O.25%左旋布比卡因在硬外麻下乳腺手术中的比较研究

目的观察0.25%左旋布比卡因在硬外麻下乳腺手术中的应用效果,并与相同浓度的罗哌卡因和布比卡因比较.方法选择ASAⅠ～Ⅱ级,拟在硬外麻下行乳腺区段切除术病人90例,随机分成三组,每组30例,观察组为左旋布比卡因(LB组),对照Ⅰ组为罗哌卡因(R组),对照Ⅱ组为布比卡因(B组).所有患者硬外均接受0.25%局麻药浓度.观察各组麻醉起效时间T0、完全起效时间T1、麻醉持续时间T2、总用药量、双上肢Bromage评分、双上肢运动完全恢复时间T3.结果 T0、T2、T3及Bromage评分LB组与B组无显著差异,但与R组有显著性差异(P＜0.05),T1及总用药量LB组与B组、R组均无显著差异.结论 0.25%左旋布比卡因可为硬外麻下乳腺手术提供良好的麻醉效果,且其麻醉作用与布比卡因相似,而较相同浓度罗哌卡因强.     

Evaluation of levobupivacaine passage to breast milk following epidural anesthesia for cesarean delivery

BackgroundFollowing maternal administration, local anesthetics pass into breast milk. In the present study, we aimed to compare the passage of levobupivacaine and bupivacaine into breast milk following epidural anesthesia for cesarean delivery.MethodsA total of 20 women undergoing elective cesarean delivery under epidural anesthesia were randomized to receive either 0.5% levobupivacaine or 0.5% racemic bupivacaine via an epidural catheter. Immediately before and 30 min, 1 h, 2 h, 6 h, 12 h and 24 h after administration of epidural local anesthetic, maternal blood and breast milk samples were taken simultaneously. Drug concentrations in plasma and milk were determined via high-performance liquid chromatography. The infant’s drug exposure was determined by calculating milk/plasma ratios of levobupivacaine and bupivacaine.ResultsBoth levobupivacaine and bupivacaine were detected in breast milk 30 min after epidural administration. Concentrations of both agents showed constant and similar decreases in milk and plasma and were nearly undetectable at 24 h. The milk/plasma ratios were 0.34 ± 0.13 for levobupivacaine and 0.37 ± 0.14 for bupivacaine.ConclusionsBoth levobupivacaine and bupivacaine pass into breast milk following epidural administration. The concentration of both drugs was approximately three times lower in breast milk than in maternal plasma.     

胸段硬膜外腔注射可乐定对上腹部手术术后膈肌功能的影响

目的　观察胸段硬膜外腔注射可乐定对上腹部手术 (UAS)术后膈肌功能的作用。方法　在连续硬膜外神经阻滞麻醉下行剖腹胆囊切除术病人 2 0例 ,均分为可乐定 (A)组与生理盐水(B)组。术后 2小时A组经硬膜外导管注入可乐定 4μg/kg ,B组注入生理盐水。记录注药前、注药后30分钟、2小时有无反常呼吸运动以及RR、VT。结果　A组注射可乐定 30分钟后膈肌功能改善 :反常呼吸运动消失 ,RR减慢 (由 2 0 0± 1 8降到 15 2± 1 7,P <0 0 0 1)、VT 增加 (由 2 19 8± 2 6 8ml/m2 增到 2 91 0± 2 5 5ml/m2 ,P <0 0 0 1) ,连续观察 2小时 ,膈肌功能仍优于注药前。B组注射生理盐水后上述指标无明显变化。结论　胸段硬膜外腔注射可乐定可改善UAS术后膈肌功能     

罗哌卡因、左旋布比卡因与布比卡因低位硬膜外麻醉的比较

目的比较罗哌卡因、左旋布比卡因与布比卡因低位硬膜外麻醉的临床效果。方法60例行下腹部手术病人。随机分成三组,每组20例。Ⅰ组：0．5％罗哌卡因;Ⅱ组：0．5％左旋布比卡因;Ⅲ组：0．5％布比卡因。行连续低位硬膜外麻醉。观察感觉阻滞起效时间、感觉阻滞平面上界、运动阻滞起效时间、运动阻滞程度及麻醉质量。结果Ⅰ、Ⅱ和Ⅲ组首次局麻药用量分别为（14．38±1．57）、（14．75±0．50）和（13．80±1．30）ml。Ⅰ组运动阻滞起效时间比Ⅲ组长（P〈0．05）,Ⅰ组Bromage评分为1分的例数多于Ⅲ组（P〈0．05）。与Ⅲ组比较,Ⅰ、Ⅱ组感觉阻滞起效时间、感觉阻滞平面上界差异均无统计学意义。Ⅲ组SBP在感觉阻滞平面达上界及运动阻滞起效时有明显降低（P〈0．05）。结论0．5％罗哌旨因、左旋布比卡因或布比卡因连续硬膜外麻醉均可产生良好的感觉和运动阻滞,三种药物药效学相似。     

