曲马多预镇痛对子宫切除术后自控镇痛效果的影响

目的　研究预先经静脉和硬膜外注射曲马多对妇科病人术后硬膜外自控镇痛 (PCEA)效果的影响。方法　择期硬膜外麻醉下经腹子宫肌瘤摘除术病人 10 0例 ,ASAⅠ～Ⅱ级 ,随机分为C、E1、E2 、V1、V2 组 ,每组 2 0例。C组为对照组 ,E1、E2 组病人分别于切皮前、后 10min硬膜外腔注射曲马多 1mg/kg(2ml) ,V1、V2 组病人分别于切皮前、后 10min ,静脉注射曲马多 1mg/kg(2ml)。术中局麻药均选用 2 %利多卡因。手术结束时采用LCP模式病人自控镇痛 :负荷量 6ml(1mg/kg曲马多 +4mg恩丹西酮 ) +背景输注量 10 0ml(0 5 %曲马多 +0 15 %布比卡因 +0 0 0 8%恩丹西酮 ) +PCA量 ,流速 2ml/h ,PCA量 2ml,锁定时间 15min。分别记录开启泵 (VAS =0 )后 4、8、12、36、72h的VAS评分、Ramsay镇静评分 ,记录总PCA需要量、总舒适评分及并发症。 结果　E1、V1组 8、12、36、72h的VAS评分均显著小于C、E2 、V2 组 (P <0 0 5 ) ,且 72hE1、V1组的VAS评分较C组差异更显著 (P <0 0 1)。E1、V1组优良 (0 +I)舒适评分显著高于E2 、V2 组 (P <0 0 5 )。E1、V1组的PCA需要量显著小于C、E2 、V2 组 (P <0 0 5 )。各组均无明显呼吸抑制发生 ,组间Ramsay镇静评分和恶心呕吐发生率的差异无显著性。结论　手术切皮前 10min预先静脉或硬膜     

东莨菪碱-曲马多-芬太尼复合液用于剖宫产术后镇痛

目的观察静脉东莨菪碱配伍曲马多与芬太尼在剖宫产术后镇痛的临床效果及不良反应。方法ASAⅠ~Ⅱ级行剖宫产术病人60例,随机分为东莨菪碱组(S组)和氟哌利多组(D组),每组30例。S组,东莨菪碱0·3mg 曲马多500mg 芬太尼0·5mg;D组,氟哌利多2·5mg 曲马多500mg 芬太尼0·5mg。均以生理盐水配置100ml药袋,静脉给予负荷剂量4ml后连接镇痛泵进行病人自控镇痛(PCA)。术后24、48h行视觉模拟评分(VAS)和镇静评分,并对用药总量、PCA量及不良反应发生情况进行观察比较。结果两组VAS差异无显著意义。D组术后24h用药总量、PCA量和镇静评分均大于术后48h,D组术后24h镇静评分比S组高(P<0·05),不良反应发生率D组明显高于S组。结论东莨菪碱配伍曲马多及芬太尼应用于剖宫产术后镇痛安全有效,不良反应发生率明显低于氟哌利多。     

老年病人开胸术后PCEA与PCIA的效果及对呼吸功能的影响

目的比较老年病人食管癌开胸术后布比卡因、芬太尼硬膜外自控镇痛(PCEA)与芬太尼静脉自控镇痛(PCIA)临床效果及对呼吸功能的影响。方法60例65岁以上ASAⅠ～Ⅱ级择期开胸手术的食管癌病人随机分为两组,每组30例,PCEA组选用0.2%布比卡因加0.0002%芬太尼硬膜外镇痛,PCIA组选用0.001%芬太尼加0.005%氟哌利多静脉镇痛。观察镇痛效果、镇静程度、舒适评分、不良反应,监测RR、SpO2、MAP、HR。并于术前和术后24h测定呼吸功能的变化。结果两组病人视觉模拟评分(VAS)评分均较低,PCIA组高于PCEA组但无明显差异(P>0.05),PCIA组Ramesay法(RSS)镇静评分显著高于PCEA组(P<0.05),布氏评分法(BCS)舒适评分明显低于PCEA组(P<0.05),恶心、呕吐、皮肤瘙痒等的发生率显著高于PCEA组(P<0.05),两组病人对术后镇痛总体满意度评估优秀者PCEA组明显多于PCIA组(P<0.05);两组术后呼吸频率和SpO2均在正常范围,无呼吸抑制发生,PCEA组呼吸功能改善明显优于PCIA组(P<0.05)。结论对于食管癌开胸手术的老年病人,硬膜外布比卡因与静脉芬太尼自控镇痛均安全可行,镇痛效果满意,改善了呼吸功能,综合总体镇痛质量,PCEA组优于PCIA组,但PCEA镇痛需加强硬膜外导管的管理。     

