摘要
目的比较丙泊酚与依托咪酯对全麻诱导期间血流动力学的变化和围麻醉期不良反应。方法选择全麻下行腹部手术患者100例,随机分为丙泊酚组(P组)和依托咪酯组(E组),P组静脉给予咪达唑仑-丙泊酚-芬太尼-罗库溴铵诱导,E组用依托咪酯替换P组丙泊酚。观察两组患者诱导前(T0)、插管前(T1)、插管后3 min(T2)循环、应激和其他不良反应。结果组间比较,T1 SBP和HR、T2SBP、DBP和HR,E组大于P组,注射痛P组多于E组,肌颤E组多于P组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论依托咪酯更适用于循环功能不稳定者;两者对血糖均无影响。
Objective To observe the effect of propofol and etomidate for anesthesia induction on hemodynamics and adverse reactions during the perioperative period. Methods One hundred patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery were randomly divided into the propofol group （Group P） and etomidate group（Group E）. For anesthesia induction, successively injected midazolam-propofol-fentanyl-rocuronium in Group P, and the propofol was replaced by eto- midate in Group P. The circulation, stress and the adverse reactions before induction（T0）, before intubation（T1）, 3 rain after intubation （T2）, two groups were recorded. Results Compared with the P group, the T1 SBP, HR, T2 SBP, DBP, and HR were higer in E group; The incidence of injection pain was higher in Group P, but the incidence of muscle tremors was lower in Group P（P 〈 0.05）. Conclusion The etomidate is more suitable for the patients with hemodynamic instability. Both etomidate and propofol has no effect on blood sugar.
出处
《中国现代医生》
2014年第23期55-57,共3页
China Modern Doctor
基金
浙江省中西医结合疼痛医学创新学科建设计划(2012-XK-A31)
浙江省嘉兴市疼痛医学重点科技创新团队项目(2011-CX-02)
关键词
依托咪酯
丙泊酚
全麻诱导
血流动力学
不良反应
Etomidate
Propofol
General anesthesia induction
Hemodynamic
Adverse reactions