右美托咪定和丙泊酚用于硬膜外麻醉下妇科手术患者镇静的比较

目的 比较右美托咪定(Dex)和丙泊酚用于硬膜外麻醉下妇科手术患者的镇静效果.方法 硬膜外麻醉下择期行子宫或(和)卵巢切除患者100例,随机均分成Dex组(D组)和丙泊酚组(P组),应用Ramsay镇静评分和脑电双频指数(BIS)对两组患者术中镇静效果进行观察.记录给药前(T0)、切皮前即给药后15 min(T1)、手术开始后15 min(T2)、30 min(T3)、45 min(T4)、术毕(T5)及术后1 h(T6)患者HR、MAP、BIS、Ramsay镇静评分及呼吸抑制情况.结果 T1～T5时D组BIS,MAP明显低于T0时和P组,Ramsay镇静评分低于P组,HR慢于T0时和P组(P<0.05).低血压的发生率P组明显高于D组(P<0.05).结论 Dex用于硬膜外麻醉下妇科手术患者镇静是安全和可行的.     

硬膜外注射右美托咪定、芬太尼用于下肢手术镇痛的效果评价

目的 观察和评价硬膜外注射右美托咪定、芬太尼复合罗哌卡因用于下肢手术的镇痛效果.方法 美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)分级Ⅰ～Ⅱ级患者100例,按随机数字表法分为两组(每组50例):罗哌卡因+右美托咪定组(RD组)和罗哌卡因+芬太尼组(RF组).除记录循环、呼吸指标及镇静评级外,于硬膜外给药后即刻观察T1o痛觉消失时间、最高感觉阻滞平面、完全运动阻滞时间、感觉阻滞消退两个节段的时间、首次追加镇痛药物的时间及副作用的发生情况等.结果 两组患者一般情况差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).RD组T10痛觉消失和完全运动阻滞时间[(7.1±1.2)min和(18.0±3.6) min]明显早于RF组[(9.2±1.8) min和(22.0±3.0) min](P＜0.05),RD组术后镇痛时间[(361±20) min]长于RF组[(259±32) min],且硬膜外局麻药总用量[(76±10)mg]显著少于后者[(97±l4)mg](P＜0.01);镇静效果评级RD组(76％)显著好于RF组(18％)(P＜0.01).RF组恶心、呕吐的发生率(28％和14％)较RD组(16％和6％)明显升高(P＜0.05),而RD组口干的发生率(16％)显著高于RF组(4％)(P＜0.01).结论 硬膜外注射右美托咪定用于下肢手术镇痛,可提供较为稳定的血流动力学,感觉神经阻滞起效快,术后镇痛时间延长,药物用量少,镇静效果良好.     

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。     

胸部硬膜外麻醉复合吸入麻醉对腹部手术患者应激性高血糖的影响

目的观察胸部硬膜外麻醉复合异氟醚吸入麻醉对腹部手术患者应激性高血糖的影响。方法择期腹部手术患者40例,随机均分为两组,每组20例。I组和E组术中吸入异氟醚维持麻醉。E组患者诱导前T8~9椎间隙穿刺硬膜外置管,注入1%利多卡因5ml(不加肾上腺素)试验量,再注入利多卡因5~8 ml将阻滞平面调节到T4,以后每小时追加5~8 ml。于麻醉前30 min(T0)、手术90min(T1)、术后60min(T2)及术后1d(T3)、2d(T4)检测血糖(Glu)、红细胞醛糖还原酶(AR)、6-磷酸葡萄糖脱氢酶(G-6PD)、谷胱甘肽过氧化物酶(GSH-Px)、超氧化物歧化酶(SOD)、过氧化氢酶(CAT)活性及血浆一氧化氮(NO)、血浆谷胱甘肽(GSH)、丙二醛(MDA)浓度。结果与T0时比较,T1~T3时两组Glu明显升高(P0.05),T3时I组AR、G-6PD、CAT活性与MDA浓度明显升高,NO、GSH浓度明显降低(P0.05)。与I组比较,T3时E组Glu、AR、G-6PD、CAT明显降低,NO明显升高(P0.05)。两组患者GSH-Px、SOD比较差异均无统计学意义。结论硬膜外麻醉可降低腹部手术患者术中、术后应激性高血糖。     

