布托啡诺在剖宫产术后硬膜外镇痛中最佳剂量的探讨

目的探讨布托啡诺用于剖宫产术后硬膜外镇痛的最佳剂量。方法 60例剖宫产产妇,ASAⅠ-Ⅱ级,随机分为三组,每组20例。分别予0.135%布比卡因＋0.002%布托啡诺（Ⅰ组）、0.135%布比卡因＋0.004%布托啡诺（Ⅱ组）及0.135%布比卡因＋0.006%布托啡诺（Ⅲ组）行硬膜外镇痛。采用负荷量＋持续剂量给药模式,持续剂量背景流速2 ml/h。结果术后8 hⅡ、Ⅲ组VAS均低于Ⅰ组（P〈0.01）,BCS高于Ⅰ组（P〈0.05）,而Ⅱ组的Romesay评分高于Ⅰ、Ⅲ组（P〈0.05）。术后Ⅰ、Ⅱ组各出现呕吐1例（5.0%）,而Ⅲ组发生7例（35.0%）,差异有显著性（P〈0.01）。结论布托啡诺剖宫产术后硬膜外镇痛效果确切,恶心呕吐及瘙痒的发生率低;0.135%布比卡因＋0.004%布托啡诺是较为安全的有效剂量。     

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.     

吗啡和芬太尼用于术后镇痛的比较

目的：比较吗啡、芬在尼用于病人自控硬膜外镇痛（PCEA）的镇痛效果及不良反应。方法：40例择期手术患者，ASAI－Ⅱ级，随机分为两组，每20例。A组选用0．01％吗啡＋0．01％氟哌利多＋0．01％地塞米松＋0．01％布比卡因；B组选用0．0002％芬太尼代替A组配方中的0．01％吗啡。均用PCA泵（100ml），以LCP模式（负荷剂量5ml＋持续剂量2ml/h＋PCA每次0．5ml）进行镇痛。结果：（1）综合镇痛质量，A组与B组无明显差异（P＞0．05）；（2）A组尿潴留、恶心、呕吐、皮肤瘙痒、嗜睡、低血压等发生率较B组高（P＜0．01）。结论：吗啡、芬太尼PCEA用于术后镇痛均可取得满意的效果,但芬太尼较吗啡的不良反应少，更适合术后镇痛。     

多沙普仑减轻布托啡诺术后镇痛期嗜睡的临床研究

目的 观察多沙普仑对布托啡诺术后镇痛期嗜睡和VAS评分的影响.方法 全组均行硬膜外麻醉后,随机分为0.01%布托啡诺和0.1%多沙普仑镇痛泵组(组Ⅰ,n=35),0.01%布托啡诺和0.15%多沙普仑镇痛泵组(组Ⅱ,n=35)和0.01%布托啡诺镇痛泵组(组Ⅲ,n=35).比较术后镇痛效果和副作用.结果 3组均获得了满意的术后镇痛效果.镇静评分(OAA/S,术后8 h～24 h):组Ⅲ>组Ⅰ和组Ⅱ(分别P<0.01).SpO2(负荷剂量后0 min～30 min):组Ⅲ分别小于组Ⅰ和组Ⅱ.VAS评分(术后8h～24 h):组Ⅲ<组Ⅰ和组ⅡP<0.05,但3组VAS均≤3分,且D1/D2值3组互比P>0.05.其他副作用无统计学差异.结论 多沙普仑和布托啡诺合用能有效地减轻或消除布托啡诺术后镇痛期的嗜睡副作用,提高临床用药的安全性.     

硬膜外腔恒速输注低浓度吗啡-布比卡因复合液用于70岁以上老年人术后镇痛

目的：评价硬膜外腔恒速输注低浓度吗啡-布比卡因复合液用于老年病人术后镇痛的效果与安全性。方法：选择600例70-92岁、ASAⅡ-Ⅲ级、胸腹四肢手术病人,采用硬膜外麻醉或硬膜外麻醉复合全身麻醉。术毕先给予硬膜外腔负荷量(0．125％布比卡因5-10ml 吗啡1-2mg),继以2ml／h的速率持续硬膜外腔输注镇痛液(0．125％布比卡因100ml 吗啡3-5mg)。观察镇痛效果及副作用,监测血压、心率、呼吸频率、脉搏氧饱和度。结果：VAS评分镇痛优良率为100％;血压、心率、呼吸频率稳定;在吸氧条件下5pO2在90％以上,恶心、呕吐、瘙瘩发生率均较低。结论：小剂量吗啡复合低浓度布比卡因硬膜外腔持续输注用于老年病人术后镇痛安全有效。     