曲马多术后镇痛对妇科肿瘤病人T淋巴细胞亚群、NK细胞的影响

目的 比较曲马多用于妇科肿瘤病人术后静脉自控镇痛(PCIA)与硬膜外自控镇痛(PCEA)对T淋巴细胞亚群、NK细胞的影响。方法 39例妇科肿瘤病人,随机分为两组,Ⅰ组(n=21)为静脉自控镇痛组,E组(n=18)为硬膜外自控镇痛组。两组均用硬膜外麻醉。Ⅰ组曲马多800mg、氟哌啶醇5mg、生理盐水83 ml。E组曲马多400 mg、氟哌啶醇5 mg、生理盐水91 ml。负荷剂量:术毕前15 minⅠ组曲马多100 mg静脉缓注,E组硬膜外给药。PCA泵容量100 ml,背景输注速率2ml/h,单次泵药剂量0.5 ml,锁定时间15 min。术后1、2 d评定镇痛效果(VAS),并于术前30min、术后1、2 d抽取肘静脉血液1.5 ml,采用流式细胞仪检测T细胞亚群(CD3+、CD4+、CD8+)、NK细胞的百分率。结果 两组镇痛差异无显著性(P>0.05)。两组间各时点各免疫指标的差异均无显著性(P>0.05)。E组术后1、2 d NK细胞显著低于术前(P<0.05),Ⅰ组术后2 d NK细胞下降(P<0.05)。两组T细胞亚群指标与术前相比差异无显著性(P>0.05)。结论 曲马多PCIA与PCEA用于妇科肿瘤病人术后镇痛对T淋巴细胞亚群、NK细胞的影响相同。     

氯诺昔康对胃癌患者术后曲马多镇痛的影响

目的　评价氯诺昔康对胃癌患者术后自控静脉镇痛 (PCIA)曲马多用量的影响。方法36例ASAⅠ～Ⅱ级择期胃癌根治术的患者 ,随机分为观察组和对照组。观察组在麻醉前、关腹时分别静注氯诺昔康 8mg ;术后第 1天分两次各静注氯诺昔康 8mg。两组均以佳士比 930 0型电子镇痛泵行曲马多PCIA。镇痛配方为曲马多 1 0mg/kg ,用生理盐水稀释至 1 0 0ml,负荷剂量曲马多 1mg/kg、恩丹西酮 4mg。背景输注 0 5ml/h ,PCA每次 1ml,锁定时间 6min。镇痛期间定时行视觉模拟镇痛评分 (VAS)和舒适度评分 (BCS)。结果　两组具有相同的镇痛效果 ,VAS、BCS均无统计学差异(P >0 0 5 ) ;但观察组 4 8h内曲马多用药量为 (34 2 5± 3 4 1 )ml,明显少于对照组 (4 8 0 8± 3 1 2 )ml(P <0 0 1 )。结论　氯诺昔康明显减少PCIA期曲马多的用药量及其不良反应 ,可作为多模式镇痛药物的选择     

