不同方法在腭咽成型术后镇痛效果的对比  

The comparison of analgesic efficacy after palatopharyngoplasty by different methods

作　　者：李树华[1] 高连宝[1] 

机构地区：[1]天津市公安医院麻醉科,天津300050

出　　处：《天津医科大学学报》2005年第3期435-436,共2页Journal of Tianjin Medical University

摘　　要：目的:比较腭咽成型术后应用芬太尼PCIA及肌注哌替啶镇痛效果。方法:选择拟行腭咽成型术病人40例,随机分为PCIA组(A组)和对照组(B组),每组20例。A组病人术后采用PCIA泵开始芬太尼持续输注镇痛。B组病人在自述疼痛难忍时肌注哌替啶止痛。记录两组病人术毕、术后6h、12h及24h的VAS评分、SBP及HR。结果:A组术后各时点VAS评分、SBP及HR均较B组显著低(P<0.05或P<0.01)。结论:芬太尼PCIA应用于腭咽成型术后镇痛较肌注哌替啶效果好。Objective： To compare analgesic efficacy by fentenyl PCIA or by pethidine intra-imuscle after palatopharyngoplasty（PPP）. Methods： A case-control study is conducted of 40.patients after PPP, in which randomized into two groups： PCIA group （A） and control group （B）, each group has 20 cases. Fentenyl PCIA intra-vental is used in A group, pethidine intra-imuscle is used in B group. The score of VAS, SBP, HR are observed after operation, 6 hours, 12 hours, 24 hours after operation. Results： The VAS score, SBP, HR in A group are lower than B group＇ s remarkably.（P〈0.05 or P〈0.01）.Conclusion： Fentenyl PCIA is better than pethidine intra-imuscle after palatopharyngoplasty.

关 键 词：芬太尼 病人自控静脉镇痛(PCIA) 腭咽成型术 

分 类 号：R766.9[医药卫生—耳鼻咽喉科] R971.2[医药卫生—临床医学]