Objective To investigate clinical application and safety evaluation of sedative demulcent anesthesia in therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP).Methods Totally 1660 patients underwent ERCP at the First Hospital of Lanzhou University were prospectively divided into two groups: venous sedative demulcent group (n=800, using sufentanil and midazolam and propofol continuing infusion) and conventional sedative demulcent group (n=860, using common medicine). The heart rate (HR), respiration (R), blood pressure (BP) and peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) of pre-anesthesia, post-anesthesia, during operation and after analepsia in every group were detected. The narcotism was evaluated by Ramsaymin grading method and the related adverse reactions such as cough, restlessness, harmful memory, and abdominal pain after operation were recorded. Results Compared with conventional sedative demulcent group, vital signs of patients in venous sedative demulcent group were more stable. For postoperative adverse reactions, abdominal pain, abdominal distension and nausea and vomiting were respectively 4.4%(35/800), 2.6%(21/800) and 3.6%(29/800) in venous sedative demulcent group, which were respectively higher of the incidence of 36.3%(312/860), 49.0%(421/860) and 53.0%(456/860) in conventional sedative demulcent group (P＜0.01). The postoperative satisfaction and adverse reactions recall between venous sedative demulcent group and conventional sedative demulcent group was respectively significant different (96.9% vs. 2.9%, 4.8% vs. 97.9%, P＜0.01). Conclusion Sufentanil and midazolam and propofol continuing infusion have good effect of sedative demulcent anesthesia, which can be widely used.
Objective To compare the early analgesic effects and the impact on knee joint function recovery after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) between single adductor canal block (SACB) and continuous adductor canal block (CACB) combined with local infiltration anesthesia (LIA) using a prospective study. Methods The patients with knee osteoarthritis admitted between April 2022 and December 2023 were enrolled as a subject. Among them, 60 patients met the selection criteria and were enrolled in the study. They were randomly assigned to the SACB group or CACB group in a ratio of 1:1 using a random number table method. There was no significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05) in terms of age, gender, height, body mass, body mass index, affected side, and preoperative resting visual analogue scale (VAS) score and active VAS score, Oxford knee score (OKS), and American Hospital of Special Surgery (HSS) score. All patients received multimodal analgesia management using LIA combined with SACB or CACB. The operation time, pain related indicators (resting and activity VAS scores, number and timing of breakthrough pain, opioid consumption), joint function related indicators (quadriceps muscle strength, knee range of motion, OKS score, and HSS score), as well as postoperative block complications and adverse events were recorded and compared between the two groups. Results There was no significant difference in the operation time between the two groups (P<0.05). All patients in the two groups were followed up with a follow-up time of (9.70±4.93) months in the SACB group and (12.23±5.05) months in the CACB group, and the difference was not significant (P>0.05). The CACB group had a significant lower resting VAS score at 24 hours after operation compared to the SACB group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in resting and active VAS scores between the two groups at other time points (P>0.05). The CACB group had a significantly lower incidence of breakthrough pain compared to the SACB group [9 cases (30.00%) vs. 17 cases (56.67%); P<0.05). However, there was no significant difference in the timing of breakthrough pain occurrence and opioid consumption between the two groups (P>0.05). Four cases in the SACB group and 7 cases in the CACB group experienced adverse events, with no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events between the two groups (P>0.05). The CACB group had significantly better knee joint mobility than the SACB group at 1 and 2 days after operation (P<0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in knee joint mobility on 0 day after operation and quadriceps muscle strength and OKS and HSS scores at different time points (P>0.05). Conclusion In UKA, the analgesic effects and knee joint function recovery are similar when compared between LIA combined with SACB and LIA combined with CACB. However, SACB is simpler to perform and can avoid adverse events such as catheter displacement and dislocation. Therefore, SACB may be a better choice.
