右美托咪定与哌替啶在肝癌射频消融术患者中的麻醉效果比较

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1671-7171.2024.11.017

Abstract
Figure/Table
References
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (1208 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract 【Objective】To compare the anesthetic effects of dexmedetomidine (Dex) and pethidine on patients undergoing radiofrequency ablation for liver cancer and their impact on regional cerebral oxygen saturation (rSO₂).【Methods】A total of 98 patients scheduled for radiofrequency ablation for liver cancer were divided into two groups based on the anesthetic methods: the observation group (Dex, n=50) and the control group (pethidine, n=48). The Ramsay sedation score, heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), rSO₂ levels, and incidence of adverse reactions were compared between the two groups at baseline (T₀), 10 minutes before the start of the procedure (T₁), at the end of the procedure (T₂), and 24 hours postoperatively (T₃).【Results】At T₁ and T₂, the Ramsay sedation scores of both groups were higher than that at T₀ (P<0.05), and the observation group had higher Ramsay sedation scores than the control group at T₁ and T₂ (P<0.05). At T₁, both groups had lower HR and MAP compared to T₀, and at T₂, both groups had higher rSO₂ levels compared to T₀ (P<0.05). The control group had lower HR and MAP at T₂ compared to T₀, and higher rSO₂ at T₁ compared to T₀ (P<0.05). At T₂, the HR and MAP of the observation group were higher than those of the control group (P<0.05), while rSO₂ was lower (P<0.05). The overall incidence of adverse reactions in the observation group was lower than that in the control group (P<0.05).【Conclusion】Compared to pethidine, Dex provides better anesthetic effects for patients undergoing radiofrequency ablation for liver cancer, has a smaller impact on rSO₂, and reduces the incidence of adverse reactions.

Key words： Liver Neoplasms Catheter Ablation Dexmedetomidine/TU Meperidine/TU Anesthesia

Received: 20 May 2024

PACS:

R735.7

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	YANG Yu
	LIU Min
	ZHU Qinqin

Cite this article:

YANG Yu,LIU Min,ZHU Qinqin. Comparison of Anesthetic Effects of Dexmedetomidine and Pethidine in Patients Undergoing Radiofrequency Ablation for Liver Cancer[J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL RESEARCH, 2024, 41(11): 1689-1691.

URL:

http://journal07.magtech.org.cn/yxlcyj/EN/10.3969/j.issn.1671-7171.2024.11.017 OR http://journal07.magtech.org.cn/yxlcyj/EN/Y2024/V41/I11/1689

[1] 安美仪,张文轩,池元伟. CT引导下经皮射频消融术治疗小肝癌的效果及对肝功能指标、并发症的影响研究[J].当代医药论丛,2024,22(5):51-54.
[2] 王略伟,程建军,洪伟,等. 咪达唑仑、地佐辛复合瑞芬太尼在肝癌患者射频消融术中的应用效果观察[J].中国医院用药评价与分析,2024,24(2):173-175.
[3] 吴健,赵亮. 超声引导下单次竖脊肌平面阻滞对肝癌切除术患者静脉自控镇痛效果的影响[J].实用医药杂志,2021,38(7):592-595.
[4] 丁国飞. 右美托咪定复合瑞芬太尼对肝癌射频消融术患者血流动力学、镇痛效果的影响[J].现代诊断与治疗,2023,34(19):2911-2913.
[5] 杭燕南. 当代麻醉学[M].2版. 上海:上海科学技术出版社, 2013:115-116.
[6] 贾建平. 中国痴呆与认知障碍诊治指南[M]. 北京:人民卫生出版社, 2010:89-90.
[7] 王小东,王石,郑宇,等. No-touch射频消融技术对小肝癌患者治疗获益及血清AFP、GPC3和无进展生存期的影响[J].现代消化及介入诊疗,2024,29(5):625-628.
[8] 张振伦. CT引导下经皮射频消融术治疗小肝癌的临床效果及对肝功能指标、并发症的影响[J].中国当代医药,2023,30(18):74-77.
[9] 张辉,龚玲,郭茜,等. 肝癌全身麻醉射频消融术后应用舒更葡糖钠逆转神经肌肉阻滞的回顾性研究[J].外科理论与实践,2023,28(1):72-76.
[10] 王翔宇. 右美托咪定复合舒芬太尼在肝癌射频消融术中的麻醉效果[J].中国实用医刊,2021,48(17):52-55.
[11] 张春丽,徐志新,孙虎,等. 右美托咪定联合七氟烷吸入麻醉对肝癌患者根治术后心功能及胃肠道功能的影响[J].成都医学院学报,2024,19(4):649-653.
[12] 石国荣, 魏秀琴, 王雪芳, 等. 右美托咪定对老年肝癌切除术患者脑氧代谢及血清DynA1-13、NSE含量的干预效果[J].中国临床研究, 2020, 33(3):294-298.
[13] 王莹莹,周平,程蕾. 右美托咪定复合七氟醚麻醉接受肝叶切除术治疗原发性肝癌患者麻醉效果分析[J].实用肝脏病杂志,2024,27(2):267-270.
[14] 刘瑞,王敏,王一涵. 右美托咪定联合胸椎旁神经阻滞对肝癌手术患者镇痛效果和认知功能障碍的影响[J].系统医学,2023,8(9):34-38.
[15] 张永杰,卫肖肖,谢小娟. 右美托咪定在肝癌手术患者中的应用效果[J].癌症进展,2024,22(4):413-416.