑞芬太尼复合丙泊酚两种麻醉方案的优劣。方法:以2016年3月至2017年3月在我院进行择期全麻手术的患儿150例作为研究对象,根据进行全麻手术的时间先后编号,采用随机数表法分为舒芬太尼组和瑞芬太尼组各75例。舒芬太尼组患儿采用舒芬太尼复合丙泊酚进行全麻,瑞芬太尼组患儿采用瑞芬太尼复合丙泊酚进行全麻。观察并比较两组患儿在麻醉诱导期[诱导前(T1)、静脉注射舒(瑞)芬太尼后(T2)、静脉注射丙泊酚后(T3)、插管即刻(T4)、插管后2 min(T5)、5 min(T6)]的收缩压(SAP)、舒张压(DBP)、平均动脉压(MAP)和脑电双频指数(BIS)。结果:舒芬太尼组患儿在T4时的DBP、MAP均优于瑞芬太尼组(P均<0.05);两组患儿在各时间点的BIS比较差异无统计学意义(P均>0.05)。舒芬太尼组患儿自主呼吸恢复、肢体动作恢复和拔管时间均短于瑞芬太尼组(P<0.05);呼吸抑制、苏醒期躁动、恶心呕吐和意识障碍发生情况均少于瑞芬太尼组(P<0.05)。结论:与瑞芬太尼复合丙泊酚相比,舒芬太尼复合丙泊酚能够显著改善患儿的术后疼痛,同时呼吸抑制等副作用较小,在需要进行全麻手术的患儿中应用具有明显优势。     

瑞芬太尼与舒芬太尼在无痛内镜检查中的效果比较

目的观察瑞芬太尼、舒芬太尼和芬太尼应用于无痛内镜检查的镇静镇痛效果比较。方法选择我院内镜室2012年9月至10月收治的无痛内镜检查患者90例,随机分为瑞芬太尼组、舒芬太尼组和芬太尼组各30例。观察三组患者术中血压、心率、血氧饱和度、睫毛反射消失时间,瑞芬太尼、舒芬太尼和芬太尼、异丙酚的使用情况,阿托品和麻黄素的使用情况。结果对三纽患者麻醉过程进行比较,瑞芬太尼组和舒芬太尼组的睫毛反射消失时间短,肢体运动发生率低,血压和心率明显降低,心动过缓和呼吸抑制的发生率则增高,瑞芬太尼组和舒芬太尼组对呼唤睁眼时间、定向力恢复时间、离院时间明显短于芬太尼组,两组与芬太尼组比较差异有显著性（P〈0．05）,瑞芬太尼组和舒芬太尼组比较差异无显著性（P〉0．05）。结论无痛内镜检查中使用丙泊酚复合瑞芬太尼和舒芬太尼,术中疼痛少,术毕恢复快等优点．呕吐、烦躁等不良反应少．是宴全有教的方法．     

Effects of morphine,fentanyl, sufentanil,and the short-acting morphine-like analgesic alfentanil on the EEG in dogs

Visual and computerized methods were used to analyze the effects of intravenously injected narcotic analgesics on the EEG of dogs implanted with cortical and subcortical electrodes. The drugs were morphine (1.6 mg/kg), fentanyl (0.004 mg/kg), sufentanil (0.0004 mg/kg), and a new potent and very short-acting compound under clinical trial in anaesthesia, alfentanil (0.04, 0.16 and 0.63 mg/kg). All compounds increased the amplitude of the EEG, decreased the frequency of the EEG, and produced spindle-like bursts of biphasic waves. These bursts were more frequent and of a higher amplitude following alfentanil than after the other compounds. A computerized on-line power spectral analysis was applied to three derivations (frontal-occipital cortex, dorsal hippocampus, amygdala). The power of the total band width (0–40 Hz) increased following all narcotic analgesics. The duration of this increase was coincident with the period of loss of righting. Spectral analysis of various frequency bands revealed significant differences between the compounds, specifically with regard to fentanyl and alfentanil as compared to morphine and sufentanil. Sleep-wake patterns of the night following injection of alfentanil were studied. This compound did not produce significant post-drug effects.     