相同浓度的左旋布比卡因、罗比卡因与布比卡因硬膜外腔给药用于剖宫产术时效性的比较

目的比较左旋布比卡因、罗比卡因和布比卡因用于硬膜外麻醉剖宫产术的阻滞效果、母婴安全和药物不良反应.方法采用随机双盲法,将48例择期剖宫产手术的足月单胎产妇分为三组：0.5%左旋布比卡因组（L组）17例、0.5%罗比卡因组（R组）15例和0.5%布比卡因组（B组）16例.记录硬膜外腔给药后产妇的感觉阻滞和运动阻滞的起效和持续时间、肌松满意程度、麻醉质量评价、恶心和呕吐等不良反应及术中心率、血压、脉搏血氧饱和度和新生儿1 min和5 min Apgar评分.结果产妇的一般情况、新生儿的Apgar评分组间无显著性差异;三组术中低血压及其他不良事件（恶心和呕吐）的发生率无显著性差异;各组的麻醉质量（术中的疼痛评分和肌松满意度）基本一致;感觉阻滞起效和维持时间组间无显著性差异,运动阻滞改良Bromage评分为1分的起效时间和持续时间组间有显著性差异.结论常用量0.5%左旋布比卡因、罗比卡因和布比卡因用于剖宫产手术的硬膜外麻醉时具有相似的麻醉效能和安全性.     

上腹部手术对小气道功能的影响

通过监测用力呼气中期流速（ＭＭＦ）和呼出２５％、５０％、７５％用力肺活量（ＦＶＣ）时瞬时呼气流速（ＦＥＦ）２５％、ＦＥＦ５０％和ＦＥＦ７５％等指标，对２５例不同麻醉方法下（全麻、硬膜外阻滞）行上腹部手术患者围术期小气道功能进行了连续观察。结果显示，术后４小时ＭＭＦ为术前的３２．７％，术后第７天为术前的６８．２％。表明上腹部手术后小气道功能严重减退。     

静脉注射吗啡病人自控镇痛与经硬膜外吗啡镇痛的观察

目的:比较术后静脉注射吗啡病人自控镇痛与硬膜外吗啡镇痛的临床效果和安全性。方法:60例在硬膜外麻醉下行妇科手术的患者随机分为硬膜外吗啡镇痛(EPI)组和静脉注射吗啡病人自控镇痛(PCIA)组。EPI组在手术结束时经硬膜外导管一次性注入吗啡2mg,PCIA组在术后患者感觉到疼痛时。自行给药镇痛,给药剂量每次1mg,锁定时间为5分钟。术后4、8、12、24小时进行随访并记录吗啡用药量、疼痛评分(VAPS)、平均动脉压和呼吸频率、镇静程度及恶心、呕吐等副作用情况。结果:术后24小时用药总量PCIA组(19.1±5.1mg)明显高于EPI组(2mg)。术后0～12小时EPI组镇痛效果优于PCIA组,镇静程度PCIA组高于EPI组。PCIA组恶心、呕吐发生率均高于EPI组,皮肤瘙痒EPI组2例,PCIA组1例。两组患者对术后镇痛总体满意度评估良好至优秀者百分率无显著性差异。两组患者术后呼吸频率及平均动脉压均在正常范围。结论:对于硬膜外麻醉术后需短期镇痛患者,单次剂量硬膜外吗啡镇痛效果优于PCIA组,副作用较少。     

The usefulness of postoperative continuous epidural morphine in abdominal surgery

The influence of continuous epidural morphine on the recovery course of intestinal activity, urinary function, and ambulation after surgery was studied in 40 patients who underwent either gastrectomy for gastric cancer or cholecystectomy for cholelithiasis. Compared with a control group of patients whose postoperative pain was managed by pentazocine or hydroxyzine as before, the length of time before passing flatus or faeces was significantly shortened in the morphine groups (P<0.05). Following gastrectomy, the urinary catheter was able to be removed significantly earlier in the morphine group (P<0.05) although there was no statistical difference between both cholecystectomy groups. The morphine group experienced no difficulty with postoperative ambulation and exercise, although the difference in time before ambulation between the two groups was not considered significant. The results of this study led us to conclude that the postoperative continuous epidural infusion of morphine would be more beneficial following major abdominal surgery than the conventionally used methods of administering postoperative analgesia.     

