两种镇痛方法用于人工流产的临床比较

目的比较宫颈局部麻醉与静脉麻醉用于无痛性人工流产的有效性及安全性。方法将200例人工流产病人随机分为两组,每组100例,局麻组术前行利多卡因、阿托品宫颈封闭;静麻组术前静脉推注丙泊酚1.5～2mg/kg。结果局麻组的宫颈扩张作用显著,对呼吸、循环无不良影响,但镇痛效果不及静脉麻醉组;静脉麻醉组镇痛效果确切,对心率有一定抑制作用。结论利多卡因 阿托品宫颈局部麻醉法,宫颈松弛作用好、安全、简单、能减轻病人痛苦;丙泊酚静脉麻醉人工流产镇痛效果好,如把握好剂量、加强术中监测则可避免不良反应的发生,病人满意度高,需求量大。

A clinical comparison of two analgesia methods for artificial abortion

Objective To compare the safety and effect of the cervix local anesthesia method with the venous anesthesia method for painless artificial abortion. Methods 200 patients subject to artificial abortion were randomly divided into two groups averagely (100 cases in each group): Group 1 (local anesthesia) receiving the treatment of lidocaine and atropine (cervix blockade) before operation; Group 2 (venous anesthesia) receiving a treatment of injecting propofol 1.5- 2.0 mg/kg. Results In group 1, the effect of cervical expansion was significant, and there was no bad effect on respiration and circulation systems, but its effect of analgesia was less than in group 2. In the group 2, the effect of analgesia was definite and heart rate was inhibited to some extent. Conclusion The local anesthesia method is simple, safe and can relieve the patient's pain. The venous anesthesia method has a good analgesia effect on artificial abortion.