右美托咪定与咪达唑仑用于无痛胃肠镜的效果分析

目的探讨和研究右美托咪定与咪达唑仑用于无痛胃肠镜检查的临床效果对比。方法研究对象选取为2010年2月—2013年8月之间我院行无痛胃肠镜检查的78例患者,采用随机分组方式分为两组,对照组39例采用咪达唑仑联合依托咪酯方案,观察组39例采用右美托咪定联合依托咪酯方案,在检查过程中如果患者存在体动反应,则追加依托咪酯4-6 mg,对两组患者各时段的生命体征、麻醉效果和不良反应进行统计对比。结果两组患者各时段的生命体征变化无显著差异（P〉0.05）;观察组患者的唤醒时间、依托咪酯用量以及不良反应发生率分别为：（5.7±2.1）、（15.8±2.7）、10.3%明显低于对照组的：（8.2±2.9）、（18.6±3.1）,66.7%,差异具有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。结论右美托咪定联合依托咪酯用于无痛胃肠镜检查的效果良好,相较于咪达唑仑具有麻醉效果好、安全性高的优势,值得在临床上推广和应用。

Dexmedetomidine and midazolam for painless gastrointestinal endoscopy re-sults analysis

Objective To explore and study of dexmedetomidine and midazolam for comparing the clinical effect of painless gastrointestinal endoscopy. Methods The study selected 78 cases in our hospital between 2010.2-2013.8 painless gastrointestinal endoscopy patients, randomly divided into two groups, 39 cases in the control group with midazolam and etomidate scheme, the observation group of 39 cases with dexmedetomidine combined with etomidate scheme, in the inspection process if patients have body movement the reaction, then additional etomidate 4-6mg, the time of two groups of patients vital signs, anesthesia effect and adverse reaction were compared. Results There was no significant difference between the two groups in each period of the change of vital signs （P〉0.05）;the observation group patients wake-up time, dosage of etomidate and adverse reaction rates were：（5.7 ± 2.1）,（15.8±2.7）, 10.3%was lower than that of the control group：（8.2±2.9）,（18.6±3.1）, and 66.7%, the difference was statistically significant （P〈0.05）.Conclusion Dexmedetomidine combined with etomidate used in painless gastrointestinal endoscopy to good effect, compared to midazolam has better anesthetic effect, high security advantages, is worthy of clinical popularization and application.