Changes in pulmonary function during continuous epidural bupivacaine with or without morphine following upper abdominal surgery

To assess the effect of postoperative continuous thoracic epidural infusion of bupivacaine on pulmonary function, a prospective randomized study was conducted in patients undergoing upper abdominal surgery (UAS). Sixteen patients, divided into two treatment groups, received continuous epidural infusion of 0.25% bupivacaine at a rate of 2–5ml·hr^–1, or that of a combination of 0.125% or 0.25% bupivacaine and 0.0025% or 0.005% morphine at a rate of 2–4ml·hr^–1. One, 4, 10, 16, 24 and 40hr postoperatively, the following indices were measured: visual analogue scale score, modified Prince Henry pain scale score, arterial Pa_{O 2} and Pa_{CO 2}, functional residual capacity (FRC), and tidal volume (TV). There was no difference in pain scores between the two groups except for significantly less pain at 40hr in the combination group. Postoperative measurements of pulmonary function revealed a significant fall in Pa_{O 2}, FRC and TV, indicating a reduction of 15–25% as compared with the preoperative values, and no significant differences between the two groups. The authors conclude that postoperative continuous epidural infusion of bupivacaine combined with morphine is highly effective in alleviating pain and impoving pulmonary function in patients following USA.(Sakura S, Yanagidani T, Saito Y et al.: Changes in pulmonary function during continuous epidural bupivacaine with or without morphine following upper abdominal sugery. J Anesth 4: 319–326, 1990)     

Is the combination of epidural clonidine–levobupivacaine has same analgesic efficacy and safety as the combination fentanyl–levobupivacaine after radical cystectomy?

ObjectiveThis study was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of addition of two drugs; clonidine versus fentanyl to epidural levobupivacaine to control postoperative pain after radical cystectomy surgery.Patients and MethodsAll urinary bladder cancer patients of both sex, ASA I and II, 40–70 years undergoing radical cystectomy surgery in National Cancer Institute (NCI) from November 2011 till May 2012 are the target group of which 50 patients accepted to share in the study, they are randomly classified by permuted block technique into two groups; group C (clonidine) who received 6 ml of levobupivacaine 0.25% + clonidine 75 μg epidural bolus dose followed by continuous epidural infusion of levobupivacaine 0.125% + clonidine 2 μg/ml at a total rate of 6–10 ml/h, and group F (fentanyl) who received 6 ml of levobupivacaine 0.25% + fentanyl 50 μg bolus dose followed by continuous epidural infusion of levobupivacaine 0.125% + fentanyl 2 μg/ml at a total rate of 6–10 ml/h. Paracetamol 1 g IV infusion was used as a rescue pain treatment. In both groups epidural activation is done after complete recovery from balanced general anesthesia. In both groups we measured vital signs (HR, MBP, RR), 0–10 visual analogue scale (VAS) and Sedation using the four-point Ramsay Sedation Scale are assessed for first 24 h postoperatively. In addition we recorded the total 24 h rescue paracetamol dose needed and side effects of both drugs were also observed.ResultsWe found that there is no statistical significant difference between both groups in the vital signs (HR, MBP, and RR), analgesic efficacy (VAS), and Sedation effects (Sedation Scale), and all data were within clinically accepted range. There was no statistically significant difference in total 24 h paracetamol rescue dose needed in both groups with the same range (1–3 g/24 h) and same median value (2 g/24 h). Recorded side effects were minimal and insignificant in both groups.ConclusionWe concluded that both clonidine and fentanyl can be used as effective additive to epidural levobubivacaine for postoperative analgesia after radical cystectomy with no significant difference between them in vital signs, analgesic, sedative effects and safety profile on adding each of them in doses not exceeding 20 μg/h to epidural continuous levobupivacaine infusion.     

