首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Current Therapeutic Research Clinical and Experimental >Comparison of recovery characteristics postoperative nausea and vomiting and gastrointestinal motility with total intravenous anesthesia with propofol versus inhalation anesthesia with desflurane for laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A randomized controlled study
【2h】

Comparison of recovery characteristics postoperative nausea and vomiting and gastrointestinal motility with total intravenous anesthesia with propofol versus inhalation anesthesia with desflurane for laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A randomized controlled study

机译:腹腔镜胆囊切除术的恢复特征术后恶心和呕吐胃肠动力与丙泊酚全静脉麻醉与地氟烷吸入麻醉的比较:一项随机对照研究

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

>Background:Clinical effects, recovery characteristics, and costs of total intravenous anesthesia with different inhalational anesthetics have been investigated and compared; however, there are no reported clinical studies focusing on the effects of anesthesia with propofol and desflurane in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.>Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the effects of total intravenous anesthesia with propofol and alfentanil compared with those of desflurane and alfentanil on recovery characteristics, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), duration of hospitalization, and gastrointestinal motility.>Methods: Patients classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I or II undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy due to benign gallbladder disease were enrolled in the study. Patients were randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio to receive total intravenous anesthesia with propofol (2–2.5 mg/kg) and alfentanil (20 μg/kg) or desflurane (4%–6%) and alfentanil (20 μg/kg). Perioperative management during premedication, intraoperative analgesia, relaxation, ventilation, and postoperative analgesia were carried out identically in the 2 groups. Extubation time, recovery time, PONV, postoperative antiemetic requirement, time to gastrointestinal motility and flatus, duration of hospitalization, and adverse effects were recorded. Postoperative pain was assessed using a visual analogue scale.>Results: Sixty-eight patients were assessed for inclusion in the study; 5 were excluded because they chose open surgery and 3 did not complete the study because they left the hospital. Sixty patients (33 women, 27 men) completed the study. Recovery time was significantly shorter in the propofol group (n = 30) compared with the desflurane group (n = 30) (8.0 [0.77] vs 9.2 [0.66] min, respectively; P < 0.005). Fifteen patients (50.0%) in the propofol group and 20 patients (66.7%) in the desflurane group experienced nausea during the first 24 hours after surgery. The difference was not considered significant. In the propofol group, significantly fewer patients had vomiting episodes compared with those in the desflurane group (2 [6.7%] vs 16 [53.3%]; P < 0.005). Significantly fewer patients in the propofol group required analgesic medication in the first 24 hours after surgery compared with those in the desflurane group (10 [33.3%] vs 15 [50.0%]; P < 0.005). Patients in the propofol group experienced bowel movements in a significantly shorter period of time compared with patients in the desflurane group (8.30 [1.67] vs 9.76 [1.88] hours; P = 0.02). The mean time to flatus occurred significantly sooner after surgery in the propofol group than in the desflurane group (8.70 [1.79] vs 9.46 [2.09] hours; P = 0.01). The duration of hospitalization after surgery was significantly shorter in the propofol group than in the desflurane group (40.60 [3.49] vs 43.60 [3.56] hours; P = 0.03).>Conclusion: Total intravenous anesthesia with propofol and alfentanil was associated with a significantly reduced rate of PONV and analgesic consumption, shortened recovery time and duration of hospitalization, accelerated onset of bowel movements, and increased patient satisfaction compared with desflurane and alfentanil in these patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery who completed the study.
机译:>背景:研究人员比较了不同吸入麻醉剂的全静脉麻醉的临床效果,恢复特征和费用;然而,目前尚无针对丙泊酚和地氟醚麻醉对腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者的疗效的临床研究报道。>目的:本研究的目的是确定丙泊酚和丙泊酚全静脉麻醉的效果。阿芬太尼与地氟醚和阿芬太尼相比,在恢复特征,术后恶心和呕吐(PONV),住院时间和胃肠道蠕动方面具有优势。>方法:正在接受美国麻醉医师学会I或II身体状况评估的患者本研究纳入因良性胆囊疾病而进行的选择性腹腔镜胆囊切除术。患者以1:1的比例随机分配,接受丙泊酚(2-2.5 mg / kg)和阿芬太尼(20μg/ kg)或地氟烷(4%–6%)和阿芬太尼(20μg/ kg)的全静脉麻醉。两组在术前,术中镇痛,放松,通气和术后镇痛期间的围手术期管理均相同。记录拔管时间,恢复时间,PONV,术后止吐需求,胃肠蠕动和肠胃气胀的时间,住院时间和不良反应。使用视觉模拟量表评估术后疼痛。>结果:对68位患者进行了研究评估,包括在研究中。有5例被排除在外,因为他们选择了开放手术,而3例因为离开医院而未能完成研究。 60名患者(33名女性,27名男性)完成了研究。与地氟醚组(n = 30)相比,丙泊酚组(n = 30)的恢复时间明显短(分别为8.0 [0.77] vs 9.2 [0.66] min; P <0.005)。丙泊酚组中有15名患者(50.0%),地氟醚组中有20名患者(66.7%)在手术后的前24小时内出现恶心。差异不被认为是显着的。与地氟醚组相比,丙泊酚组的呕吐患者明显减少(2 [6.7%] vs 16 [53.3%]; P <0.005)。与地氟烷组相比,丙泊酚组在术后头24小时需要镇痛药的患者明显减少(10 [33.3%] vs 15 [50.0%]; P <0.005)。与地氟醚组的患者相比,丙泊酚组的患者排便时间明显缩短(8.30 [1.67] vs 9.76 [1.88]小时; P = 0.02)。异丙酚组的肠胃胀气平均发生时间比地氟醚组明显快(8.70 [1.79] vs 9.46 [2.09]小时; P = 0.01)。丙泊酚组术后住院时间明显短于地氟醚组(40.60 [3.49] vs 43.60 [3.56]小时; P = 0.03)。>结论:使用异丙酚和在完成这项研究的这些接受腹腔镜手术的患者中,与地氟醚和阿芬太尼相比,与地氟烷和阿芬太尼相比,阿芬太尼与PONV和止痛药的使用率显着降低,恢复时间和住院时间缩短,肠蠕动发作加快以及患者满意度提高相关。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
代理获取

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