论文部分内容阅读
目的 本次试验将采用罗哌卡因与布比卡因对腰-硬联合麻醉的临床效果进行分析，更好地为手术提供服务。方法 本次试验选取了2018年6月至2019年5月前来本院进行疾病检查及治疗的患者为对象，经过专业科室检查，开展下腹手术治疗。在自愿参与试验调的患者中，采用计算机随机数字表法，对120例患者进行麻醉使用效果的讨论。对照组患者采用布比卡因，观察组则为罗哌卡因，分析不同麻醉方式所产生的临床效果和使用安全性。结果 观察组为腰硬联合麻醉的起效时间为（3.82±2.51）min，对照组为（3.52±1.86）min，与此“,”Objective This experiment will use ropivacaine and bupivacaine to analyze the clinical effect of combined spinal and epidural anesthesia， so as to provide better service for surgery. Methods From June 2018 to may 2019， the patients who came to our hospital for disease examination and treatment were selected as the subjects in this experiment. After professional department examination， they carried out lower abdominal surgery. Among the patients who voluntarily participated in the experimental investigation， 120 patients were used to discuss the effect of anesthesia by using the method of computer random number table. Bupivacaine was used in the control group and ropivacaine was used in the observation group. Results The onset time of combined spinal-epidural anesthesia in the observation group was (3.82±2.51) min， and the control group was (3.52±1.86) min. At the same time， the time of T10 analgesia in the observation group was (146.24±1.74) min. The control group is (114.58±1.63) min， the difference between the groups is more significant， with statistical significance (P＜0.05). In the duration of exercise block， the observation group was (271.36±1.52) min， which was shorter than the control group (224.36±1.29) min， and the difference between the groups was significant (P＜0.05). On the onset time of sensory block， the observation group was (73.60±7.60) s， the control group was (62.30±3.90) s， the duration of sensory block was (223.24±1.52) s in the observation group， and the control group was (158.63±1.89) s， the difference between the groups was significant (P＜0.05). At the same time， the total score of the modified Bromage assessment method was (1.65±0.54) points for the observation group and (1.95±0.57) points for the control group， and the difference between the groups was significant (P＜0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions in the observation group was 5.00% (3/60)， which was significantly lower than the 11.67% (7/60) in the control group， and the difference was statistically significant (P＜0.05). In the indicators of HR， SpO2 and MAP， there was no difference between the two groups before anesthesia and after the first injection of anesthetic (P＞0.05); but there was a significant difference at 5 min and 10 min after administration (P＜0.05). Conclusion Ropivacaine is more safe and effective in combined spinal and epidural anesthesia. It can provide convenience and guarantee for surgical treatment， and is beneficial to the early recovery of patients after surgery. It is an effective local anesthetic and can be widely used.