依托咪酯乳剂复合舒芬太尼在妇产科腹腔镜手术中的应用

目的 评价依托咪酯乳剂复合舒芬太尼与传统的丙泊酚乳剂复合芬太尼对妇产科腹腔镜手术中血流动力学的影响,比较两组苏醒及拔管时间、苏醒质量.方法 100例妇产科腹腔镜手术择期患者,按入院时的单双号排序随机分为观察组和对照组各50例.观察组患者依托咪酯乳剂+舒芬太尼全麻诱导并静脉持续微泵依托咪酯乳剂麻醉维持,对照组患者丙泊酚乳剂+芬太尼全麻诱导并静脉持续微泵丙泊酚乳剂麻醉维持.监测并记录两组患者在插管前5 min(基础值,T0)、全麻诱导后2 min(T1)、插管后即刻(T2)、气腹后5 min(T3)、手术半小时(T4)、苏醒拔管时(T5)的平均动脉压(MAP)、心率(HR)、血氧饱和度(SPO2)、呼气末二氧化碳分压(PETCO2)的变化,并记录苏醒时间、拔管时间及术中知晓情况.结果 两组患者的平均动脉压(MAP)、心率(HR)在T0时无明显区别,但在T1、T2、T3时观察组明显低于对照组,差异有显著性(P＜0.05);观察组患者苏醒时间为(5.1±2.3)min、拔管时间为(8.1±2.4)min,对照组为(10.3±5.2)min、(12.8±2.3)min;观察组患者苏醒期躁动、恶心呕吐发生率明显低于对照组(P＜0.05).结论 依托咪酯乳剂复合舒芬太尼应用于妇产科腹腔镜手术对血流动力学影响较小,术后并发症少,麻醉效果更安全可靠.     

舒芬太尼预防妇科腹腔镜手术苏醒期躁动的应用

目的研究舒芬太尼（0.5μg/kg）应用于防治妇科腹腔镜手术苏醒期躁动的临床疗效。方法妇科腹腔镜手术的患者120例,随机分A组和B组,分别为舒芬太尼组和芬太尼＋曲马多组,每组60例,舒芬太尼组和芬太尼＋曲马多组分别于手术结束前30min静脉注射舒芬太尼（0.5μg/kg）或芬太尼（1μg/kg）＋曲马多（0.5mg/kg）,所有患者在手术结束前10min停止泵注异丙酚,手术结束时停止泵注瑞芬太尼,比较两组患者自主呼吸恢复、意识恢复和拔管时间和躁动评分。结果舒芬太尼组和芬太尼＋曲马多组患者的自主呼吸恢复时间、意识恢复时间和拔管时间在统计学上没有显著性差异,而舒芬太尼组苏醒期躁动评分结果优于芬太尼＋曲马多组（P〈0.05）,具有统计学意义。结论手术结束前30min静脉注射舒芬太尼（0.5μg/kg）能够有效预防妇科腹腔镜手术麻醉后苏醒期躁动,并且提高术后恢复质量。     

Spectral frequency index monitoring during propofol-remifentanil and propofol-alfentanil total intravenous anaesthesia

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of spectral frequency index (SFx) monitoring to assess the depth of anaesthesia during propofol-opioid total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA). METHODS: Thirty-three patients scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy under propofol TIVA were prospectively and randomly allocated to receive either remifentanil (bolus of 1.0 microg/kg, followed by continuous infusion from 0.25 to 0.05 microg/kg/min) [n = 18] or alfentanil (bolus of 10 microg/kg, followed by continuous infusion from 2.0 to 0.5 microg/kg/min) [n = 15]. EEG activity was monitored to achieve the desired depth of anaesthesia, and intravenous propofol was titrated to keep the SFx at 70-80%. The remifentanil and alfentanil groups were compared in relation to the plasma propofol concentration required for an adequate level of hypnosis during maintenance of anaesthesia, Pearson correlation coefficient for the relationship between the plasma propofol concentration and SFx values, recovery parameters, and recall of events during anaesthesia. RESULTS: The study groups were comparable with regard to demographic characteristics, type and duration of surgery, and time to resumption of spontaneous ventilation. No evidence of explicit recall was noted. The mean plasma propofol concentration required for an adequate level of hypnosis during maintenance of anaesthesia was significantly higher in the alfentanil group (3.20 microg/mL) compared with the remifentanil group (2.17 microg/L) [p < 0.05]. In both groups, the Pearson correlation coefficient test showed a linear correlation between SFx values and propofol concentration in the studied propofol concentration range. The mean time to orientation for name and place was significantly shorter (p < 0.05), the mean propofol concentration at orientation for name and place and at the resumption of spontaneous ventilation timepoints was significantly lower (both p < 0.01), and the mean SFx value at resumption of spontaneous ventilation timepoint was significantly higher (p < 0.01) in the remifentanil group. CONCLUSIONS: As SFx is linearly related to plasma propofol concentration, this index may be used to measure anaesthetic effect during propofol anaesthesia. The results of this clinical trial are consistent with a previous computer-simulated opioid-propofol model with regard to intraoperative and recovery variables, although the recovery occurred at different propofol concentration and SFx values.     

