国际麻醉学与复苏杂志   2021, Issue (9): 5-5
    
瑞马唑仑与丙泊酚用于无痛胃肠镜检查临床比较
赵颖颖, 李锋1()
1.盐城市第一人民医院
Comparison of efficacy and safety between remimazolam and propofol in painless gastroenteroscopy
 全文:
摘要:

目的 探讨瑞马唑仑复合酒石酸布托啡诺在门诊无痛胃肠镜检查中的应用效果。 方法 将70例择期行无痛胃肠镜检查的患者按随机数字表法分为丙泊酚组(A组)和瑞马唑仑组(B组),每组35例。麻醉诱导方案:A组酒石酸布托啡诺0.6 mg+丙泊酚1.5~2.0 mg/kg,B组酒石酸布托啡诺0.6 mg+瑞马唑仑0.2 mg/kg。比较两组患者围手术期低血压和低氧血症发生情况,术前(t1)、手术开始时(t2)、手术开始后5 min(t3)、手术开始后10 min(t4)、手术结束时(t5)、完全清醒时(t6)MAP、心率、SpO2及BIS,无痛胃肠镜的麻醉效果、苏醒时间、加药次数,不良反应发生情况,离开内镜中心后4 h与24 h时随访情况。 结果 与A组比较,B组低氧血症发生率明显降低(P<0.05);两组患者低血压发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。A组t2、t3、t4、t5时MAP低于B组(P<0.05),t4时心率低于B组(P<0.05),t2、t4时BIS值低于B组(P<0.05);两组患者各时点SpO2比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两组患者苏醒时间、加药次数及麻醉效果优良率比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。与A组比较,B组注射痛发生率明显降低(P<0.05);其余不良反应发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两组患者苏醒后头晕发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。 结论 复合酒石酸布托啡诺的情况下,瑞马唑仑用于胃肠镜检查在获得不亚于丙泊酚的麻醉效果时,呼吸循环抑制作用较轻,不良反应发生率较低。

关键词: 瑞马唑仑; 布托啡诺; 二异丙酚; 无痛胃肠镜
Abstract:

Objective To investigate the effect of remimazolam combined with butorphanol in outpatient painless gastroenteroscopy. Methods According to the random number table method, 70 patients who were scheduled for painless gastroenteroscopy were divided into two groups (n=35): propofol group (group A) and remimazolam group (group B). Anesthesia induction program: group A was given butorphanol tartrate 0.6 mg combined with propofol 1.5‒2.0 mg/kg, group B received butorphanol tartrate 0.6 mg combined with remimazolam 0.2 mg/kg. Both groups were compared for the incidence of perioperative hypotension and hypoxemia. Their mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate, pulse oxygen saturation (SpO2) and bispectral index (BIS) before surgery (t1), at the beginning of surgery (t2), 5 min after surgery (t3), 10 min after surgery (t4), at the end of surgery (t5), and after fully emergence (t6) were recorded. The anesthetic effect, emergence time, dosage times of rescue analgesia, and adverse reactions were observed. The patients were followed up 4 h and 24 h after leaving endoscopy center. Results Compared with group A, group B presented remarkably reduced incidence of hypoxemia (P<0.05). There was no statistical difference in the incidence of hypotension between the two groups (P>0.05). The MAP of group A was lower than that of group B at t2, t3, t4 and t5 (P<0.05). The heart rate of group A was lower than that of group B at t4 (P<0.05). The BIS value in group A was lower than that in group B at t2 and t4 (P<0.05). There were no statistical differences in SpO2 between the two groups at each time points (P>0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the rate of anesthetic effect, emergence time and the dosage number of rescue analgesia (P>0.05). The percentage of injection pain obviouisly decreased in group B, compared with group A. The difference in adverse reactions between the two groups was statistically significant (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of dizziness after recovery between the two groups (P>0.05). Conclusions In combination with butorphanol tartrate, remimazolam is used in painless gastroenteroscopy and achieve an anesthetic effect not inferior to that of propofol, with less respiratory and circulatory system inhibition and a low incidence of adverse react ions, which is an effective scheme for outpatient intravenous anesthesia.

Key words: Remimazolam; Butorphanol; Propofol; Painless gastroenteroscopy