首页> 外文会议>International Conference on Biological Information and Biomedical Engineering >Anesthetic effect of midazolam in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography
【24h】

Anesthetic effect of midazolam in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

机译:咪达唑仑在内镜逆行胰胆管造影术中的麻醉作用

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Background: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is an advanced upper endoscopic procedure and is useful for the diagnosis and treatment of pancreatobiliary disorders. The technique involves imaging of the biliary tree and pancreatic duct following endoscopy and is used to aid the diagnosis of obstruction, for example by gallstones or cholangiocarcinoma. However, ERCP is an invasive procedure of considerable duration and causes substantial discomfort to patients. Thus, a deeper level of sedation may be necessary to ensure the success and safety of the procedure. Although the incidence of sedation-related complications is low, it is closely associated with endoscopy related morbidity and Mortality. The use of propofol for endoscopic sedation has increased due to its useful pharmacokinetic profile. However, no reversal agent is available and cardiovascular and respiratory complications can result. Use of midazolam in conjunction with opioid has been reported to be a higher quality of sedation, better patient satisfaction and no significant increase in the development of hypoxia and arrhythmias. And its reversal agent, flumazenil can immediately reverse the sedation effect of the midazolam and lead to faster recovery and fewer postoperative adverse events. Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the effects and safety profile of ERCP using propofol and oxycodone vs. those of ERCP using midazolam and oxycodone. Methods: Sixty ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) II or III patients undergoing Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) were randomly allocated to one of two groups. Group P (n = 30) received propofol target-controlled infusion (TCI, target site concentration 3mug/ml at induction, reduced to 2-3mug/ml during general anaesthesia maintenance and titrated to a BIS (bispectral index) of 40-60) and 0.1mg/kg oxycodone for anesthesia. Group M (n = 30) received 0.1mg/kg midazolam and 0.1mg/kg oxycodone for anesthesia induction and 0.05-0.1mg/kg h midazolam for anaesthesia maintenance and titrated to a BIS of 40-60. The injection rate of midazolam is 1mg/min. For both groups, a 20-30 mg propofol bolus was also injected when the patient coughed or moved their bodies as the operation began. After the surgery, all the patients in Group M received 0.5mg flumazenil to get rapid awakening, patients in Group P were stopped from propofol infusion. BIS after anesthesia, recovery time, I ntraoperative and postoperative complications, including hypoxia, bradycardia, hypotension, gagging or body movements, nausea and vomiting, and patients' satisfaction were recorded. MAP, HR, SPO2 and BIS at the time of arrival of the operating room (T0), 5 min after induction (T1), endoscope through the throat (T2), endoscope through the duodenal papilla (T3), during the process of operation (the mean value of any 3 times during the operation) (T4) and the time when patients regained consciousness (T5) were recorded. Results: In total, 60 patients were enrolled in this prospective study and were randomized to Group P (n = 30) and Group M(n = 30). The number of patients with adverse reactions during the operation in Group P and Group M were 15(50.00%) and 5(16.67%), respectively (P = 0.006). Patient satisfaction score in Group P and Group M were 8.23±0.94 and 9.03±0.81, respectively (P = 0.001). In addition, Group M had a shorter mean recovery time than Group P ((2.57±0.73 vs 5.77±2.58, P < 0.001). And there were no difference between the two groups at TO. HR was significantly higher in Group M than in Group P at T2, T3 and T4.MAP was significantly higher in Group M than in Group P at T1, T2 and T3. SpO2 was significantly higher in Group M than in Group P at T4. Conclusions: Midazolam and oxycodone anesthesia for ERCP is safe and may reduce the incidence rate of respiratory inhibition, decrease of heart rate and blood pressure, and may shorten the recovery time. Patients are more satisfied with the use of midazolam than propofol. It's suitable for clinical promotion.
机译:背景:内镜逆行胰胆管造影术(ERCP)是一种先进的上内镜手术方法,可用于诊断和治疗胰腺胆道疾病。该技术包括在内窥镜检查后对胆管树和胰管成像,并用于诊断阻塞,例如胆结石或胆管癌。但是,ERCP是一种持续时间很长的侵入性手术,会给患者带来极大的不适感。因此,可能需要更深的镇静剂以确保手术的成功和安全。尽管镇静相关并发症的发生率较低,但与内窥镜检查相关的发病率和死亡率密切相关。丙泊酚用于内镜镇静的用途由于其有用的药代动力学特征而有所增加。但是,没有可用的逆转剂,会导致心血管和呼吸系统并发症。已报道将咪达唑仑与阿片类药物联合使用具有更高的镇静效果,更好的患者满意度,并且缺氧和心律不齐的发生没有明显增加。氟马西尼是其逆转剂,可以立即逆转咪达唑仑的镇静作用,并能更快恢复,减少术后不良事件。目的:本研究的目的是比较使用丙泊酚和羟考酮与使用咪达唑仑和羟考酮对ERCP的疗效和安全性。方法:将60例接受内镜逆行胰胆管造影术(ERCP)的ASA(美国麻醉医师学会)II或III患者随机分配为两组之一。 P组(n = 30)接受异丙酚靶控输注(TCI,诱导时靶位浓度为3mug / ml,在全身麻醉维持期间降低至2-3mug / ml,并滴定至40-60的BIS(双频谱指数)) 0.1mg / kg羟考酮麻醉。 M组(n = 30)接受0.1mg / kg咪达唑仑和0.1mg / kg羟考酮进行麻醉诱导,并接受0.05-0.1mg / kg h咪达唑仑进行麻醉维持,并将BIS滴定至40-60。咪达唑仑的注射速率为1mg / min。对于两组,当患者开始手术时咳嗽或移动身体时,也要注射20-30 mg异丙酚推注。手术后,M组所有患者均接受了0.5mg氟马西尼的快速唤醒,P组停止了异丙酚的输注。记录麻醉后的BIS,恢复时间,术中和术后并发症,包括缺氧,心动过缓,低血压,作呕或身体运动,恶心和呕吐以及患者的满意度。在手术过程中到达手术室(T0)时,到达(T1)后5分钟,通过喉咙(T2)的内窥镜,通过十二指肠乳头(T3)的内窥镜时的MAP,HR,SPO2和BIS (手术中任何3次的平均值)(T4)和患者恢复意识的时间(T5)。结果:总共60例患者参加了这项前瞻性研究,随机分为P组(n = 30)和M组(n = 30)。 P组和M组术中出现不良反应的患者分别为15(50.00%)和5(16.67%)(P = 0.006)。 P组和M组的患者满意度得分分别为8.23±0.94和9.03±0.81(P = 0.001)。另外,M组的平均恢复时间短于P组((2.57±0.73 vs 5.77±2.58,P <0.001),两组在TO时无差异,HR显着高于P组。 P组在T2,T3和T4.MAP在T1,T2和T3显着高于P组,SpO2在M组在T4显着高于P组。安全,可以降低呼吸抑制的发生率,降低心率和血压,缩短康复时间,使用咪达唑仑比使用丙泊酚对患者更满意,适合临床推广。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号