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。     

术后不同镇痛方式对老年患者应激反应和凝血功能的影响

目的 观察两种镇痛方式:硬膜外自控镇痛(PCEA)与静脉自控镇痛(PCIA)对老年患者下肢手术后应激反廊及凝血功能的影响.方法 择期行下肢骨科矫形手术的老年患者40例,ASAⅡ～Ⅲ级,随机分为硬膜外自榨镇痛组(PCEA组)与静脉自控镇痛组(PCIA组),每组20例.所有患者均施行腰麻硬膜外联合麻醉.术后PCEA组自硬膜外腔导管给予硬膜外自控镇痛,PCEA药物配制:罗哌卡因225 mg+吗啡8 mg+氟哌利多5 mg加生理盐水配成100 ml混合液,首次负荷苗吗啡2 mg,背景量2.0 ml/h,PCA量1.5 mL/次,间隔时间15 min;PCIA组给予静脉自控镇痛,PCIA药物配制:芬太尼0.2 mg+曲马多1g+氟哌利多5 mg加生理盐水配成100 ml混合液,首次负荷量为上述混合液10 ml静注,背景量2.0ml/h,PCA 量1.5 ml/次,间隔时间15 min.分别于麻醉前(T0)、术毕(T1)、术后24 h(T2)、术后48 h(T3)各时间点静脉采血检测血浆皮质醇(COR)、血糖(BS)和凝血功能:血浆凝血酶原时间(PT),活化部分凝血活酶时间(AFIT),凝血酶时间(TT)及血浆纤维蛋白原(Fg).于手术后12、24、48 h对两组患者进行视觉模拟疼痛评分(VAS).结果 术后12 h及24 h PCEA组VAS低于PCIA组(P均＜0.05).两组患者术毕到术后48 h(TI到T3)COR及BS与术前(TO)时比较降低(P＜0.05或0.01);而组间比较,T2和T3时PCEA组COR及BS均低于PCIA组(P均＜0.05).凝血功能指标PT、APTT、TT自T1到T3与T0比较,两组均延长(P＜0.05或0.01),而组问比较,T1和T3时两组间差异无统计学意义,而T2时上述三项指标PCEA组较PCIA组延长(P＜0.05).PCEA组纤维蛋白原(Fg)T1至T3较T0时降低(P＜0.05或0.01),而PCIA组T1到T3 Fg较T0时虽然有所降低,但差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05);两组间比较,T1和T3时组间差异无统计学意义,仅1、2时PCEA组低于PCIA组(P＜0.05).结论 PCEA和PCIA均能提供有效的术后镇痛,并减轻手术后应激反应和改善凝血功能,但PCEA优于PCIA.     

不同镇痛方法用于腹部手术后留置胃管病人的比较

目的将病人自控静脉镇痛(PCIA)和自控硬膜外镇痛(PCEA)分别用于腹部手术术后保留胃管病人,观察镇痛和镇静效果及对胃管的耐受性。方法择期行腹部手术术后保留胃管病人90例,随机分为对照组、PCEA组和PCIA组,每组30例。分别记录术后8、24、48h视觉模拟评分(VAS)、镇静评分(RSS)、留置胃管舒适度评分(GTCS)。结果VAS评分在同一时间,PCIA组与PCEA组均小于对照组(P<0.01)。Ramsay镇静评分在同一时间,PCIA组显著大于其他两组(P<0.01)。GTCS评分在同一时间,除术后8h,PCIA组显著小于其他两组(P<0.01)。结论对于留置胃管的术后病人PCIA优于PCEA。     

氯胺酮复合曲马多病人自控静脉镇痛用于肝功能不全患者术后镇痛

目的　研究小剂量氯胺酮复合曲马多应用于肝功能不全患者术后病人自控静脉镇痛(PCIA)的可行性和安全性。方法 4 0例肝炎后肝硬化合并脾功能亢进需行脾切除术的患者 ,ASAⅡ～Ⅲ级 ,随机等分为T组 (曲马多 15 0 0mg、恩丹西酮 8mg加生理盐水至 15 0ml)、TK组 (曲马多12 0 0mg、氯胺酮 30 0mg、恩丹西酮 8mg加生理盐水至 15 0ml)。两组持续输注速度 0 0 3ml·kg 1·h 1,首剂为 0 1ml/kg ,单次PCA给药剂量 2ml,锁定时间 15min。记录术后第 2、4、8、16、2 4、36、4 8、72h的VAS评分、PCIA用药量、PCA总按压次数 /有效按压次数 (D/D)、呼吸和循环的状况以及不良反应的发生情况。结果　两组患者一般情况相同 ,术后第 3天的肝功能与术前相比无显著差异 (P >0 0 5 )。两组患者呼吸通畅 ,SpO2 均在 96 %以上。在术后 36h内TK组的VAS评分、用药量、D/D明显低于T组 (P <0 0 1) ,36h以后无显著差异 (P >0 0 5 ) ;两组患者的并发症发生率无显著差异 (P >0 0 5 )。结论　小剂量氯胺酮复合曲马多可以改善镇痛效果 ,明显减少曲马多的用量 ,可以安全有效地应用于肝功能不全的患者术后静脉镇痛     