左布比卡因复合右美托咪定在分娩镇痛中的应用及对母儿的影响

目的 研究左布比卡因复合右美托咪定(dexmedetomidine,Dex)在分娩镇痛中的应用及对母儿的影响. 方法 120例单胎、头位、初产妇,采用随机数字表法分为两组(每组60例),观察组(A组)应用左布比卡因复合Dex,对照组(B组)应用左布比卡因复合舒芬太尼,两组均采用硬膜外麻醉方式.产妇行硬膜外穿刺,两组分别给予0.1％左布比卡因+0.5 mg/L Dex复合液和0.1％左布比卡因+0.5 mg/L舒芬太尼复合液各5 ml.连接泵镇痛,泵速设置为8ml/h,患者自控镇痛(patient controlled analgesia,PCA)追加5 ml/次,锁定15 min.观察两组产妇生命体征、VAS评分、Bromage评分、Ramsay评分、产程、产后出血及新生儿Apgar评分. 结果 与麻醉前(T0)比较,麻醉后30 min(Tt)两组产妇MAP[A组,(81.8±4.7) mmHg(1 mmHg=0.133 kPa)比(93.0±6.2) mmHg;B组,(86.3±5.4)mmHg比(93.8±7.0) mmHg]、HR[A组,(70±10)次/min比(90±10)次/min;B组,(76±8)次/min比(88±8)次/min]均降低(P＜0.05).VAS评分,在T0、T1、活跃期1 h(T2)、第二产程1 h(T3)时,A组分别为(8.6±1.1)、(1.3±0.7)、(1.7±0.6)、(3.5±0.7)分,B组分别为(8.8±1.2)、(3.0±0.3)、(3.0±0.5)、(3.2±0.8)分,两组差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).Ramsay评分在T1～T3时点,B组[(3.0±0.2)、(4.0±0.3)、(4.0±0.1)分]与A组[(2.0±0.3)、(2.0±0.2)、(2.0±0.1)分]比较,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).两组Bromage评分、产程时间、妊娠结局、产后出血及新生儿Apgar评分比较,差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05). 结论 左布比卡因复合Dex用于分娩镇痛安全、有效、舒适.     

Comparative study between dexmedetomidine/nalbuphine and midazolam/nalbuphine in monitored anesthesia care during ear surgery

BackgroundMonitored anesthesia care (MAC) is the practice of administrating local anesthesia in combination with IV sedatives, anxiolytics and/or analgesic drugs during certain surgical procedures. Most of ear surgeries can be done under monitored anesthesia care.MethodologyThis is a randomized, double blind, prospective study and 100 patients undergoing ear surgery under MAC were divided into two groups of 50 patients each. The patients in group (D) received dexmedetomidine 1 μg/kg IV over 10 min followed by 0.7 μg/kg/h + nalbuphine 100 μg/kg IV and in group (M) received midazolam 20 μg/kg IV followed by 20 μg/kg/h + nalbuphine 100 μg/kg over 10 min. Assessment of sedation by Ramsay sedation score, requirement of intraoperative rescue sedation, intraoperative VAS, intraoperative rescue analgesia, intraoperative hemodynamics, intraoperative bleeding, intraoperative complications, postoperative visual analogue score and postoperative rescue analgesia requirement, time to achieve full recovery and satisfaction scores of patients and surgeon were recorded.ResultsGroup (D) showed more sedation by Ramsay sedation score than the midazolam (M) group. Fifty percent in group (M) needed more rescue sedation than 26% in group (D) (p < 0.05). Intraoperative VAS was significantly higher in group (M) than in group (D) that led to the use of more rescue analgesia in 60% of group (M). Intraoperative heart rate and mean blood pressure were significantly lower in group (D) than in group (M) (p < 0.05). There was no statistical difference between the two groups as regards respiratory rate or SpO₂. Intraoperative bleeding is less significantly less in group (D). Intraoperative hypotension was significantly higher in group (D) (30%) than in group (M) (20%). Bradycardia was insignificantly higher in group (D). As regards postoperative VAS, group (D) was significantly lower than group (M). This led to the use of more rescue analgesia in 94% of group (M). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups as regards recovery time. Patient’s satisfaction was significantly higher in group (D) (80%) compared with group (M) (60%) (p >0.05). The same as regards doctor’s satisfaction where satisfaction was significantly higher in group (D) (76%) than in group (M) (54%).ConclusionWe concluded that the combination of dexmedetomidine/nalbuphine is a better alternative to midazolam/nalbuphine in MAC since it provides analgesia, amnesia and sedation with better intraoperative and postoperative patient satisfaction with better surgical field exposure.     

