快通道心脏麻醉用于心脏手术的临床观察

发布时间：2018-06-13 17:26

本文选题：快通道心脏麻醉 + 心脏手术　；参考：《中国药房》2016年14期

【摘要】：目的:观察快通道心脏麻醉用于心脏手术的临床效果与安全性。方法:134例心脏手术患者按随机数字表法分为对照组(66例)和观察组(68例)。对照组患者采用常规麻醉方法,观察组患者采用快通道心脏麻醉。比较两组患者的重症加强护理病房(ICU)住院时间、拔管时间、术后清醒时间、用药剂量、麻醉效果、治疗效果、血流动力学指标与术后感染情况。结果:观察组患者的ICU住院时间为(5.03±1.95)d,术后清醒时间为(35.31±11.30)min,气管拔管时间为(232.69±15.57)min,均明显短于对照组[分别为(10.03±2.35)d、(110.32±39.25)min、(345.56±43.28)min],差异均有统计学意义(P0.05)。观察组患者使用舒芬太尼(653±148)μg、维库溴铵(0.30±0.02)mg/kg,用药剂量明显少于对照组[分别为(932±53)μg、(0.50±0.40)mg/kg],差异均有统计学意义(P0.05)。观察组患者的镇痛效果明显优于对照组,且观察组患者的警觉/镇静评分(OAA/S)明显优于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。观察组患者的治愈率(88.2%)明显高于对照组(69.7%),肺部感染率(0)和支气管痉挛率(0)明显低于对照组(分别为6.1%、10.6%),差异均有统计学意义(P0.05)。两组患者手术前、中、后各项血流动力学指标比较,差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:快通道心脏麻醉在心脏手术中的效果良好、安全性高。
[Abstract]:Objective: to observe the clinical effect and safety of fast channel cardiac anesthesia in cardiac surgery. Methods 134 patients undergoing cardiac surgery were randomly divided into control group (n = 66) and observation group (n = 68). The patients in the control group were treated with routine anesthesia and the patients in the observation group were treated with fast channel cardiac anesthesia. The hospitalization time, extubation time, postoperative waking time, dosage of medication, anesthetic effect, therapeutic effect, hemodynamic index and postoperative infection were compared between the two groups. Results: the hospitalization time was 5.03 卤1.95 days, the postoperative waking time was 35.31 卤11.30 minutes, and the extubation time was 232.69 卤15.57 min in the observation group, which was significantly shorter than that in the control group [10.03 卤2.35 min, 110.32 卤39.25 min, 345.56 卤43.28)min, respectively] (P 0.05). The dosage of sufentanil 653 卤148 渭 g and vecuronium 0.30 卤0.02 mg / kg in the observation group was significantly lower than that in the control group (932 卤53 渭 g / kg vs 0.50 卤0.40)mg/kg, respectively), and the difference was statistically significant (P 0.05). The analgesic effect of the observation group was significantly better than that of the control group, and the OAA / sedation score of the observation group was significantly better than that of the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P 0.05). The cure rate of the observation group was significantly higher than that of the control group (69.7%, lung infection rate 0) and bronchiospasm rate 0) significantly lower than that of the control group (6.1% 10.6%, P 0.05). There was no significant difference in hemodynamic indexes before, during and after operation between the two groups (P 0.05). Conclusion: fast channel cardiac anesthesia is effective and safe in cardiac surgery.
【作者单位】：郑州市第七人民医院麻醉科;
【分类号】：R614.2

【相似文献】