检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:郭绍红[1] 储修峰[1] 张晓辉[1] 严金[1] 陈江[1] 王晶晶[2] 王孝文[3]
机构地区:[1]中国医科大学绍兴华宇医院微创外科,中国医科大学多汗症及颜面潮红研究所,浙江省绍兴市312030 [2]中国医科大学绍兴华宇医院心理咨询与心理治疗门诊 [3]中国医科大学绍兴华宇医院麻醉科
出 处:《河北医药》2008年第6期755-757,共3页Hebei Medical Journal
摘 要:目的探讨局部麻醉自主呼吸下行一期双侧胸腔镜胸交感神经夹闭术的可行性。方法67例多汗症或颜面潮红患者自己选择麻醉方式。全麻组54例,局麻组13例。局麻组用0.5%利多卡因+0.0625%布比卡因浸润麻醉每个手术切口,术中使用瑞芬太尼辅助镇痛。每侧切2个长约7mm的皮肤切口。穿入穿刺套管,然后进行常规的胸腔镜胸交感神经夹闭术。结果所有患者均顺利完成手术。局麻组患者整个手术过程中神志清醒,完全自主呼吸。局麻组和全麻组的手术时间分别为(57±14)min和(42±12)min(P<0.01),进出手术室时间分别为(102±22)min和(106±25)min,(P>0.05),术毕至出手术室时间分别为(11±10)min和(25±11)min,(P<0.01),住院日2组分别为(3.4±0.8)d和(3.9±0.6)d(P=0.01),局麻组的手术费用少于全麻组,分别为(5388±1129)元和(6801±898)元(P<0.01)。结论一期双侧胸腔镜胸交感神经夹闭术可以在瑞芬太尼强化局部浸润麻醉下完成,手术更安全、更为微创、费用显著减少、术后恢复加快、住院日显著缩短。Objective To detect the possibility of one stage bilateral thoracoscopic sympathetic blocking (OSBTSB) under local infiltration anesthesia and spontaneous breathing. Methods 67 patients with hyperhidrosis or facial blushing were enrolled in this study. The methods of general anesthesia (GA) or local infdtration anesthesia (LIA) were chosen by patients. There were 54 patients in group of general anesthesia (GGA) with the ages between 15 to 50 years (mean 28.81 years) and 13 in group of local infiltration anesthesia (GLIA) with the ages between 18 and 45 year (mean 26.62 years). The LIA of each of the four incisions was made by injecting 10 ml of 1% lidocaine. OSBTSB was performed according to the routine method same as that under the GA. Results All of the operations for the 67 patients were successfully performed. All the patients in GLIA were consciousness and breathed spontaneously during the operation. The operation time was (56.92 ± 14.51 ) min for GLIA and (42.41 ± 12.16) min for GGA( P 〈 0.01 ). The time between entering and coming out of the operation room were (101.54 ± 22.49) min for GLIA and (106.48 ± 25.13) min for GGA( P 〉 0.05). The time between finishing of the operation and coming out of operation room were ( 10.77 ± 9.54) min for GLIA and (25.28 ± 11.34) min for GGA( P 〈 0.01). The time of hospitalization were (3.38 ± 0.77) days for GLIA and (3.89 ±0.57) days for GGA( P = 0.01 ). The cost were (5 388.10 ± 1 128.69) yuan for GLIA and (6 800.66± 897.88) yuanforGGA( P 〈0.01).Conclusion The operation of OSBTSB can be successfiflly and safely performed under LIA. All the risk of GA can be avoided if the operation performed under IJA. The superiority is much safer, more minimally invasive, cheaper, recovering faster and shorter hospitalization time comparing with those of the operations under GA.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:18.224.70.193