Objective We aimed to determine the efficacy and complication of sevoflurane maintenance in children. Methods Trials were collected through electronic searches of MEDLINE, EBSCO, OVID, Springer, Foreign Journals Integration System, CNKI, and CMBdisk (from the date of building the database to April 2008). We also checked the bibliographies of retrieved articles. Results A total of 20 trials involving 1 592 patients were included. The Metaanalysis showed: ① Recovery time: sevoflurane was similar with propofol [WMD=0.22, 95%CI (–2.86, 3.30)], but slower than desflurane [WMD=5.01, 95%CI (2.87, 7.16)], and faster than isoflurane [WMD= –0.55, 95%CI (– 0.74, –0.37)]; ② Discharge time: sevoflurane was similar with propofol [WMD= –4.39, 95%CI (–10.02, 1.25)], desflurane[WMD=1.13, 95%CI (–3.25, 5.51)], and isoflurane [WMD= –8.17, 95%CI (–17.94, 1.60)]; ③ Postoperative agitation: sevoflurane was much more obvious than propofol [RR=5.53, 95%CI (2.99, 10.21)], but superior than desflurane [RR=0.55, 95%CI (0.35, 0.88)], and similar with isoflurane [RR=1.24, 95%CI (0.85, 1.800]; ④ Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV): sevoflurane was much more severe than propofol [RR=2.17, 95%CI (1.21, 3.90)], and no difference with desflurane [RR=0.88, 95%CI (0.61, 1.25)]; ⑤ Oculocardiac reflex: sevoflurane was less than propofol [RD= – 0.42, 95%CI (–0.56, –0.27)], and no difference with desflurane [RR=0.93, 95%CI (0.61, 1.41)]. Conclusion The limited current evidence shows no difference between sevoflurane and propofol in recovery time, while the effect of sevoflurane is faster than isoflurane and slower than desflurane. There are no differences among sevoflurane, desflurane, isoflurane, and propofol in discharge time. The incidence of postoperative agitation of sevoflurane is higher than that of propofol, but lower than that of other inhaled anesthetics. The incidence of PONV of sevoflurane is higher than that of propofol. The incidence of oculocardiac reflex of sevoflurane is lower than that of propofol and similar with that of desflurane.
ObjectivesTo systematically review the efficacy of lidocaine injected prior to tracheal extubation in preventing hemodynamic responses to tracheal extubation in general anesthesia.MethodsPubMed, Ovid, Web of Science, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CBM, CNKI, VIP and WanFang Data databases were electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy of lidocaine administrated prior to extubation in preventing hemodynamic responses to tracheal extubation in patients undergoing general anesthesia from inception to October, 2018. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies, then, meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.3 and Stata 13.0 software.ResultsA total of 10 RCTs involving 525 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: compared with control group, lidocaine could reduce mean arterial pressure in 5 min after extubation (MD=–5.10, 95%CI –9.41 to –0.79, P=0.02), weaken the increase in systolic blood pressure caused by extubation from the moment before extubation to 5 minutes after extubation (before extubation: MD=–7.22, 95%CI –10.34 to –4.11, P<0.000 01; at extubation: MD=–14.02, 95%CI –19.42 to –8.62, P<0.000 01; 1 minutes after extubation: MD=–15.82, 95%CI –22.20 to –9.45, P<0.000 01; 3 minutes after extubation: MD=–12.55, 95%CI –20.36 to –4.74, P=0.002; and 5 minutes after extubation: MD=–12.05, 95%CI –20.35 to –3.74, P=0.004), and weakened extubation-induced increase in diastolic blood pressure at extubation (MD=–9.71, 95%CI –16.57 to –2.86, P=0.005). In addition, lidocaine inhibited heart rate in all time points except the moment of before and at 10 minutes after extubation.ConclusionsCurrent evidence shows that lidocaine can inhibit the increase in blood pressure and heart rate caused by extubation at certain times. Due to limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high-quality studies are needed to verify above conclusions.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the protection effect of epidural anesthesia combined with general anesthesia versus general anesthesia alone in patients underwent cardiac surgery, so as to provide evidence for reducing complications of cardiac surgery. MethodsDatabases including PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2015), WanFang Data, CBM, and CNKI were searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about epidural anesthesia combined with general anesthesia versus general anesthesia alone for patients underwent cardiac surgery from inception to February 2015. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed by RevMan 5.3 software. ResultsA total of 35 RCTs involving 3 311 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that, compared with the general anesthesia group, the combination anesthesia group had lower incidence of supraventricular tachycardias (RR=0.63, 95%CI 0.48 to 0.83, P=0.001) and shorter ICU stay time (SMD=-0.57, 95%CI -1.02 to-0.12, P=0.01), but there were no significant differences in the incidences of respiratory complications, myocardial infarction, stroke and mortality between the two groups (all P values >0.05). ConclusionCurrent evidence shows that the combination of epidural anesthesia and general anesthesia has better protection effect than general anesthesia alone in cardiac surgery, but the influence on long-term prognosis still needs to be assessed. Due to the limited quality of included studies, the above conclusion still needs to be verified by more high quality studies．
