国际麻醉学与复苏杂志   2020, Issue (6): 6-6
    
右美托咪定在局部麻醉俯卧位下经皮穿刺椎间孔镜术中镇痛镇静的安全性和有效性评估
孙丽, 高昌俊, 郭飞, 陈志阳, 郭瑜1()
1.第四军医大学研究生院
Evaluation of safety and efficacy of dexmedetomidine for analgesia and sedation under local anesthesia in percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy in prone position
 全文:
摘要:

目的 评价右美托咪定(dexmedetomidine, Dex)在严密的麻醉监护下俯卧位行经皮穿刺椎间孔镜术(percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy, PTED)术中镇静镇痛的安全性及其辅助局部麻醉药物的有效性。 方法 选择择期行PTED的患者120例,采用随机数字表法分为3组(每组40例):Dex低剂量组(D1组,Dex负荷剂量1 µg/kg输注10 min后,维持剂量0.3 µg·kg−1·h−1)、Dex高剂量组(D2组,Dex负荷剂量1 µg/kg输注10 min后,维持剂量0.5 µg·kg−1·h−1)及生理盐水组(C组,生理盐水1.5 ml·kg−1·h−1速度输入10 min后,维持速度0.125 ml·kg−1·h−1)。记录镇静前(T0)、手术开始时(T1)、环钻打磨关节突时(T2)以及术毕时(T3)患者的心率、MAP、SpO2及BIS;T3时点记录手术时间、利多卡因用量、晶体液输入量;T2时点记录VAS评分、Ramsay镇静评分及疼痛发生率。 结果 T1、T2、T3时点,与C组比较,D1组和D2组心率、MAP及BIS均明显降低(P<0.05);与D1组比较,D2组心率进一步降低(P<0.05)。在T1时点,D2组MAP较D1组明显降低(P<0.05);与C组比较,D1组和D2组利多卡因用量、VAS评分及疼痛发生率明显降低,而Ramsay镇静评分明显增加(P<0.05);与D1组比较,D2组VAS评分及疼痛发生率明显降低(P<0.05)。 结论 在严密的麻醉监护下,俯卧位时使用Dex能够有效缓解PTED患者的疼痛和焦虑,并减少局部麻醉药物的使用量。

关键词: 右美托咪定; 经皮穿刺椎间孔镜术; 镇静; 镇痛; 监护麻醉; 俯卧位
Abstract:

Objective To evaluate the safety of dexmedetomidine (Dex) for sedation and analgesia for patients undergoing percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) in prone position under close monitoring and its effect on assisting local infiltration anesthesia. Methods A total of 120 patients scheduled for PTED were divided into three groups (n=40), according to random number table method: low dose Dex group (D1 group, loading dose 1 µg/kg for 10 min, followed by 0.3 µg·kg−1·h−1), higher dose Dex group (D2 group, loading dose 1 µg/kg for 10 min, followed by 0.5 µg·kg−1·h−1) and a normal saline group (C group, 1.5 ml·kg−1·h−1 for 10 min, followed by 0.125 ml·kg−1·h−1). Heart rate, mean arterial pressure (MAP), pulse oxygen saturation (SpO2) and bispectral index (BIS) were recorded at each time point such as before sedation (T0), at the beginning of the operation (T1), during grinding the articular process with a trephine (T2) and at the end of the operation (T3). The operative time, lidocaine dosage and crystalloid fluid input were recorded at T3, and the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores, Ramsay Sedation Scale and incidence of pain were recorded at T2. Results At T1, T2 and T3, compared with C group, the heart rate, MAP and BIS in D1 and D2 groups were significantly lower (P<0.05), while compared with D1 group, the heart rate in the D2 group further decreased (P<0.05). At T1, the MAP in the D2 group was significantly lower than that in the D1 group (P<0.05). Compared with C group, the lidocaine dosage, VAS score and the incidence of pain in the D1 and D2 groups were significantly lower, while Ramsay Sedation Scale was significantly increased (P<0.05). Compared with D1 group, the VAS score and the incidence of pain in the D2 group were significantly higher (P<0.05). Conclusions Dex can effectively and safely relieve pain and anxiety in PTED patients and reduce the use of local anesthetics in prone position under close anesthesia monitoring.

Key words: Dexmedetomidine; Percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy; Sedation; Analgesia; Monitoring anesthesia care; Prone position