摘要
目的探讨两种麻醉药物配伍在结肠镜检查中的可行性和安全性。方法入选900例,2002年8月￣2003年5月在该科接受无痛结肠镜检查的380例为A组,给予咪唑安定0.1mg/kg,芬太尼0.05￣0.10mg/例;2003年6月￣2005年5月520例为B组,给予咪唑安定0.04mg/kg,芬太尼0.02￣0.05mg/例,异丙酚0.3￣3.0mg/kg。观察两组的药物起效时间、苏醒时间、镜检满意度、药物的用量及血压、心率及血氧饱和度的变化。结果两组患者都能顺利完成结肠镜检查,没有严重不良反应的发生。B组中药物起效时间、苏醒时间、镜检满意度都明显优于A组(P<0.05);咪唑安定和芬太尼的累计剂量都少于A组;对血压、心率和血氧饱和度的影响B组明显低于A组(P<0.05)。结论在结肠镜检查中两种麻醉药物配伍都是安全、有效的镇静麻醉方法,其中后者更适合门诊患者使用。
[Objective] To compare the feasibility and safety of two kinds of sedation methods in colonoscopy of outpatients. [Method] 900 cases were included in this study. The patients were divided into two groups. Group A was checked from August of 2002 to May of 2003 （n=380）. Group B was checked from June of 2003 to May of 2005 （n=520）. Group A was treated with midazolam 0.1mg/kg and fentanyl 0.05-0.10 mg/case. Group B was treated with midazolam 0.04 mg/kg, fentanyl 0.02-0.05 mg/case, and propofol 0.3-3.0 mg/kg. [Result] Both groups succeeded in colonoseopy and no severe negative effects. There were remarkable differences in effective time, recovery time and satisfaction of endoscope inspection. The cumulated dosage of midazolam and fentanyl of group B were less than that of group A. There were no remarkable differences in the variation of the heart rate, BP and SpO2. [Conclusions] The methods of both groups are safe and feasible sedative methods in colonoseopy, while the method of group B was more suitable to the outpatients.
出处
《中国内镜杂志》
CSCD
北大核心
2006年第1期85-86,共2页
China Journal of Endoscopy