Prevention of propofol-induced injection pain by sufentanil: a placebo-controlled comparison with remifentanil

BACKGROUND and objective: Propofol produces anaesthesia with rapid recovery but also causes pain or discomfort on injection. The effect of remifentanil in prevention of propofol-induced injection pain has been demonstrated in earlier studies. However, sufentanil, an opioid analgesic, has not been evaluated as an agent for managing pain on injection of propofol. In this study we aimed to compare the efficacy of remifentanil and sufentanil for the prevention of propofol-induced pain. METHODS: This double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical study was carried out from July 2006 to February 2007, and included patients who were candidates for elective surgery in a university hospital. From 92 American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) status I-II adult patients, 80 were randomly assigned to four groups of 20 each. Patients received 2 mL of sufentanil 0.01 mg, 2 mL of remifentanil 0.01 mg, 2 mL of remifentanil 0.02 mg, or 2 mL of saline 60 seconds prior to administration of 5 mL of propofol 1%. Patients were asked prior to losing consciousness whether they felt any pain due to propofol injection, and their pain scores were evaluated on the four-point scale of Ambesh et al. RESULTS: The incidence of pain was significantly lower in the remifentanil 0.02-mg group, remifentanil 0.01-mg group and sufentanil group compared with the saline group (40%, 70%, 75% and 100%, respectively, p < 0.05). Median pain intensity scores were significantly lower in the group receiving remifentanil 0.02 mg than in the sufentanil group (0 and 1 respectively, p < 0.05). The median intensity of propofol-induced pain was statistically similar between the groups receiving sufentanil or remifentanil 0.01 mg and the placebo group (1, 1 and 1, respectively, p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Remifentanil 0.02 mg administered over 60 seconds before propofol administration is more effective than sufentanil 0.01 mg, remifentanil 0.01 mg or placebo administered 1 minute prior to propofol in reducing the incidence and intensity of injection pain.     

瑞芬太尼复合丙泊酚靶控输注在小儿脑瘫手术中的应用

目的 评价瑞芬太尼复合丙泊酚全凭(TCT)静脉麻醉用于小儿脑瘫的临床效果.方法 选择择期需全麻下行肌力肌张力调整术或者行颈动脉剥脱术手术的患儿50例,随机分成A组和B组各25例.A组麻醉诱导(咪达唑仑0.2 mg/kg、丙泊酚1.0 mg/kg、瑞芬太尼1.5 μg/kg、琥珀胆碱2 mg/kg).麻醉维持连续靶控输注丙泊酚2~4 mg/(kg·h)微量持续泵注瑞芬太尼0.1~0.25 μg/(kg·min)能用肌松剂的维库溴胺0.03 μg/(kg·min)B组麻醉实施中麻醉诱导中瑞芬太尼改用芬太尼0.5~1 μg/kg麻醉维持中微量泵持续泵入瑞芬太尼改为间断推注芬太尼0.1 μg/(kg·min)其余药物使用方法及剂量同A组.结果 丙泊酚联合瑞芬太尼比丙泊酚联合芬太尼更能有效的控制麻醉诱导和手术过程中血压和心率的上升 并且使用瑞芬太尼组的患儿苏醒时间及拔管时间较使用芬太尼组明显缩短,术中丙泊酚的用量也大大减少.结论 丙泊酚联合瑞芬太尼适用于脑瘫患儿手术,且效果优于丙泊酚联合芬太尼.     

