瑞马唑仑结合丙泊酚方案对鼻整形患者围手术期体动及呼吸抑制情况的影响
作者:
作者单位:

作者简介:

汤国亮(1982.9-),男,河北南皮县人,本科,副主任医师,主要从事临床麻醉工作

通讯作者:

中图分类号:

R622

基金项目:


Effect of Remazolam Combined with Propofol on Body Movement and Respiratory Depression During the Perioperative Period for Patients Undergoing Rhinoplasty
Author:
Affiliation:

Fund Project:

  • 摘要
  • |
  • 图/表
  • |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献
  • |
  • 相似文献
  • |
  • 引证文献
  • |
  • 资源附件
  • |
  • 文章评论
    摘要:

    目的 观察对鼻整形患者应用瑞马唑仑结合丙泊酚方案的效果及对围手术期体动及呼吸抑制情况 的影响。方法 选取2022年6月-2024年2月南皮县人民医院收治的88例鼻整形患者,根据信封法分为对照 组和观察组,每组44例。对照组采用丙泊酚麻醉方案,观察组采用瑞马唑仑结合丙泊酚麻醉方案。比较两 组麻醉前(T0)、麻醉10 min后(T1)、麻醉40 min后(T2)生命体征变化[心率(HR)、收缩压(SBP)、 舒张压(DBP)]、麻醉效果(麻醉时间、苏醒时间、离开监测室时间)、镇痛质量(VAS评分)、呼吸 抑制情况(呼吸频率、呼吸道梗阻)及体动情况。结果 两组T0期间HR、SBP以及DBP比较,差异无统 计学意义(P >0.05),而观察组T1、T2期间HR、SBP以及DBP水平优于对照组(P <0.05)。观察组麻 醉时间、苏醒时间、离开监测室时间短于对照组(P <0.05)。观察组术后3、12、24 h的VAS评分均低 于对照组(P <0.05)。观察组麻醉1 min后呼吸频率高于对照组,呼吸道梗阻人数低于对照组(P<0.05)。观 察组体动发生率为4.55%,低于对照组的9.09%,但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 相较于单一应用丙 泊酚,配合应用瑞马唑仑安全系数相对更高,且对呼吸质量较好,麻醉效果确切。

    Abstract:

    Objective To observe the effect of remazolam combined with propofol in patients with rhinoplasty and its effect on body movement and respiratory depression during the perioperative period. Methods A total of 88 patients with rhinoplasty were selected in Nanpi County People's Hospital from June 2022 to February 2024, and they were divided into control group and observation group according to envelope method, with 44 patients in each group. The control group was treated with propofol for anesthesia, and the observation group was treated with remifentanil combined with propofol for anesthesia. The changes of vital signs [heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP)] before anesthesia (T0), 10 min after anesthesia (T1) and 40 min after anesthesia (T2), anesthetic effect (anesthesia time, recovery time, leaving the monitoring room time), analgesic quality (VAS score), respiratory depression (respiratory frequency, respiratory obstruction) and body movement were compared between the two groups. Results There was no significant difference in HR, SBP and DBP between the two groups during T0 (P >0.05), while the levels of HR, SBP and DBP in the observation group during T1 and T2 were better than those in the control group (P <0.05). The anesthesia time, recovery time and leaving monitoring room time in the observation group were shorter than those in the control group (P <0.05). The VAS score of the observation group at 3,12 and 24 h after operation was lower than that of the control group (P <0.05). The respiratory rate of the observation group was higher than that of the control group after 1 min of anesthesia, and the number of respiratory tract obstruction was lower than that of the control group (P <0.05).The incidence of body movement in the observation group was 4.55%, which was lower than 9.09% in the control group, but the difference was not statistically significant (P >0.05). Conclusion Compared with the single application of propofol, the safety factor of combined application of remazolam is relatively higher, and the respiratory quality is better, the anesthetic effect is exact.

    参考文献
    相似文献
    引证文献
引用本文

汤国亮.瑞马唑仑结合丙泊酚方案对鼻整形患者围手术期体动及呼吸抑制情况的影响[J].医学美学美容,2024,33(11):132-135.

复制
分享
文章指标
  • 点击次数:
  • 下载次数:
  • HTML阅读次数:
  • 引用次数:
历史
  • 收稿日期:
  • 最后修改日期:
  • 录用日期:
  • 在线发布日期: 2024-06-24
  • 出版日期: