|摘要||目的 观察靶控输注方式对老年患者麻醉剂用量、血流动力学和苏醒等方面的影响.方法 2009年4月至2010年2月于北京大学第三医院行腹腔镜结直肠癌手术的65岁以上患者60例,经过医院伦理委员会的批准,根据随机数字表将患者随机分为手控输注(MCI组,n=30例)和靶控输注(TCI组,n=30例).麻醉诱导,MCI组丙泊酚输注速度为200 ml/h,TCI组初始丙泊酚血浆浓度2.0μg/ml,逐渐增加靶浓度,至患者意识消失.两组瑞芬太尼输注方案相同.气管插管后根据脑电双频指数(BIS)调整丙泊酚输注速度或靶浓度,根据血流动力学参数变化调整瑞芬太尼输注速度.记录患者意识消失时间、插管时间、诱导和维持阶段丙泊酚和瑞芬太尼用量、血压、心率、调整泵速或靶浓度的次数及苏醒时间.结果 两组患者意识消失时间、插管时间、意识消失时丙泊酚用量、维持期丙泊酚用量、插管前及维持期间瑞芬太尼用量的差异无统计学意义,在维持过程中TCI调整靶浓度的次数明显低于MCI组调整输注速度的次数[(5.8±2.1)vs(7.8±3.7)次,P＜0.01].两组患者BIS值、血压、心率的变化、血管活性药的应用、苏醒时间的差异无统计学意义.结论 虽然靶控输注系统操作简单,维持过程中调整次数少,但在老年人采用靶控输注在诱导和维持期丙泊酚用量、维持血流动力学和麻醉深度的稳定性、以及术后苏醒等方面,无明显优势.
Objective To evaluate the impact of anesthesia via target-controlled infusion (TCI) on drug consumption, intraoperative hemodynamic stability and recovery compared with manual-controlled infusion (MCI) in elderly patients. Methods Under the approval of the hospital ethics committee, 60elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery were randomly allocated by random numbers to either the MCI group (n =30) or the TCI group (n =30). The patients in MCI group received an infusion of propofol at 200 ml/h while those in TCI group propofol at an initial plasma concentration of 2.0μg/ml and titrated upwards by 0.5μg/ml steps until loss of consciousness. Both groups received an infusion of remifentanil.After intubation, the infusion rate or the target concentration of propofol was titrated to maintain BIS (bispectral index) values between 40 and 60. The infusion of remifentanil was adapted to intraoperative hemodynamics. The doses of propofol and remifentanil were recorded, the hemodynamic parameters and the use of vasoactive drugs collected and the recovery times assessed. Results The time of loss of consciousness and the time to intubation, the doses of propofol and remifentanil during induction and maintenance were not significantly different between two groups. The times of pump adjustment were less in TCI group versus MCI group [(5.8±2.1)vs(7.8±3.7) times, P＜0.01]. Blood pressure and heart rates were not statistically different at any time point between two groups. There were no significant differences in BIS or the use of vasoactive drugs between two groups. The recovery times were similar for two groups. Conclusion Although target infusion system is easy to use and requires less time of adjustment, it fails to show added benefit on propofol consumption, hemodynamic stability, anesthesia depth and recovery in elderly patients.|