异丙酚联合不同芬太尼用于无痛宫腔镜检查的疗效观察

目的 观察异丙酚联合不同芬太尼用于无痛宫腔镜检查的麻醉效果.方法 选择拟行无痛宫腔镜检查的患者90例,随机分为3组,即PF组(异丙酚联合芬太尼)、PSF组(异丙酚联合舒芬太尼)和PRF组(异丙酚联合瑞芬太尼),每组30例.观察3组用药后不同时点的血压、心率、脉搏血氧饱和度(SpO2)、呼吸频率及潮气量,评估麻醉效果和苏醒质量.结果 PSF组无呼吸抑制发生,PRF组和PF组分别有15例和3例发生呼吸抑制,给予面罩辅助呼吸后SpO2无明显下降.3组血压、心率变化组间无差异.PSF组麻醉效果和苏醒质量明显优于PF组和PRF组,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).结论 与异丙酚联合普通芬太尼、瑞芬太尼相比,异丙酚联合舒芬太尼(0.1 μg/kg)能为无痛宫腔镜检查提供更完善的镇痛效果,苏醒质量高,且呼吸抑制发生率低.     

舒芬太尼复合依托咪酯清醒镇静镇痛在无痛电子胃镜检查中的应用

目的研究舒芬太尼复合依托咪酯清醒镇静镇痛用于无痛胃镜检查中的有效性、安全性和可行性。方法选择ASAⅠ～Ⅱ级拟行无痛胃镜检查患者150例,随机分为三组：丙泊酚组（P组）、依托咪酯组（E组）、舒芬太尼复合依托咪酯组（SE组）,各50例。P组：丙泊酚1．0～2．0mg／kg,E组：依托咪酯0．1～0．2mg／kg,DE组：舒芬太尼0．1μg／kg＋依托咪酯0．1mg／kg。各组均以60秒匀速静脉推注完毕。检查中均视患者体动情况给予适量缓慢静脉追加注射丙泊酚0．25～0．5mg／kg或依托咪酯0．025．0．05mg／kg。观察记录三组患者术前、术中的平均动脉压（MAP）、心率（HR）、经皮脉搏血氧饱和度（SPO,）;记录定向力恢复时间、恢复质量及肌阵挛、心动过缓、血压过低等不良反应情况。结果三组患者在不同时点的平均动脉压（MAP）、心率（HR）、经皮脉搏血氧饱和度（SP02）组间比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）,但与基础值比,P组T1、T2时点MAP、HR、SPO,下降明显,E组和sE组血流动力学明显比P组较平稳;三组定向力恢复时间和患者OAA／S评分结果比较,sE组和P组患者的神志恢复质量明显较E组好,患者术后嗜睡现象明显较少（P〈0．05）,且恢复时间也较E组迅速,但差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）;E组出现肌阵挛4例,而sE组和P组均不超过2例发生,肌阵挛发生率三组间差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。结论舒芬太尼复合依托咪酯清醒镇静镇痛用于无痛电子胃镜检查能达到满意的麻醉效果,且不良反应少,是一种安全、有效、可靠的麻醉方法。     

瑞芬太尼、芬太尼增强丙泊酚在无痛人工流产术中麻醉效果的对比分析

目的对比观察瑞芬太尼、芬太尼在无痛人工流产术中增强丙泊酚的麻醉效果,探求理想麻醉方式。方法将我院50例行人工流产术的患者随机分为瑞芬太尼组和芬太尼组各25例。分别应用瑞芬太尼和芬太尼复合丙泊酚麻醉,对比观察2组患者苏醒时间、镇痛效果、不良反应和丙泊酚用量。结果与芬太尼组比较,瑞芬太尼组麻醉诱导后SBP、DBP、MAP、fH下降明显,术中丙泊酚用量少,术后恢复时间短,差异均有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。瑞芬太尼组呼吸抑制发生率高于芬太尼组,术后腹痛发生率低于芬太尼组,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。结论瑞芬太尼或芬太尼复合丙泊酚用于无痛人工流产术中,麻醉效果确切、安全。瑞芬太尼可明显减少丙泊酚用量,术后恢复时间短,但术中要加强对呼吸的管理。     

