학술논문
环泊酚联合阿芬太尼用于老年患者ERCP麻醉的安全性研究 / Study on the safety of ciprofol combined with alfentanil for ERCP anesthesia in eld-erly patients
Document Type
Academic Journal
Author
Source
实用药物与临床 / Practical Pharmacy and Clinical Remedies. 27(1):22-25
Subject
Language
Chinese
ISSN
1673-0070
Abstract
目的 探讨环泊酚联合阿芬太尼是否可安全用于老年患者内镜下逆行性胰胆管造影术(ERCP)麻醉.方法 以2021年1月至2022年12月北部战区总医院择期行ERCP术的80例老年患者为研究对象,随机等分为2组:丙泊酚联合舒芬太尼组(P组),环泊酚联合阿芬太尼组(C组).麻醉诱导:C组给予环泊酚0.3～0.5 mg/kg(静脉注射时间＞30 s)+阿芬太尼5～10 μg/kg;P组给予丙泊酚1.5～2.0 mg/kg(静脉注射时间＞30 s)+舒芬太尼5～10 μg.记录两组患者入室前(T0)、诱导后(T1)、进镜时(T2)、置入十二指肠乳头时(T3)、苏醒时(T4)的HR、MAP、SpO2等血流动力学指标;术中体动、低氧血症、低血压、心动过缓、呛咳、苏醒时间、离室时间、注射痛、术后恶心呕吐、术后呼吸抑制的发生情况.结果 T0时,P组与C组基础血压、心率(HR)[(74.75±5.65)次/minvs.(73.42±5.48)次/min]、平均动脉压(MAP)[(101.48±7.76)mmHg vs.(99.53± 8.33)mmHg]和 SpO2(97.48％±1.76％vs.98.53％±1.33％)比较,差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).T1～T3时,C 组患 者的 HR[T1:(69.25±4.52)次/minvs.(64.83±4.47)次/min;T2:(68.40±4.69)次/min vs.(64.15±4.82)次/min;T3:(67.91±9.43)次/min vs.(64.82±7.45)次/min]、MAP[T1:(84.60±5.74)mmHg vs.(81.23±4.96)mmHg;T2:(87.88±3.17)mmHg vs.(84.58±5.75)mmHg;T3:(88.98±5.67)mmHg vs.(85.90±5.99)mmHg)]、SpO2(T1:97.73％±2.16％vs.96.60％±2.74％;T2:97.68％±2.07％vs.96.58％± 2.45％;T3:98.90％±1.02％vs.97.28％±1.87％)高于 P 组,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).T4 时,P 组与 C 组的 HR[(69.80±2.62)次/min vs.(70.53±3.62)次/min]、MAP[(89.45±5.33)mmHg vs.(87.22± 5.30)mmHg]、SpO2(98.22％±1.30％vs.97.75％±1.13％)比较,差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).C 组患者注射痛(1 vs.10)的例数少于P组,且苏醒时间[(12.00±2.83)minvs.(15.80±3.41)min]及离室时间[(32.08± 2.96)min vs.(35.58±3.00)min]较P组缩短,差异均有统计学意义(P＜0.05).结论 环泊酚复合阿芬太尼用于老年患者ERCP手术麻醉,术中呼吸和血流动力学影响较轻,苏醒迅速且苏醒质量较高,并发症发生风险较低,安全性高.