ObjectiveTo investigate the feasibility and safety of non-intubation anesthesia in thoracic surgery.MethodsFrom September 2017 to December 2019, 296 patients were operated at department of thoracic surgery in our hospital. There were 167 males and 129 females with an average age of 50.69±12.95 years, ranging from 16 to 76 years. The patients were divided into two groups according to whether they were intubated: 150 patients were in a non-intubation group, including 83 males and 67 females with an average age of 49.91±13.59 years, ranging from 16 to 76 years, and 146 patients were in an intubation group including 84 males and 62 females with an average age of 51.49±12.26 years, ranging from 16 to 74 years. Intraoperative data, postoperative recovery, inflammatory response of the two groups were compared.ResultsThere was no statistical difference between the two groups in operation time, blood loss, the lowest oxygen saturation or other indicators (P>0.05). But the highest partial pressure of carbon dioxide of the non-intubation group was higher than that of the intubation group (P=0.012). The non-intubation group was superior to the intubation group in postoperative recovery and inflammatory response (P<0.05).ConclusionThe non-intubation anesthesia is safe and maneuverable in thoracic surgery, and it has some advantages in accelerating postoperative rehabilitation.
Objective To study the application, safety and efficiency of tetracaine sprayed through thyrocricoid puncture before intubation in intensive care unit ( ICU) . Methods Forty-one patients ready to undergo intubation, admitted in ICU from November 2009 to February 2010, were recruited in the study. They were randomly divided into a tetracaine group and a control group. 2% tetracaine was sprayed through thyrocricoid puncture before intubation in the tetracaine group but not in the control group. The hemodynamic variables and SpO2 at baseline ( T0 ) , beginning of intubation ( T1 ) , 1 min after intubation ( T2 ) , and 5 min after intubation ( T3 ) were recorded. The dosage of propofol and vasoactive agents, the incidence of hypotension, the times of intubation, and complications were also recorded. Results The variance rate about heart rate ( HR) , mean arterial pressure ( MAP) and rate pressure production on time of T1 and T2 were significantly lower in the tetracaine group than those in the control group ( P lt; 0. 05) . There was no difference about the incidence of successful intubation and hypoxia ( P gt; 0. 05) . The dosage of propofol during induction and vasoactive agents after intubation in the tetracaine group were less than those in the control group ( P lt;0. 05) . The incidence of hypotension after intubation in the tetracaine group was 35% , which was lower than 61. 9% in the control group ( P lt;0. 05) . There was no any complications and adverse accidents in the tetracaine group. Conclusions It is safe and simple to spray tetracaine through thyrocricoid puncture before intubation in ICU, which can effectively stabilize the hemodynamics, and decrease the dosages of propofol and vasoactive agents.
摘要:目的: 探讨非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术(offpump coronary artery bypass grafting,OPCABG)患者的围术期管理。 方法 : 回顾分析2005 年7 月至2008 年6 月的200 例择期非体外循环下冠状动脉旁路移植术患者200例,诱导用咪唑安定005～01 mg/kg,依托咪酯03 mg/kg,芬太尼5～15 μg／kg,罗库溴铵05～10 mg／kg,麻醉维持采用持续泵注异丙酚1～4 mg/kg·h,,间断辅以05%～20%异氟烷吸入,术中随手术操作时出现的血流动力学变化,用血管活性药物调整。 结果 : 麻醉效果满意,术中血压心率基本满意。本组患者苏醒时间,拔管时间和ICU停留时间为(178±42) min、(105±40)h、(18±63)h。术毕180例患者在12 h内拔管。180例预后良好,无麻醉并发症。 结论 :非体外循环下冠状动脉旁路移植术麻醉管理的关键是合理的应用麻醉药和血管活性药来维持血流动力学平稳。Abstract: Objective: To summarize the technique and evaluate the effect of anesthesia for offpump coronary artery bypass surgery (OPCAB). Methods :From July of 2005 through June of 2008,two hundred consecutive patients undergoing OPCAB were retrospectively studied. Anesthesia was induced with midazolam 00501mg/kg, or etomidate 03mg/kg and fentanyl 515μg/kg. Anesthesia was maintained with isoflurane 05%20% and oxygen, combined with propofol 14mg/(kg·h). Intraoperative hypotension resulting from either surgical procedure or anesthetics should be dealt with inotropes immediately. Results :Intraoperative hemodynamics deviation was tolerated with the support of inotropics. The mean of patients of consciousness recovery time, tracheal extubation time and stay in ICU time were 178±42 min,105±40 hours and 18±63 hours. The patients were discharged in 80±12 days. Racheal intubation were remained 12 hours in 180 patients after operation, 180 patients had good recovery without any anesthesia complications. Conclusion : Rational use of anesthetics and inotropics to stabilize hemodynamics during operation plays a key role in successful OPCAB.