丙泊酚复合瑞芬太尼靶控静脉麻醉用于胆囊切除手术的临床观察

目的评价丙泊酚复合瑞芬太尼靶控静脉麻醉的诱导和术后苏醒过程。方法ASAI-Ⅱ级择期行胆囊切除手术患者40例，随机分为瑞芬太尼（R）组及芬太尼（F）组，R组采用瑞芬太尼和丙泊酚诱导和维持麻醉，F组采用芬太尼和丙泊酚诱导和维持麻醉，观察并比较两组患者麻醉诱导及维持期血流动力学的变化、术毕停药后患者自主呼吸恢复时间、清醒时间、拔管时间以及苏醒期不良反应等。结果瑞芬太尼麻醉术中循环波动较小，苏醒快，术后并发症少。结论与芬太尼相比，瑞芬太尼可更安全有效地用于胆囊切除术。     

食管癌根治术靶控输注舒芬太尼或瑞芬太尼复合吸入七氟醚麻醉的效果比较

目的探讨食管癌根治术靶控输注（TCI）舒芬太尼或瑞芬太尼复合吸入七氟醚的麻醉效果。方法择期行食管中段癌根治术患者30例,ASAⅠ级或Ⅱ级,随机分为舒芬太尼组（SF组）和瑞芬太尼组（RF组）,每组15例。麻醉诱导设定异丙酚血浆靶浓度3 mg/L,舒芬太尼和瑞芬太尼血浆靶浓度分别为0.6、6μg/L,2组分别TCI异丙酚及舒芬太尼或瑞芬太尼。麻醉维持舒芬太尼或瑞芬太尼血浆靶浓度不变,停止TCI异丙酚,持续吸入七氟醚,维持呼气末七氟醚浓度0.7～1.5MAC,术后行自控静脉镇痛（PCIA）。监测患者围术期收缩压（SBP）、舒张压（DBP）、平均动脉压（MAP）及心率（HR）变化,观察麻醉苏醒情况,记录术后Ramsay镇静评分及视觉模拟镇痛评分（VAS）,随访术后麻醉相关并发症发生情况。结果与RF组比较,SF组围术期血流动力学更加平稳,手术结束至呼吸恢复、呼之睁眼、气管拔管和定向力恢复时间均较长（P〈0.05）。SF组拔管后出现暂时性呼吸抑制2例;RF组诱导时给与麻黄碱6 mg 4例,麻醉苏醒期出现烦躁3例。2组术后镇痛期间均未发生恶心、呕吐、皮肤瘙痒及呼吸抑制,但RF组追加曲马多例数多于SF组。结论舒芬太尼TCI时需要提前较长时间停药,而瑞芬太尼TCI可控性优于舒芬太尼,适用于麻醉维持。但舒芬太尼镇痛作用强,术后患者自控镇痛优于瑞芬太尼。     

瑞芬太尼复合异丙酚用于无痛胃镜中的临床观察

目的:观察瑞芬太尼和异丙酚联合应用于无痛胃镜过程中的临床变化。方法:210例成人ASAI-II患者随机分成3组,芬太尼和异丙酚组(A组,n=70)、瑞芬太尼和异丙酚组(B组,n=70)以及5%GS和瑞芬太尼-异丙酚合剂组(C组,n=70)。每ml瑞芬太尼-异丙酚合剂中含有瑞芬太尼1.5ug和异丙酚5mg。双盲法静脉缓注0.5ug/kg芬太尼或0.5ug/kg瑞芬太尼或5%GS0.1ml/kg。1min后,静脉缓注异丙酚或瑞芬太尼-异丙酚合剂。异丙酚或瑞芬太尼-异丙酚合剂的用量根据麻醉深度来调节,以满足检查需要和不导致低氧血症(SpO2<90%)为准。结果:B组较A组:一般体动发生率较低(P<0.05),但是心动过缓和低血压发生率较高(P<0.05)。虽然呼吸暂停发生率较高(P<0.05),但是低氧血症发生率无统计学意义(P>0.05)。C组较A组:体动发生率较低(P<0.05),但是心动过缓、低血压以及异丙酚注射痛发生率都较高(P<0.05)。结论:瑞芬太尼和异丙酚联合应用于无痛胃镜时,体动发生少,但是心动过缓、低血压较多见,特别要重视瑞芬太尼-异丙酚合剂可能引起的低氧血症。     