右美托咪定复合左布比卡因用于剖宫产术后硬膜外镇痛的临床研究

目的 探索右美托咪定(dexmedetomidine,Dex)联合低浓度左布比卡因在剖宫产术后硬膜外自控镇痛治疗中的应用可行性及对舒芬太尼消耗量的影响. 方法 90例足月孕单胎择期行剖宫产术的孕妇,ASA分级Ⅰ、Ⅱ级,按随机数字表法分为3组(每组30例):对照组(C组),舒芬太尼1.5 μg/kg+0.1％左布比卡因;Dex 1组(D1组),舒芬太尼1.5μg/kg+0.1％左布比卡因+Dex 0.02 μg·kg-1·h-1;Dex 2组(D2组),舒芬太尼1.5 μ.g/kg+0.1％左布比卡因+Dex 0.05 μg·kg1·h-1,各组药物均用生理盐水稀释至150 ml.孕妇均采用L～L4硬膜外腔联合蛛网膜下腔阻滞麻醉,术毕均快速泵注镇痛液2ml,背景输注速度为2ml/h,患者自控镇痛(patient controlled analgesia,PCA)锁定时间15 min,每次2 ml.记录术前产妇的一般资料,手术与麻醉时间,副作用(皮肤瘙痒、恶心、呕吐)的发生率,舒适度(Bruggrmann comfort scale,BCS)评分以及术后4、8、12、24、48 h的VAS评分和Ramsay评分,统计PCA键有效按压次数和48 h舒芬太尼用量. 结果 术后4、8、12、24、48 h,C组Ramsay评分[(2.0±0.5)、(1.7±0.5)、(1.6±0.6)、(1.6±0.5)、(1.8±0.4)分]明显低于D1组[(2.3±0.5)、(2.3±0.6)、(2.1±0.5)、(2.3±0.5)、(2.2±0.5)分]和D2组[(2.3±0.5)、(2.4±0.5)、(2.3±0.5)、(2.4±0.5)、(2.3±0.5)分](P＜0.05或P＜0.01);D1组[(0.5±0.6)、(0.8±0.9)、(0.9±0.9)、(1.0±0.9)、(1.1±0.8)分]和D2组[(0.4±0.6)、(0.5±0.7)、(0.7±0.7)、(0.8±0.8)、(0.9±0.7)分]VAS评分明显低于C组[(1.3±1.0)、(1.5±1.1)、(1.8±1.0)、(1.9±0.7)、(1.9±0.7)分](P＜0.05或P＜0.01).D2组皮肤瘙痒发生率(3.33％)明显低于C组(26.67％)(P＜0.05).D2组BCS评分[(3.1±0.7)分]显著高于C组[(3.1±0.7)分]与D1组[(1.9±0.7)分](P＜0.05或P＜0.01).C组48 h舒芬太尼消耗量[(1.041±0.025) μg/kg]明显大于D1组[(1.020±0.021)μ.g/kg]和D2组[(1.003±0.019) μg/kg](P＜0.01),且D1组比D2组消耗量大(P＜0.05). 结论 小剂量Dex能明显提高左布比卡因和舒芬太尼剖宫产术后的镇痛效果和安全性,具有良好的应用前景.     