布托啡诺在术后镇痛的应用

目的观察布托啡诺用于术后镇痛的效果。方法105例硬膜外麻醉术后患者随机均分为芬太尼镇痛组（Ⅰ组）,曲马多镇痛组（Ⅱ组）和布托啡诺镇痛组（Ⅲ组）,比较术后镇痛效果和副作用。结果三组均获得了满意的术后镇痛效果。其中Ⅰ组术后4h VAS和术后24h D1／D2值分别小于Ⅱ组（P〈0．05）。头痛头晕Ⅱ组多于Ⅰ组（P〈0．05）。排尿困难Ⅲ组少于Ⅰ组（P〈0．05）。OAA／S评分Ⅲ组分别大于Ⅰ组和Ⅱ组（P〈0．05或P〈0．01）。结论布托啡诺在下腹部和下肢手术是一种有效术后镇痛药物,副作用较少,但嗜睡副作用应引起高度重视。     

布托啡诺剖宫产术后硬膜外镇痛效果

布托啡诺为阿片受体激动拮抗药,通过对脊髓к受体的激动作用而产生脊髓镇痛,而作为μ受体拮抗药,对μ受体兴奋引起的恶心呕吐有抑制作用。有关布托啡诺硬膜外镇痛国内尚未见报道。本研究旨在观察布托啡诺剖宫产术后硬膜外镇痛效果与副作用,并与吗啡比较,为临床选择提供依据。资     

硬膜外甲磺酸罗比卡因复合吗啡应用于妇科术后镇痛的观察

目的比较硬膜外甲磺酸罗比卡因与盐酸罗比卡因复合吗啡用于妇科术后镇痛的临床效果和安全性。方法40例择期在硬膜外麻醉下行经腹子宫全切或子宫肌瘤摘除手术患者,随机分为两组,观察组(n=40)采用0·238%甲磺酸罗比卡因(含0·002mg/ml吗啡);对照组(n=40)采用0·2%盐酸罗比卡因(含0·002mg/ml吗啡)。观察术后15min、2、4、8、24、48h两组患者的视觉模拟评分(VAS)、镇静评分、下肢运动神经阻滞情况及副作用的发生率。结果在各时点两组患者的VAS、镇静评分、下肢运动神经阻滞情况及副作用的发生率差异均无显著意义。结论硬膜外甲磺酸罗比卡因与盐酸罗比卡因复合吗啡术后镇痛具有相似的临床效果和安全性。     

不同浓度氯普鲁卡因复合吗啡应用于直肠癌术后硬膜外镇痛效果的临床观察

为观察氯普鲁卡因复合吗啡应用于直肠癌术后硬膜外镇痛的临床效果,我们选择120例直肠癌患者,其中行直肠癌根治术（经腹会阴联合直肠癌切除术）52例,直肠癌切除术68例,随机分成A、B、C三组,各40例。A组中,直肠癌根治术16例,直肠癌切除术24例;B组中,直肠癌根治术17例,直肠癌切除术23例;C组中,直肠癌根治术19例,直肠癌切除术21例。术后给予硬膜外持续镇痛。A组用1．0％氯普鲁卡因＋0．1mg／ml吗啡,B组用1．2％氯普鲁卡因＋0．1mg／ml吗啡,C组用1．5％氯普鲁卡因＋0．1mg／ml吗啡。结果显示,A组镇痛效果较差,VAS为28．0±4．7～57．0±6．2,有13例诉求3％氯普鲁卡因5ml或哌替啶100mg肌肉注射;B组镇痛效果较好,VAS为9．5±2．3～13．0±4．4;C组镇痛效果好,VAS为8．7±3．3～11．0±3．5。B,C组均无额外诉求,但B组与C组VAs评分差异无统计学意义,P〉0．05。结果表明,氯普鲁卡因复合吗啡应用于直肠癌术后硬膜外镇痛效果良好,其中以1．2％和1．5％浓度为好。     

酒石酸布托啡诺在隆乳术后镇痛中的应用

目的:观察酒石酸布托啡诺用于隆乳术后镇痛的效果。方法:选择术后短期留院观察,行硅胶假体隆乳手术的患者90例,ASA I～I I级。静脉复合气管插管麻醉手术后,随机将要求镇痛的患者分为芬太尼自控镇痛F组、酒石酸布托啡诺自控镇痛B组,开始自控静脉镇痛;拒绝实施术后镇痛的患者作为对照C组,观察患者术后24h内镇痛评分及不良反应的发生情况。结果:酒石酸布托啡诺自控镇痛B组与芬太尼自控镇痛F组镇痛效果显著。B组患者术后疼痛评分明显低于对照组;不良反应发生率依次为:B组相似文献   