ObjectiveTo observe the effects and security of dexmedetomidine in combined spinal epidural anesthesia (CSEA) for laparoscopic total extraperitoneal hernia repair (TEP). MethodsFrom January 2010 to January 2013, we selected 90 patients who were going to receive TEP surgery as our study subjects. The patients were divided into three groups:M1, M2 and M3 with 30 patients in each. The patients had left lateral position, and anesthesia was done between 3-4 lumbar epidural line. Injection of 0.5% bupivacaine 2 mL was carried out, and epidural catheter was 3-5 cm. Anesthesia plane was adjusted from the chest 4 or 6 vertebra to the sacral vertebra. The three groups of patients were treated with micro pump using dexmedetomidine given at a pre-charge of 0.5 μg/kg, and then group M1 was maintained by 0.3 μg/(kg·h), M2 by 0.5 μg/(kg·h), and M3 by 0.7 μg/(kg·h). The changes of mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate, respiration and pulse oximetry (SpO2) were observed at each time point, and bispectral index (BIS) monitor and Ramsay sedation score test were also conducted. ResultsThe changes of MAP, heart rate and respiration in group M1 were not obvious; the Ramsay score for group M1 was 2 to 3, and BIS value after pre-charge was 65-84. For group M2, MAP, heart rate and respiration had a slight decline; Ramsay score was 3-5 points, and BIS value was 60-79. In group M3, patients had a milder decline in their MAP and respiration; the heart rate declined obviously after receiving dexmedetomidine and one patient with severe decline of the heart rate alleviated after active treatment; Ramsay score was 5 to 6 points, and BIS value was between 55 and 75. There was little change in SpO2 in all the three groups, and the difference was not statistically significant (P>0.05). ConclusionContinuous injection of dexmedetomidine at 0.3-0.5 μg/(kg·h) in CSEA is an alternative way for anesthesia, which can effectively promote sedation and reduce pain and discomfort.
Objective?To systematically evaluate the effects of thoracic epidural anesthesia on outcome after coronary artery bypass surgery. Methods?We searched PubMed, EBSCO, Springer, Ovid, and CNKI databases from 1990 through Oct. 2009 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about thoracic epidural anesthesia combined with general anesthesia versus general anesthesia alone on outcome after coronary artery bypass surgery. The methodological quality of the included RCTs was assessed and the data was extracted according to the Cochrane Reviewer’s Handbook. The homogeneous RCTs were pooled using RavMan 4.2.10 software. Results?Sixteen RCTs involving 1 316 patients met the inclusion criteria. The results of meta-analyses showed that thoracic epidural anesthesia significantly reduced time to tracheal extubation (MD= –332.43, 95%CI –640.19 to –24.68, P=0.03), visual analog scale (VAS) scores at rest on postoperation day 1 (MD= –1.23, 95%CI –2.19 to –0.27, P=0.01), VAS scores with movement on postoperation day 1 (MD= –2.52, 95%CI –4.65 to –0.39, P=0.02) and day 2 (MD= –1.5, 95%CI –2.56 to –0.43, P=0.006), and incidences of myocardial ischemia (RR=0.53, 95%CI 0.29 to 0.97, P=0.04). There were no significant differences between the two groups in postoperative pulmonary function, incidences of myocardial infarction, atrial fibrillation, and mortality. Conclusions?Thoracic epidural anesthesia could reduce postoperative time to tracheal extubation, VAS score, and incidences of myocardial ischemia, but it does not affect postoperative pulmonary function, incidences of myocardial infarction, atrial fibrillation, and mortality. More high-quality RCTs are required.