曲马多复合芬太尼在口腔颌面部手术术后镇痛中的平衡应用

目的　观察静脉曲马多与芬太尼在口腔颌面部手术后镇痛的临床效果及不良反应。方法　ASAⅠ～Ⅱ级 6 0例择期行口腔颌面部手术病人 ,随机分为两组 ,曲马多组 (T组 )和芬太尼组(F组 ) ,每组 30例。T组 :曲马多 4 0 0mg+芬太尼 0 4mg +氟哌利多 2 5mg;F组 :芬太尼 2 0mg +氟哌利多 2 5mg ,均以生理盐水配置 10 0ml药袋 ,给予负荷剂量 4ml后连接ACEMedical镇痛泵进行自控镇痛 (PCA)。术后行 2、8、2 0、4 4hVAS评分 ,并对有效按压次数、用药量及不良反应发生情况进行了观察比较。结果　两组VAS评分、有效按压次数、用药量均无显著差异 (P >0 0 5 ) ,不良反应发生率F组明显高于T组。结论　曲马多与芬太尼联合应用于口腔颌面部手术的术后镇痛与芬太尼单独应用效果相当 ,但不良反应发生率明显低于后者 ,是一种更安全、有效的平衡镇痛方法     

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 intravenous or epidural patient-controlled analgesia in the elderly after major abdominal surgery

BACKGROUND: Patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with intravenous morphine and patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA), using an opioid either alone or in combination with a local anesthetic, are two major advances in the management of pain after major surgery. However, these techniques have been evaluated poorly in elderly people. This prospective, randomized study compared the effectiveness on postoperative pain and safety of PCEA and PCA after major abdominal surgery in the elderly patient. METHODS: Seventy patients older than 70 yr of age and undergoing major abdominal surgery were assigned randomly to receive either combined epidural analgesia and general anesthesia followed by postoperative PCEA, using a mixture of 0.125% bupivacaine and sufentanil (PCEA group), or general anesthesia followed by PCA with intravenous morphine (PCA group). Pain intensity was tested three times daily using a visual analog scale. Postoperative evaluation included mental status, cardiorespiratory and gastrointestinal functions, and patient satisfaction scores. RESULTS: Pain relief was better at rest (P = 0.001) and after coughing (P = 0.002) in the PCEA group during the 5 postoperative days. Satisfaction scores were better in the PCEA group. Although incidence of delirium was comparable in the PCA and PCEA groups (24% vs. 26%, respectively), mental status was improved on the fourth and fifth postoperative days in the PCEA group. The PCEA group recovered bowel function more quickly than did the PCA group. Cardiopulmonary complications were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSION: After major abdominal surgery in the elderly patient, patient-controlled analgesia, regardless of the route (epidural or parenteral), is effective. The epidural route using local anesthetics and an opioid provides better pain relief and improves mental status and bowel activity.     

Safety and efficacy of patient controlled epidural analgesia following pediatric spinal surgery

BACKGROUND: Patient controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) is uncommon in pediatric anesthesia. Because PCEA offers superior pain control compared with continuous epidural infusions in adults, we prospectively evaluated the analgesia efficacy and safety of PCEA in children and adolescents following extensive spinal surgery. METHODS: Following ethics committee approval, 100 consecutive children [age median (range) 14 (6-19) years] undergoing spinal surgery were studied until the seventh postoperative day, and 98 children received a PCEA. One or two epidural catheters were positioned under direct vision by the surgeon based on the number of vertebral segments operated upon. The epidural solution consisted of bupivacaine 0.0625%, fentanyl 1 microg.ml(-1) and clonidine 0.6 microg.ml(-1), delivered at a basal rate of 0.2 ml.kg(-1).h(-1) and a PCEA dose of 0.1 ml.kg(-1).h(-1)(max. 2 h(-1)). On the fourth postoperative day, PCEA was stopped and analgesia was continued with patient controlled analgesia (PCA) with morphine. RESULTS: During the PCEA regimen, the maximal scores of the revized facial scale were below 4 at rest with a very high satisfaction rate (>90%). Pain scores were higher during mobilization on the first postoperative day and when PCEA was switched to PCA. The overall incidence of adverse events was low and consisted primarily of technical problems and postoperative nausea and vomiting. Only two children experienced a complication requiring the discontinuation of the PCEA but there were no consequent adverse sequelae. CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrates that PCEA provides excellent pain relief following extensive spinal surgery and is associated with a low incidence of adverse events. The use of PCEA should be encouraged in children and adolescents following extensive spinal surgery.     