Propofol. A review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties and use as an intravenous anaesthetic

Propofol is an intravenous anaesthetic which is chemically unrelated to other anaesthetics. Induction of anaesthesia with propofol is rapid, and maintenance can be achieved by either continuous infusion or intermittent bolus injections, with either nitrous oxide or opioids used to provide analgesia. Comparative studies have shown propofol to be at least as effective as thiopentone, methohexitone or etomidate for anaesthesia during general surgery. The incidence of excitatory effects is lower with propofol than with methohexitone, but apnoea on induction occurs more frequently with propofol than with other anaesthetics. Additionally, a small number of studies of induction and maintenance of anaesthesia have found propofol to be a suitable alternative to induction with thiopentone and maintenance with halothane, isoflurane or enflurane. Propofol is particularly suitable for outpatient surgery since it provides superior operating conditions to methohexitone (particularly less movement), and rapid recovery in the postoperative period associated with a low incidence of nausea and vomiting. When used in combination with fentanyl or alfentanil, propofol is suitable for the provision of total intravenous anaesthesia, and comparative studies found it to be superior to methohexitone or etomidate in this setting. Infusions of subanaesthetic doses of propofol have been used to sedate patients for surgery under regional anaesthesia, and also to provide sedation of patients in intensive care. In the latter situation it is particularly encouraging that propofol did not suppress adrenal responsiveness during short term studies. If this is confirmed during longer term administration this would offer an important advantage over etomidate. Thus, propofol is clearly an effective addition to the limited range of intravenous anaesthetics. While certain areas of its use need further study, as would be expected at this stage of its development, propofol should find a useful role in anaesthetic practice.     

雷米芬太尼复合丙泊酚在宫腔镜手术中的应用

目的：观察雷米芬太尼复合丙泊酚在宫腔镜手术中的临床效果。方法：选择宫腔镜手术患者60例,随机分为雷米芬太尼复合丙泊酚组（Ⅰ组）和芬太尼复合丙泊酚组（Ⅱ组）。Ⅰ组静注雷米芬太尼1μg/kg,丙泊酚1.5～2.0mg/kg,继而以丙泊酚3mg/（kg·h）加雷米芬太尼0.6μg/（kg·h）输注。Ⅱ组静注芬太尼1μg/kg,丙泊酚2mg/kg,继而以丙泊酚4mg/（kg·h）输注。观察注药前（T0）,注药后5min（T1）、10min（T2）、15min（T3）及停药后5min（T4）的循环、呼吸情况,并记录起效时间、苏醒时间、定向力恢复时间及术中、术后并发症情况。结果：与T0比较,Ⅰ组、Ⅱ组在T1～T3时,HR明显减慢（P〈0.05）,MAP明显下降（P〈0.05）;T4时Ⅰ组的MAP、HR与T0比较差异无统计学意义,而Ⅱ组的MAP明显降低（P〈0.05）,HR明显减慢（P〈0.05）;Ⅰ组术中体动小于Ⅱ组（P〈0.01）,起效时间、苏醒时间、定向力恢复时间快于Ⅱ组（P〈0.05）。结论：雷米芬太尼复合丙泊酚用于宫腔镜手术,起效快、苏醒迅速、不良反应小、安全、可行。     

丙泊酚和依托咪酯用于雄性 SD 大鼠麻醉效果的比较

摘要： 目的 序贯法测定雄性 SD 大鼠静脉麻醉丙泊酚和依托咪酯的 95%有效剂量 （ED95）, 比较 2 种麻醉药物的效能和麻醉维持时间。方法 28 只雄性 SD 大鼠随机分成丙泊酚组和依托咪酯组, 每组 14 只。以翻正反射作为意识的判定指标。根据公式 Y=Ymin+ （Ymax-Ymin ） / ［1+10log （ED50-X） ×m ］ 拟合大鼠翻正反射消失的剂量-反应性曲线。分别测定丙泊酚和依托咪酯的 ED95 和大鼠静脉注射等效剂量的 2 种药物后麻醉持续时间。结果 测得两组 SD 大鼠丙泊酚 ED95 为 9 mg/kg, 依托咪酯 ED95 为 1.5 mg/kg, 丙泊酚与依托咪酯 ED95 的比值为 6。丙泊酚组大鼠麻醉维持时间 （465.6±18.5） s, 依托咪酯组麻醉维持时间 （233.7±9.3） s, 两组差异有统计学意义 （P＜0.05）。结论 以 ED95 为等效剂量, 丙泊酚组麻醉维持时间长于依托咪酯组。     