布托啡诺与吗啡用于腹部手术后硬膜外镇痛效果的比较

目的 研究不同剂量布托啡诺用于腹部手术患者术后硬膜外镇痛的效果及副作用,并与吗啡硬膜外镇痛进行比较. 方法 择期腹部手术ASAⅠ～Ⅱ级患者75例,按术后镇痛用药不同随机分为3组(n=25):M组(吗啡12 mg+0.1%罗哌卡因共150ml),B1组(布托啡诺9mg+0.1%罗哌卡因共150 ml),B2组(布托啡诺12mg+0-1%罗哌卡因共150ml).负荷量为0.25%罗哌卡因5 ml加吗啡2 mg或布托啡诺2 mg,持续背景输注剂量均为1-5 ml/h,按压追加药量均为2 ml/次,按压锁定时间20 min.观察记录3组患者术中芬太尼的总药量;术后1、4、8、12、18、24、36、48 h各时间点的疼痛视觉模拟评分(pain visual analogue scores,VAS);术后1、4、8、12 h的警觉镇静评分(observer's assessment ofalertness/sedation scores,OAA/S);术后48 h内按压总次数及总药量;肛门排气时间;术后镇痛副作用(头痛头晕、嗜睡、呼吸抑制、搔痒、恶心、呕吐、腹胀)的发生情况.结果 术后4 h时间点B1组VAS评分为2.8±1.0,高于M组的2.0±0.7及B2组的2.0±0.9(P<0-05),其余时间点3组间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).M组的头痛头晕、恶心、呕吐,腹胀,搔痒发生例数分别为3、11、7、4、5例,而B1组仅有1例头痛头晕,B2组有2例头痛头晕,1例恶心,发生率均低于M组(P<0.05).3组患者术中芬太尼的总药量、48 h内按压总次数及总药量、术后不同时间点OAA/S评分及肛门排气时间的比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05). 结论 每天3 mg～4 mg布托啡诺应用于腹部手术后硬膜外镇痛,镇痛效果确切,且其副作用发生率较吗啡明显降低.     

盐酸帕洛诺司琼预防上腹部手术后硬膜外吗啡镇痛所致的恶心呕吐

目的 观察和评价帕洛诺司琼对上腹部手术后硬膜外吗啡镇痛引起的恶心呕吐的预防效果和安全性.方法 择期行上腹部手术并术后接受硬膜外吗啡镇痛患者60例,随机分为帕洛诺司琼组（P组）和托烷司琼组（T组）.手术结束前30 min,P组患者缓慢静注帕洛诺司琼0.25 mg,T组患者缓慢静注托烷司琼6 mg.观察记录两组患者术后24 h、48 h VAS及Ramsay评分、恶心呕吐的程度,计算恶心呕吐有效控制率.同时记录患者腹胀、头痛、椎体外系症状等不良反应.结果 两组患者术后24 h及48 h的VAS及Ramsay评分差异无统计学意义.P组患者术后24 h的恶心及呕吐有效控制率分别为80.0%和73.3%,T组分别为63.3%和60.0%;P组患者术后48 h的恶心及呕吐有效控制率分别为90.0%和93.3%,T组分别为66.6%和63.3%.两组患者术后24 h恶心、呕吐有效控制率差异无统计学意义.P组患者术后48 h恶心、呕吐有效控制率明显优于T组患者（P 〈 0.05）.帕洛诺司琼的不良反应主要为头痛.结论 腹部手术后24 h内,帕洛诺司琼预防吗啡硬膜外镇痛所致的恶心呕吐的效果与托烷司琼相当,但术后48 h预防恶心呕吐的效果优于托烷司琼,且不良反应发生率低,程度较轻,安全性好.     

Combined spinal-epidural anesthesia in major abdominal surgery in high-risk neonates and infants

BACKGROUND: Combined spinal-epidural anesthesia (CSE-A) is reportedly safe and effective for the pediatric population in infraumbilical surgery. Our main purpose was to describe our experience of this technique in neonates and infants undergoing elective major upper abdominal surgery. METHODS: Spinal anesthesia was performed in 28 neonates and infants with isobaric bupivacaine 0.5%, 1 mg.kg(-1) followed by placement of a caudal epidural catheter to thoracic spinal segments. The catheter tip position was confirmed radiographically. Respiratory and hemodynamic data were collected before and after the CSE-A and throughout the operation, as a measure of anesthetic effectiveness. Complications related to the anesthesia technique were collected as a measure of the anesthetic technique safety. RESULTS: Satisfactory surgical anesthesia was achieved in 24 neonates and infants, four patients were converted to general anesthesia. Respiratory and hemodynamic variables did not change significantly during surgery, compared with baseline values: oxygen saturation (P = 0.07), systolic and diastolic blood pressures (P = 0.143, P = 0.198 respectively), heart rate (P = 0.080) and respiratory rate (P = 0.127). However, twenty infants were fussy during the surgical procedures and were calmed with intravenous midazolam; our patients required oxygen supplementation and transient manual ventilation intraoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: Combined spinal-epidural anesthesia could be considered as an effective anesthetic technique for elective major upper abdominal surgery in awake or sedated neonates and infants, and could be used cautiously by a pediatric anesthesiologist as an alternate to general anesthesia in high-risk neonates and infants undergoing upper gastrointestinal surgery.