Patient-controlled epidural analgesia combined with patient-controlled intravenous analgesia for postoperative analgesia after Miles' operation for rectal cancer

A 69-year-old woman (156 cm, 53 kg) underwent a Miles' operation, total hysterectomy, resection of vagina, and thigh flap to vulva for rectal cancer. Before general anesthesia, an epidural catheter was inserted at T11-12 interspace, and 1.5% mepivacaine 7ml was administered. Sensory block level spread from T4 to L1. Anesthesia was induced with propofol and maintained with sevoflurane in air oxygen mixture. Operation was performed uneventfully. After the operation, postoperative analgesia was achieved with patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA). The epidural solution of 0.06% ropivacaine with 4 microg x ml(-1) fentanyl and 20 microg x ml(-1) was connected to a PCA pump (i-Fuser, JMS, Japan) that was programmed as an 8 ml initial bolus, 4 ml x hr(-1) basal infusion, 2 ml bolus dose, and 10-min lockout interval. Although abdominal pain was well controlled by PCEA, intractable pain in the pelvic nerve region existed. Patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (IV-PCA) with fentanyl, ketamine, and lidocaine was added to PCEA. Then excellent pain relief was obtained without any side effects such as nausea, vomiting, drowsiness, and respiratory depression. It could be useful to use IV-PCA together with PCEA when wide spread postoperative analgesia is necessary.     

Comparison of Intravenous or Epidural Patient-controlled Analgesia in the Elderly after Major Abdominal Surgery

Background: Patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with intravenous morphine and patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA), using an opioid either alone or in combination with a local anesthetic, are two major advances in the management of pain after major surgery. However, these techniques have been evaluated poorly in elderly people. This prospective, randomized study compared the effectiveness on postoperative pain and safety of PCEA and PCA after major abdominal surgery in the elderly patient.

Methods: Seventy patients older than 70 yr of age and undergoing major abdominal surgery were assigned randomly to receive either combined epidural analgesia and general anesthesia followed by postoperative PCEA, using a mixture of 0.125% bupivacaine and sufentanil (PCEA group), or general anesthesia followed by PCA with intravenous morphine (PCA group). Pain intensity was tested three times daily using a visual analog scale. Postoperative evaluation included mental status, cardiorespiratory and gastrointestinal functions, and patient satisfaction scores.

Results: Pain relief was better at rest (P = 0.001) and after coughing (P = 0.002) in the PCEA group during the 5 postoperative days. Satisfaction scores were better in the PCEA group. Although incidence of delirium was comparable in the PCA and PCEA groups (24%vs. 26%, respectively), mental status was improved on the fourth and fifth postoperative days in the PCEA group. The PCEA group recovered bowel function more quickly than did the PCA group. Cardiopulmonary complications were similar in the two groups.     

老年患者腹腔镜直肠癌术后硬膜外麻醉与静脉自控镇痛的效果及对血气的影响

目的：观察老年患者腹腔镜直肠癌术后甲磺酸罗哌卡因、芬太尼硬膜外自控镇痛（patient controlled epidural analgesia,PCEA）与芬太尼、氟哌利多静脉自控镇痛（patient controlled intravenous analgesia,PCIA）的临床效果及对血气的影响。方法：随机将52例65岁以上ASAⅠ或Ⅱ级择期直肠癌根治术患者分成两组,每组26例,PCEA选用0．238％甲磺酸罗哌卡因加0．0002％芬太尼硬膜外镇痛,PCIA组选用0．001％芬太尼加0．005％氟哌利多静脉镇痛。观察镇痛效果、镇静程度、舒适评分、不良反应,持续监测平均动脉压（MAP）、心率（HR）、脉搏氧饱和度（SpO2）和呼气末二氧化碳分压（PETCO2）,分别于麻醉前,术后4、12、24h在患者不吸氧或停吸氧0．5h的情况下抽取动脉血,监测pH、PaCO2,并计算动脉血与呼气末CO2梯度（Pa-PETCO2）的变化。结果：两组患者视觉模拟评分（visual analoguescale,VAS）均较低,PCIA组高于PCEA组,但无明显差异（P〉0．05）,PCIA组Ramesay法（RSS）镇静评分显著高于PCEA（P〈0．05）布氏评分法（BCS）,舒适评分明显低于PCEA组（P〈0．05）,恶心、呕吐、皮肤搔痒等的发生率显著高于PCEA组（P〈0．05）,评估两组患者术后镇痛总体满意度,优秀者PCEA组明显多于PCIA组（P〈0．05）;术后较术前pH降低,PaCO2、PETCO2、Pa-PETCO2升高（P〈0．05）,术后各时点上述指标无显著差异（P〉0．05）。结论：腹腔镜直肠癌手术后的老年患者,甲磺酸罗哌卡因硬膜外自控镇痛与芬太尼静脉自控镇痛均安全可行,镇痛效果满意,术后PaCO2、PETCO2、上升,pH下降,但不呈进行性的变化。综合总体镇痛质量,PCEA组优于PCIA组,但PCEA组镇痛需加强硬膜外导管的管理。     