硬膜外分娩镇痛的研究进展

硬膜外分娩镇痛对分娩的影响一直存在争议.新近资料不仅提供了硬膜外分娩镇痛对产程、剖宫产率、阴道器械助产率、及新生儿影响的进展,而且它与持续性枕后位和产妇发烧的关系也受到关注.改进硬膜外分娩镇痛技术的关键是减小对分娩不利影响并保证产妇满意镇痛的重要手段.研究表明采用低浓度局麻药复合阿片类药硬膜外镇痛,设置大容量PCEA和长锁定时间的输注模式对分娩的影响最小.     

腹部手术后镇痛药需求量的影响因素

目的：分析腹部手术后患者自控静脉镇痛用药量的影响因素。方法选取2012年4月至2013年8月全麻下行腹部手术,术后接受48 h自控静脉镇痛的患者。记录患者性别、年龄、身高、体重、体重指数、手术方式、手术部位。术后静脉镇痛期间,记录用药剂量、静止和运动疼痛评分、镇静评分、心率、血压、脉搏氧饱和度以及不良反应。采用多元线性回归分析多个变量与用药量的关系。结果共有2829例（男性1611例,女性1218例）患者纳入分析。性别、年龄、体重和手术部位显著影响术后镇痛用药量。其中,体重影响最大且与术后镇痛用药量正相关,年龄与术后镇痛用药量负相关,女性用药量少于男性。身高、体重指数和手术方式不是术后镇痛用药量的决定因素。结论腹部手术患者实施术后自控静脉镇痛时要考虑体重、年龄、性别以及手术部位的影响,为患者制定专科化和个体化的镇痛方案。     

开胸手术后伤口持续输注局麻药和PCIA的镇痛效果

目的比较开胸手术后伤口持续输注局麻药和PCIA的镇痛效果。方法择期开胸非心脏手术患者60例,ASAⅠ或Ⅱ级,随机均分为两组:伤口持续输注局麻药镇痛组(A组)和PCIA组(B组)。A组患者缝皮前在切口皮下处放置镇痛泵导管,继之通过导管快速给予0.5%罗哌卡因5ml,术毕48h内以2ml/h持续输注0.5%罗哌卡因。B组患者手术结束前30min缓慢静注舒芬太尼3μg,术毕接PCA泵以2ml/h(3μg/kg舒芬太尼配置成100ml)持续泵注。分别记录患者术后2、8、12、24、36、48h安静和活动时VAS评分、Ramsay镇静评分、术后需哌替啶镇痛例数、不良反应、住院时间及总体满意率等。结果两组患者术后不同时点安静时和活动时VAS评分差异无统计学意义。与A组比较,术后不同时点A组Ramsay镇静评分明显升高(P0.05)。术后A组无一例患者发生不良反应,明显低于B组嗜睡26例(87%)、头晕11例(37%)(P0.05)、呼吸抑制2例(6%)。A组满意率29例(97%),B组25例(83%),患者术后需哌替啶镇痛A组8例(26.7%),B组7例(23.3%),两组差异均无统计学意义。结论伤口持续输注局麻药镇痛和PCIA具有同样的镇痛效果,但伤口持续输注局麻药镇痛不良反应发生率低。     

Analgesia combinada epidural-intradural para el trabajo de parto: una revisión bibliográfica sistemática cuantitativa (metaanálisis)

ObjectiveTo perform a meta-analysis on the use of combined epidural-intrathecal analgesia during labor, including intrathecal fentanyl and/or morphine compared to usual epidural techniques.Material and methodA literature search was made looking for randomized clinical trials in MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library. The size of the effect for quantitative variables was analyzed by weighted mean difference; for qualitative variables, by odds ratio. Variables analyzed were: labor duration, type of delivery (spontaneous, instrumental and caesarean section), motor blockade, pain, and satisfaction. The analysis used in most cases was a random effects model.ResultsA total of 21 trials, which included 3.646 patients, were selected out of the 38 initially found. The type of delivery variable with its 3 subgroups was the only one to show uniformity (p > Q 0.1; I² < 50%). There were no differences in the variables analyzed except pain, which was advantageous for the group with intrathecal fentanyl or morphine by 0.55 points out of 10.ConclusionCombined analgesia including intrathecal fentanyl-morphine does not offer significant advantages compared to the standard epidural.     

