论文部分内容阅读
[目的]主要探讨静脉麻醉不同配伍方式与苏醒期躁动的关系。[方法]选择静脉全麻下行无痛胃镜检查术的患者300例，随机分为三组：丙泊酚＋芬太尼组（PF组）、丙泊酚＋瑞芬太尼组（PR组）、丙泊酚＋舒芬太尼组（PS组），各组均100例。记录用药前、用药后、胃镜退出时平均动脉压（MAP）、脉搏氧饱和度（SpO2），胃镜退出后观察躁动发生情况，并按镇静躁动分级法对其苏醒状况进行评分。[结果]苏醒期躁动的发生率分别为：PR组39％（39/100）、PS组11％（11/100）、PF组17％（17/100）。PR组与 PS组及 PF组相比，躁动发生率均显著增高（P≤0．01），而PS组与PF组相比则无显著差异（P＞0．05）。PR组低氧血症发生率（11％）明显高于PS组（1％）与PF组（2％），差异均有显著性（P＜0．01）。[结论]丙泊酚＋芬太尼组及丙泊酚＋舒芬太尼组苏醒期躁动发生率和低氧血症发生率明显低于丙泊酚＋瑞芬太尼组，为静脉全麻较好配伍方式。“,”[Objective] To explore the relationship between different combined intravenous anesthesia methods and agitation in recovery period .[Methods]Totally 300 patients undergoing painless gastroscopy un-der intravenous anesthesia were chosen and randomly divided into propofol + fentanyl group (group PF) , propofol+remifentanil group(group PR) and propofol+sufentanil group(PS) with 100 patients in each group . Mean arterial pressure (MAP) and pulse oxygen saturation(SpO2 ) before and after administration and at gas-troscope withdrawal were recorded .The incidence of agitation after gastroscope withdrawal was observed .The sedation agitation classification method was used to assess the recovery status .[Results] The incidence of agi-tation of group PR ,group PS and group PF in recovery period were 39% (39/100) ,11% (11/100) and 17%(17/100) ,respectively .Compared with group PS and group PF ,the incidence of agitation in group PR was significantly increased ( P≤0 .01) ,but there was no significant difference between group PS and group PF ( P>0 .05) .The incidence of hypoxemia in group PR (11% ) was obviously higher than that in group PS (1% ) and group PF(2% ) ,and there was significant difference( P <0 .01) .[Conclusion]The incidence of agitation and hypoxemia in propofol+fentanyl group and propofol+ sufentanil group in recovery period were lower than that in propofol+ remifentanil group ,so it provides a good combined intravenous anesthesia method .