Objective To investigate whether ciprofol combined with afentanil can be safely used for ERCP anesthesia in elderly patients.Methods Totally 80 elderly patients who received ERCP in General Hospital of Northern Theater Command from January 2021 to December 2022 were randomly divided into two groups:propofol+sufentanil group(group P)and ciprofol+afentanil group(group C).Anesthesia induction:group C was given ciprofol 0.3～0.5 mg/kg(intravenous injection time was more than 30 s)+afentanil 5～10 μg/kg;group P was given propo-fol 1.5～2.0 mg/kg(intravenous injection time was more than 30 s)+sufentanil 5～10 μg.HR,MAP,SpO2 and other hemodynamic indexes were recorded before entry(T0),after induction(T1),at entry(T2),at implantation of duodenal papilla(T3),and at recovery(T4).Results There was no significant difference in,HR[(74.75±5.65)bpm vs.(73.42±5.48)bpm],MAP[(101.48±7.76)mmHg vs.(99.53±8.33)mmHg]or SpO2(97.48％± 1.76％vs.98.53％±1.33％)between group P and group C at T0(P＞0.05).At T,～T3,HR[T,:(69.25±4.52)bpm vs.(64.83±4.47)bpm;T2:(68.40±4.69)bpm vs.(64.15±4.82)bpm;T3:(67.91±9.43)bpm vs.(64.82±7.45)bpm],MAP[T,:(84.60±5.74)mmHg vs.(81.23±4.96)mmHg;T2:(87.88±3.17)mmHg vs.(84.58±5.75)mmHg;T3:(88.98±5.67)mmHg vs.(85.90±5.99)mmHg)]and SpO2(T,:97.73％±2.16％vs.96.60％±2.74％;T2:97.68％±2.07％vs.96.58％±2.45％;T3:98.90％±1.02％vs.97.28％±1.87％)in group C were higher than those in group P(P＜0.05).At T4,there was no significant difference in HR[(69.80± 2.62)bpm vs.(70.53±3.62)bpm],MAP[(89.45±5.33)mmHg vs.(87.22±5.30)mmHg]or SpO2(98.22％±1.30％vs.97.75％±1.13％)between group P and group C(P＞0.05).The injection pain(1 vs.10)in group C was less than that in group P,and the time to recovery[(12.00±2.83)min vs.(15.80±3.41)min]and time to leave the room[(32.08±2.96)min vs.(35.58±3.00)min]were shorter than those in group P(P＜0.05).Conclusion Cipofol combined with afentanil for anesthesia in elderly patients with ERCP surgery has mild re-spiratory and hemodynamic effects,rapid and high recovery quality,low risk of complications,and high safety.
Objective To investigate whether ciprofol combined with afentanil can be safely used for ERCP anesthesia in elderly patients.Methods Totally 80 elderly patients who received ERCP in General Hospital of Northern Theater Command from January 2021 to December 2022 were randomly divided into two groups:propofol+sufentanil group(group P)and ciprofol+afentanil group(group C).Anesthesia induction:group C was given ciprofol 0.3～0.5 mg/kg(intravenous injection time was more than 30 s)+afentanil 5～10 μg/kg;group P was given propo-fol 1.5～2.0 mg/kg(intravenous injection time was more than 30 s)+sufentanil 5～10 μg.HR,MAP,SpO2 and other hemodynamic indexes were recorded before entry(T0),after induction(T1),at entry(T2),at implantation of duodenal papilla(T3),and at recovery(T4).Results There was no significant difference in,HR[(74.75±5.65)bpm vs.(73.42±5.48)bpm],MAP[(101.48±7.76)mmHg vs.(99.53±8.33)mmHg]or SpO2(97.48％± 1.76％vs.98.53％±1.33％)between group P and group C at T0(P＞0.05).At T,～T3,HR[T,:(69.25±4.52)bpm vs.(64.83±4.47)bpm;T2:(68.40±4.69)bpm vs.(64.15±4.82)bpm;T3:(67.91±9.43)bpm vs.(64.82±7.45)bpm],MAP[T,:(84.60±5.74)mmHg vs.(81.23±4.96)mmHg;T2:(87.88±3.17)mmHg vs.(84.58±5.75)mmHg;T3:(88.98±5.67)mmHg vs.(85.90±5.99)mmHg)]and SpO2(T,:97.73％±2.16％vs.96.60％±2.74％;T2:97.68％±2.07％vs.96.58％±2.45％;T3:98.90％±1.02％vs.97.28％±1.87％)in group C were higher than those in group P(P＜0.05).At T4,there was no significant difference in HR[(69.80± 2.62)bpm vs.(70.53±3.62)bpm],MAP[(89.45±5.33)mmHg vs.(87.22±5.30)mmHg]or SpO2(98.22％±1.30％vs.97.75％±1.13％)between group P and group C(P＞0.05).The injection pain(1 vs.10)in group C was less than that in group P,and the time to recovery[(12.00±2.83)min vs.(15.80±3.41)min]and time to leave the room[(32.08±2.96)min vs.(35.58±3.00)min]were shorter than those in group P(P＜0.05).Conclusion Cipofol combined with afentanil for anesthesia in elderly patients with ERCP surgery has mild re-spiratory and hemodynamic effects,rapid and high recovery quality,low risk of complications,and high safety.