Postoperative analgesia after major abdominal surgery: Fentanyl–bupivacaine patient controlled epidural analgesia versus fentanyl patient controlled intravenous analgesia

BackgroundMajor abdominal surgeries induce neurohumoral changes responsible for postoperative pain, various organ dysfunctions and prolonged hospitalization. Inadequate pain control is harmful and costly to patients thus an appropriate pain therapy to those patients must be applicated.MethodsOne hundred patients (ASA I or II) of either sex aged from 20 to 60 years were scheduled for elective major abdominal surgery. Patients were allocated randomly into two groups (fifty patients each) to receive: patient-controlled epidural analgesia with bupivacaine 0.125% and fentanyl (PCEA group), or patient controlled intravenous analgesia with fentanyl (PCIA group). Postoperative pain was assessed over 24 h using Numerical Pain Rating scale (NPRS). The frequency of rescue analgesia, sedation score and overall patient satisfaction were recorded. Any concomitant events like nausea; vomiting, shivering, pruritus or respiratory complications were recorded postoperatively.ResultsThere was a significant less pain in PCEA group at 2, 8 and 12 h. postoperative but PCIA group had less pain at immediate postoperative time. As regard sedation scale, patients of the PCEA group were significantly less sedated than PCIA group at immediate postoperative only. Overall patient satisfaction was significantly more in PCEA group.ConclusionThis study concluded that both PCEA and PCIA were effective in pain relief after major abdominal surgery but PCEA was much better in pain relief, less sedating effect and overall patient satisfaction.     

Comparison of patient-controlled epidural analgesia with and without night-time infusion following gastrectomy

To assess the analgesic efficacy and side effects of a supplementalnight-time infusion in patient-controlled epidural analgesia(PCEA) after gastrectomy, we carried out a randomized, double-blindstudy. The number of requests were lower (P<0.005) in thePCEA plus night-time infusion group than in the PCEA alone groupduring the postoperative nights. Patients who had a PCEA plusnight-time continuous infusion, slept with fewer interruptionsthan those who had only the PCEA. VAS pain scores on coughingwere significantly lower (P<0.05) in the PCEA plus infusiongroup than in the PCEA alone group during the night followingpostoperative day 1. In conclusion, a night-time infusion inPCEA following gastrectomy decreases the incidence of postoperativepain, provides a better sleep pattern, and reduces the degreeof the pain associated with coughing during the night. Br J Anaesth 2001; 87: 633–5     

瑞芬太尼静脉自控镇痛与腰-硬联合镇痛用于分娩镇痛的比较

目的比较瑞芬太尼静脉自控镇痛(PCIA)与罗哌卡因复合芬太尼腰-硬联合自控镇痛(CSEA)在分娩镇痛中的安全性和有效性。方法选择单胎足月初产妇60例,年龄22～32岁,身高156～170cm,体重60～75kg,ASAⅠ级,依据产妇自愿原则分为两组:瑞芬太尼静脉自控镇痛组(R组)和罗哌卡因复合芬太尼腰-硬联合自控镇痛组(E组),每组30例。R组瑞芬太尼背景剂量0.02μg·kg~(-1)·min~(-1),单次剂量10～20μg,锁定时间3min;E组蛛网膜下腔注射罗哌卡因2.5～3mg,然后连接硬膜外镇痛泵(0.1%罗哌卡因75ml+芬太尼2μg/ml),设置负荷剂量10ml,背景剂量8～10ml/h,单次剂量为5ml,锁定时间15min。记录产妇镇痛前、镇痛后30min的SBP、HR、SpO2;记录镇痛前、镇痛后30min和宫口开全时VAS疼痛评分、改良Bromage评分、Ramsay镇静评分;记录第一产程和第二产程时间、胎心率、新生儿Apgar评分及脐动脉血气;分析不良反应情况、产妇满意度。结果 R组VAS疼痛评分及Ramsay镇静评分明显高于E组(P0.05);R组头晕发生率明显高于E组(P0.05);两组产程时间、Bromage评分、恶心呕吐、嗜睡、皮肤瘙痒、尿潴留等不良反应情况、产妇满意度、胎心率、脐动脉血气分析及新生儿Apgar评分差异无统计学意义。结论与罗哌卡因复合芬太尼腰-硬联合自控镇痛比较,采用瑞芬太尼静脉自控镇痛有较好的镇痛效果。尽管产妇镇静深度更高,头晕发生率较多,但是对母婴无明显不良反应,可作为椎管内分娩镇痛的补充方法。     