全麻诱导期芬太尼复合不同静脉麻醉药时适宜用量的探讨

目的探讨全麻诱导期芬太尼复合静脉麻醉药时，既能预防气管插管心血管应激反应，又无过度降压效应的适宜剂量。方法全麻气管插管下择期手术患者162例，按麻醉配方分7组：组1硫喷妥钠5mg／kg，芬太尼7μg／kg（n=25）；组2依托咪酯0．3mg／kg，芬太尼7gg／kg（n=28）；组3依托咪酯0．3mg／kg，芬太尼5μg／kg（n=27）；组4咪唑安定（力月西）0．05mg／kg，依托咪酯0．3mg／kg，芬太尼6μg／kg（n=22）；组5异丙酚2mg／kg，芬太尼7μg／kg（n=15）；组6异丙酚2mg／kg，芬太尼5μg／kg（n=15）；组7异丙酚2mg／kg，芬太尼3gg／kg（n=30）。记录麻醉诱导前、诱导后、插管即刻、插管后1、3、5、7、10min收缩压（SBP）、舒张压（DBP）、平均动脉压（MAP）、心率（HR）。结果各组进行自身对照，与基础值比较：组1，SBP、DBP和MAP在诱导后、插管后5、7、10min明显降低（P〈0．05），HR在诱导后和插管1min明显增快（P〈0．05）。组2，各项指标在各时点之间无显著差异（P〉0．05）。组3，SBP在插管1min时显著增高（P〈0．01）。组4，仅SBP在诱导后明显降低（P〈0．05）。组5，SBP、DBP、MAP在诱导后和插管后各时点显著降低（P〈0．01）。组6，SBP、DBP、MAP在诱导后和插管后7、10min显著降低（P〈0．01）。组7，SBP、DBP、MAP仅在诱导后显著降低（P〈0．01）。结论静脉麻醉药在推荐的诱导剂量基础上，硫喷妥钠或依托咪酯伍用芬太尼7ug／kg，依托咪酯加咪唑安定伍用芬太尼6ug／kg，异丙酚伍用芬太尼3ug／kg较为适宜。     

UHPLC-MS/MS同时检测人血浆中5种麻醉药物

目的 建立UHPLC-MS/MS同时检测人血浆中瑞芬太尼、舒芬太尼、依托咪酯、右美托咪定、地佐辛5种麻醉药物的分析方法,为指导临床用药提供参考。方法 血浆样品经乙腈沉淀蛋白质后进样分析,以普鲁卡因为内标,采用Agilent Poroshell 120 EC-C₁₈（2.1 mm×150 mm,2.7 μm）色谱柱进行色谱分离;以甲醇-10 mmol·L^-1甲酸铵溶液（28：72,用甲酸调节pH至3.5）为流动相,流速0.2 mL·min^-1;采用电喷雾电离源正离子检测模式,以多反应监测方式进行分析。结果 人血浆中瑞芬太尼、舒芬太尼、依托咪酯、右美托咪定、地佐辛分别在0.25~25.32（r=0.998 7）,0.27~27.48（r=0.999 2）,1.54~154.05（r=0.999 5）,0.51~51.35（r=0.999 2）,0.56~56.19（r=0.998 8）ng·mL^-1内线性关系良好。日内和日间精密度RSD均<10.0%,提取回收率均处于92.8%~107.3%之间。该方法成功应用于30例临床患者血浆样本分析。结论 该方法操作简单快速、灵敏度高、专属性高且稳定,适用于人血浆中瑞芬太尼、舒芬太尼、依托咪酯、右美托咪定、地佐辛5种麻醉药物的分析,能够服务于临床治疗药物监测。