论文部分内容阅读
目的:评价瑞马唑仑复合丙泊酚用于患儿门诊根管治疗术镇静的效果。方法:择期行门诊根管治疗术的患儿70例，性别不限，年龄2~6岁，ASA分级Ⅰ或Ⅱ级，治疗时间<1 h。采用随机数字表法分为2组(n n＝35)：丙泊酚组(P组)和瑞马唑仑复合丙泊酚组(RP组)。麻醉诱导：P组静脉注射丙泊酚1~3 mg/kg直至BIS值<60，RP组静脉注射瑞马唑仑0.2 mg/kg和丙泊酚1~3 mg/kg直至BIS值<60。麻醉维持：P组静脉输注丙泊酚6~12 mg·kgn -1·hn -1；RP组静脉输注丙泊酚6~12 mg·kgn -1·hn -1和瑞马唑仑0.3 mg·kgn -1·hn -1。术中维持BIS值50~70。保留自主呼吸，鼻导管吸氧，氧流量2~3 L/min。记录丙泊酚诱导期用量、维持期用量及总用量；记录镇静起效时间、手术时间、苏醒时间和PACU停留时间；记录术中呼吸抑制、低血压、心动过缓、呛咳、体动反应、苏醒期躁动和术后恶心呕吐等的发生情况。n 结果:与P组比较，RP组丙泊酚诱导期、维持期及总用量减少，镇静起效时间延长，苏醒时间和PACU停留时间缩短，呼吸抑制发生率降低(n P0.05)。2组均未见术中呛咳及术后恶心呕吐发生。n 结论:瑞马唑仑复合丙泊酚用于患儿门诊根管治疗术镇静的效果优于单独使用丙泊酚。“,”Objective:To evaluate the effect of remimazolam combined with propofol for sedation in the pediatric patients undergoing outpatient root canal treatment.Methods:Seventy pediatric patients of either sex, aged 2-6 yr, of American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status Ⅰ or Ⅱ, with an expected treatment time<1 h, scheduled for elective outpatient root canal treatment, were divided into 2 groups (n n=35 each) using a random number table method: propofol group (P group) and remimazolam plus propofol group (RP group). Induction of anesthesia was as follows: propofol 1-3 mg/kg was intravenously injected until BIS value was less than 60 in group P, and remimazolam 0.2 mg/kg and propofol 1-3 mg/kg were intravenously injected until BIS value was less than 60 in group RP.Anesthesia maintenance was as follows: propofol 6-12 mg·kgn -1·hn -1 was intravenously infused in group P, and remimazolam 0.3 mg·kgn -1·hn -1 and propofol 6-12 mg·kgn -1·hn -1 were intravenously infused in group RP.The BIS value was maintained at 50-70 during operation.Spontaneous breathing was kept, and oxygen was inhaled through a nasal catheter with oxygen flow rate of 2-3 L/min in both groups.The amount of propofol consumed during induction and maintenance periods and the total consumption were recorded.The onset time of sedation, duration of operation, emergence time and duration of post-anesthesia care unit stay were recorded.The adverse reactions such as intraoperative respiratory depression, hypotension, bradycardia, coughing and body movement, emergence agitation and postoperative nausea and vomiting were recorded.n Results:Compared with group P, the amount of propofol consumed during induction and maintenance periods and the total consumption were significantly reduced, the onset time of sedation was prolonged, the emergence time and duration of post-anesthesia care unit stay were shorted, the incidence of respiratory depression was decreased (n P0.05). No intraoperative coughing or postoperative nausea and vomiting was found in two groups.n Conclusions:The combination of remimazolam and propofol provides better efficacy than propofol alone when used for sedation in the pediatric patients undergoing outpatient dental root canal treatment.