个体化镇痛时机对硬膜外分娩镇痛效果的影响

目的观察提前预置硬膜外导管,根据产妇需要开始镇痛的个体化镇痛模式对分娩镇痛效果的影响。方法这是一项标签开放的随机对照研究。选择单胎、足月、头位妊娠初产妇,年龄18~35岁,随机分为两组。个体化组产妇在产程开始(出现规律宫缩、宫颈接近消失)行硬膜外穿刺置管,当产妇有镇痛需求且NRS评分≥5分时给予硬膜外镇痛;对照组在宫口开大1 cm时行硬膜外镇痛。主要研究终点是分娩过程最严重疼痛NRS评分及分娩时NRS评分≥7分产妇比例。结果194例产妇完成研究,分娩过程中两组最严重疼痛程度NRS评分[个体化组9(8~10)分vs对照组9(8~10)分,P=0.201]及分娩时NRS评分≥7分产妇比例[个体化组94例(96.9%)vs对照组89例(91.8%),P=0.121]差异均无统计学意义。两组不良事件发生率差异无统计学意义。结论对于单胎、足月、头位且产科评估可试行阴道分娩的产妇,根据产妇需求实施硬膜外分娩镇痛的效果与传统的镇痛时机(宫口开放1 cm)相当。     

Comparison of patient-controlled analgesia with and without a background infusion after appendicectomy in children

BACKGROUND: There have been many studies using patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) and opioids for postoperative analgesia in children. In this study, we investigated the efficacy, usefulness and analgesic consumption of two different PCA programmes [bolus dose alone (BD) or bolus dose with background infusion (BD + BI)] to evaluate postoperative analgesia for children after emergency appendicectomy. METHODS: Forty children, aged between 6 and 15 years and ASA class I or II, undergoing emergency appendicectomy were randomly allocated into two groups. The children were given a loading dose of pethidine 0.3 mg.kg-1 and 150 micro g.kg-1 bolus intravenously in group BD (n = 20) and pethidine 0.3 mg.kg-1 loading dose, 75 micro g.kg-1 bolus and 15 micro g.kg-1.h-1 background infusion in group BD + BI (n = 20). The lockout interval was 20 min in both groups. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in pain, sedation and nausea scores during the 24-h postoperative period between the groups (P > 0.05). Pethidine consumption was significantly lower in group BD + BI than that in group BD for the first 24-h period (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that both these PCA programmes were effective and reliable for postoperative pain relief in children. We believe that giving information about PCA to the children and their parents is useful during the preoperative period. However, the background infusion with lower bolus dose in PCA did not increase pethidine consumption.     

Labour analgesia by single shot spinal for any parturient?—A retrospective one-year single centre audit

Background

Single shot spinal (SSS) provides effective analgesia for multiparous parturients during advanced labour. Its utility in early labour or primiparous parturients may be limited by the insufficient duration of action. Regardless, SSS may offer a reasonable labour analgesia option in certain clinical scenarios. In this retrospective study, we analyse the failure rate of SSS analgesia by assessing pain after the SSS and by determining the need for additional analgesic interventions in primiparous or early-stage multiparous parturients compared to multiparous parturients in advanced labour (cervix ≥6 cm).

Methods

Following institutional ethical board approval, the patient files of all parturients receiving SSS analgesia during a 12-month period in a single centre were analysed for any recorded notes regarding recurrent pain or subsequent analgesia interventions (a new SSS, epidural, pudendal or paracervical bloc) as a marker for insufficient analgesia.

Results

A total of 88 primiparous and 447 multiparous parturients (cervix <6 cm: N = 131; cervix ≥6 cm: N = 316) received SSS analgesia. The odds ratio for the insufficient duration of analgesia was 1.94 (1.08–3.48) in primiparous and 2.08 (1.25–3.46) in early-stage multiparous parturients compared to advanced multiparous labour (p < .01). Primiparous and early-stage multiparous parturients were also 2.20 (1.15–4.20) and 2.61 (1.50–4.55) times more likely, respectively, to receive new peripheral and/or neuraxial analgesic interventions during delivery (p < .01).

Conclusions

SSS appears to provide adequate labour analgesia for the majority of parturients in whom it is used, including nulliparous and early-stage multiparous parturients. It remains a reasonable option in certain clinical scenarios, including resource-limited settings where epidural analgesia is unavailable.