机构地区:[1]首都医科大学附属北京天坛医院麻醉科,100050
出 处:《中国医师进修杂志》2013年第36期14-17,共4页Chinese Journal of Postgraduates of Medicine
摘 要:目的探讨导管室内持续输注右美托咪定镇静下进行脑血管造影的可行性和安全性。方法将85例ASA分级Ⅱ~Ⅲ级,接受脑血管造影的患者根据年龄分为两组:35例年龄大于60岁为老年组,50例年龄18-59岁为中青年组。于手术开始前静脉输注负荷剂量的右美托咪定,老年组为0.5μg/kg、中青年组为1.0μg/kg,手术开始后以0.5μg/(kg·h)持续静脉输注。观察两组患者给药前及给药后5、10、15、30、45min的血压、心率、呼吸频率、脉搏血氧饱和度(SpO2)、脑电双频指数(BIS)和Ramsay镇静评分。结果两组给药后10、15、30、45minBIS和Ramsay镇静评分均较给药前明显降低[老年组:84±22、83±22、85±15、75±23比94±5,(2.0±0.4)、(2.3±0.6)、(2.8±0.7)、(3.0±0.7)分比(1.7±0.5)分;中青年组:91±8、89±11、86±12、81±13比96±2,(1.9±0.6)、(2.3±0.7)、(2.7±0.9)、(3.0±0.9)分比(1.6±0.5)分],差异有统计学意义(P〈0.05);两组给药后10、15、30、45min收缩压、舒张压、平均动脉压均较给药前明显降低[老年组:(152±23)、(144±23)、(140±21)、(135±21)mmHg(1mmHg=0.133kPa)比(165±25)mmHg,(87±11)、(83±11)、(78±8)、(75±8)mmHg比(89±13)mmHg,(106±14)、(100-I-13)、(99±12)、(95±12)mmHg比(113±16)mmHg;中青年组:(131±24)、(127±23)、(124±25)、(124±26)mmHg比(142±23)mmHg,(81±13)、(79±13)、(77±13)、(76±13)mmHg比(86±14)mmHg,(97±16)、(94±16)、(91±19)、(92±20)mmHg比(104±19)mmHg],差异有统计学意义(P〈0.05),但降低幅度在基础血压20%以内;两组给药后各时间点心率、呼吸频率、SpO2与给药前比较差异均无统计学意义(P〉0.05)。两组术中均未出现严重不良反应。结论脑血管造影Objective To explore the feasibility and safety of dexmedetomidine sedation in interventional neuroradiology operations. Methods Eighty-five cases ASA grade II - III grade patients undergoing cerebral angiography according to age divided into two groups:old group( more than 60 years old, 35 cases) and young group (18-59 years old,50 cases). The loading dose of dexmedetomidine were dexmedetomidine 0.5 μg/kg in old group and 1.0 μg/kg in young group, respectively. The loading dose was administered for 10 min followed by continuous infusion dexmedetomidine 0.5μg/(kg·h). Blood pressure, heart rate (HR),pefipheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) and respiratory rate (RR), Ramsay score and bispectral index(BIS) were monitored and recorded during the study. Results The BIS, Ramsay score after administration 10,15,30,45 min in two groups was significantly longer than that before administration [ old group:84 ±22,83 ±22,85 ± 15,75 ±23 vs. 94 ±5; (2.0 ±0.4), (2.3 ±0.6), (2.8 ±0.7), (3.0 ±0.7) scores vs. ( 1.7 ± 0.5 ) scores; young group: 91 ± 8,89 ± 11,86 ± 12,81 ± 13 vs. 96 ± 2; ( 1.9 ± 0.6), (2.3 ± 0.7 ), (2.7 ± 0.9 ), (3.0 ± 0.9 ) scores vs. ( 1.6 ± 0.5 ) scores, P 〈 0.05 ]. The systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, mean arterial pressure (MAP) after administration 10,15,30,45 min in two groups was significantly longer than that before administration E old group: ( 152 ± 23 ), ( 144 ± 23 ), ( 140 ± 21 ), ( 135 ± 21) mm Hg(1 mm Hg=0.133 kPa) vs. (165 ± 25) mm Hg;(87 ± 11),(83 ± 11),(78 ± 8),(75 ± 8) mm Hgvs. (89±13)mmHg;(106±14),(100±13),(99±12),(95±12)mmHgvs. (113±16)mmHg; younggroup:(131±24),(127±23),(124±25),(124±26)mmHgvs. (142±23)mmHg;(81±13), (79±13),(77±13),(76±13)mmHgvs. (86±14) mmHg;(97±16),(94±16),(91±19),(92± 20) mm Hg vs. (104 ± 19) mm Hg,P 〈 0
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...