持续硬膜外镇痛用于防治硬膜穿破后头痛的疗效观察  

Clinical Efficacy of Continuous Epidural Analgesia on Patients with Post Dural Puncture Headache

作　　者：罗勇[1] 王同春[1] 严达红 吴斌[1] 董福华[1] 

机构地区：[1]广东省中山市陈星海医院麻醉科,广东中山528415

出　　处：《神经损伤与功能重建》2014年第5期404-405,438,共3页Neural Injury and Functional Reconstruction

摘　　要：目的:观察持续硬膜外镇痛(CEA)用于防治硬膜穿破后头痛(PDPH)的疗效。方法:30例意外出现硬膜穿破者随机分为观察组和对照组各15例。观察组采取CEA等方法,对照组则采取硬膜外腔单次注入生理盐水等方法,对2组患者头痛、头晕恶心、呕吐发生情况及不同时间段的相关评分和安全性进行观察。结果:观察组头痛发生率为13.33%、头晕恶心发生率6.67%,呕吐0例,均低于对照组,头痛持续时间较对照组明显缩短(P<0.05);且术后第2、3、4、5天观察组的头痛评分、头晕恶心评分和呕吐评分均低于对照组(P<0.05),2组安全性相比差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:CEA用于防治PDPH疗效确切。Objective：To observe the effects of continuous epidural analgesia （CEA） treatment on patients with post dural puncture headache （PDPH）. Methods：Thirty cases of accidental dural puncture patients were randomly divided into groups of observation and control （15 cases in each group）. The observation group were given CEA, and the control group took equal amount physiological saline. The occurrence of headache, dizziness, nausea, vomiting were observed. Meanwhile, the neurological scores and safety were evaluated. Results：In the observa-tion group, the incidences of the headache, dizziness and nausea and vomiting were 13.33%, 6.67%and 0 respec-tively. All the incidences in the observation group were lower than those in the control group. The lasting time of headache in the observation group was significantly shorter than the control group （ P〈0.05）. And the scores of headache grade, dizziness, nausea and vomiting in the observation group were lower than those of the control group at days 2, 3, 4, 5 after operation （ P〈0.05）. The safety between the 2 groups shows no significant difference （ P〉0.05）. Conclusion：CEA is effective to treat PDPH.

关 键 词：持续硬膜外镇痛 硬膜穿破 头痛 

分 类 号：R741[医药卫生—神经病学与精神病学] R614.42[医药卫生—临床医学]