术中负荷剂量曲马多对术后吗啡PCA效果的影响

目的　研究术中负荷剂量曲马多的使用对术后吗啡病人自控镇痛 (PCA)效果的影响。方法　 6 0例腹部手术患者 ,采用随机、双盲、对照试验的方法于手术结束前静脉给予生理盐水 (对照组 )、1mg/kg曲马多或 2mg/kg曲马多。术后使用吗啡静脉PCA进行镇痛。观察术后镇痛效果及不良反应。结果　曲马多组与对照组比较 ,术后清醒时间、拔管时间、术后呼吸次数和血氧饱和度均无显著差异。 2mg/kg曲马多组在给药后 1小时和 8小时VAS评分分别为 (1 33± 1 4 6 )分和 (1 5 4±1 6 5 )分 ,对照组分别为 (2 78± 1 87)分和 (2 6 1± 2 0 6 )分 (P <0 0 1,P <0 0 5 )。结果还显示 ,术毕给予 2mg/kg曲马多可明显减少术后PCA的吗啡用量及补救吗啡用量。 结论　术中使用 2mg/kg负荷剂量的曲马多可有效改善术后吗啡PCA的镇痛效果 ,并可减少PCA吗啡和补救吗啡用量。同时 ,曲马多的使用对术毕的清醒时间和呼吸恢复没有明显影响     

Comparison of intravenous patient-controlled analgesia with tramadol versus morphine after microvascular breast reconstruction

Tramadol is a weak centrally acting analgesic and it might provide efficacious postoperative pain relief with minimal sedative effects in the use of intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA). Sixty women scheduled to undergo microvascular breast reconstruction under standard general anaesthesia were enrolled in a study on the performance of patient-controlled analgesia with tramadol or morphine with special emphasis on drug- and technique-related side-effects. Seven patients were re-operated within the same day, leaving 25 patients in the tramadol group and 28 in the morphine group for comparison. When postoperative pain occurred, loading doses of either 10 mg tramadol or 1 mg morphine intravenous increments were administered in a double-blind fashion until the pain control was judged to be satisfactory by the patient. After that the patients received tramadol or morphine by a PCA apparatus (lockout 5 min, tramadol 450 microg kg-1, morphine 45 microg kg-1 bolus). In addition, all patients received 500 mg paracetamol rectally, three times a day. The potency ratio of tramadol to morphine was found to be between 8.5 : 1 (loading) and 11 : 1 (PCA). There was neither a significant difference between the groups in the overall satisfaction of the analgesic medication nor in the visual analogue and verbal rate scales for pain. Women in the tramadol group had more nausea and vomiting during the administration of loading doses (P < 0.05) and more patients in the tramadol group (7) than in the morphine group (3) (NS) wanted to discontinue the PCA therapy before the end of the study due to nausea. Sedation or blurred vision prevented the performance of the psychomotor tests in 22 and 32% of the tramadol and morphine patients, respectively. The remaining patients performed similarly in the Digit Symbol Substitution Test. In women receiving intravenous PCA for analgesia after microvascular breast reconstruction tramadol and morphine provided comparable postoperative analgesia with similar sedative effects. However, tramadol was associated with a disturbingly high incidence of nausea and vomiting.     

Efficacy of patient-controlled epidural analgesia using a disposable PCA device

We evaluated efficacy of patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) using a disposable PCA device (3.0 ml type). Twenty-two patients for elective gynecological surgery were randomized into two groups. Patients of the continuous epidural group received epidural fentanyl (15 micrograms.ml-1) with bupivacaine (1.25 mg.ml-1) from a disposable infusion pump (infusion rate: 2.1 ml.hr-1). Patients of the PCEA group received the same anesthetic solution from the same infusion pump serially connected to the disposable PCA device. There were no significant differences in postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) scores at rest and with movement between the two groups. However, VAS scores significantly decreased from 6.8 +/- 1.6 to 1.0 +/- 1.3 when the PCA device was used for severe pain. This suggests that segmental analgesic effect might be obtained by diffusion of anesthetic solution in the epidural space after 3.0 ml PCEA bolus administration. The incidences of side effects were similar in both groups. Respiratory depression and sedative effects were not observed in both groups. We conclude that PCEA using a disposable PCA device (3.0 ml type) seems to be effective for postoperative pain relief.