河北医科大学学报 ›› 2023, Vol. 44 ›› Issue (6): 707-712.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-3205.2023.06.017

• • 上一篇    下一篇

异丙酚-芬太尼与咪达唑仑-芬太尼用于晚期肝病胃肠内镜检查安全性比较

  

  1. 南京中医药大学附属南京医院,南京市第二医院麻醉科,江苏 南京 210000

  • 出版日期:2023-06-25 发布日期:2023-06-29
  • 作者简介:刘婷婷(1992-),女,江苏南京人,江苏省南京市第二医院医师,医学学士,从事临床麻醉学研究。
  • 基金资助:
    江苏省自然科学基金面上项目(BK20181145)

Comparison of safety between propofol fentanyl and midazolam fentanyl for gastrointestinal endoscopy in advanced liver diseases

  1. Department of Anesthesiology, the Second Hospital of Nanjing City, Nanjing Hospital Affilated to 
    Nanjing University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jiangsu Province, Nanjing 210000, China

  • Online:2023-06-25 Published:2023-06-29

摘要: 目的 比较异丙酚-芬太尼与咪达唑仑-芬太尼用于晚期肝病患者胃肠内镜检查的安全性。
方法 招募因肝硬化接受胃肠内镜检查的晚期肝病患者86例。所有患者均进行上消化道内镜检查,根据麻醉用药方案将患者分为异丙酚-芬太尼组和咪达唑仑-芬太尼组,每组43例。异丙酚-芬太尼组给予静脉注射异丙酚2 mg/kg和芬太尼0.5 μg/kg。咪达唑仑-芬太尼组给予静脉注射咪达唑仑3 mg和芬太尼0.5 μg/kg。比较诱导前(T0)、镇静后5 min(T1)、镇静后10 min(T2)、镇静后15 min(T3),镇静后30 min(T4)、手术结束前5 min(T5)血流动力学参数[血氧饱和度(oxygen saturation,SpO2)、心率(heart rate,HR)、平均动脉压(mean arterial pressure,MAP)]变化。比较T0~T5时点Ramsay镇静评分。比较术前、麻醉诱导、气管插管和术后的脑电图双谱指数(bispectral index,BIS)值、脑电图θ波和δ波波段频率。比较受试者手术期间不良反应发生情况。
结果 2组SpO2水平呈逐渐升高趋势,HR水平呈逐渐降低趋势,异丙酚-芬太尼组SpO2水平升高幅度大于咪达唑仑-芬太尼组,HR水平降低幅度大于咪达唑仑-芬太尼组,组间、时点间、组间·时点间交互作用差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。2组Ramsay镇静评分、脑电图δ波波段均呈先升高再降低趋势,BIS和脑电图θ波波段呈先降低再升高趋势,异丙酚-芬太尼组Ramsay镇静评分、BIS、脑电图θ波波段、脑电图δ波波段波动幅度大于咪达唑仑-芬太尼组,组间、时点间、组间·时点间交互作用差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。异丙酚-芬太尼组低血压发生率高于咪达唑仑-芬太尼组(P<0.05)。
结论 异丙酚或咪达唑仑与芬太尼联合使用对上消化道内窥镜检查的晚期肝病患者的镇静作用是有效的,与咪达唑仑相比,异丙酚药物能更好的发挥深度镇静作用,体现在BIS降低和脑电图δ波段频率升高,然而会增加低血压的发生风险。


关键词: 终末期肝病, 内窥镜检查, 异丙酚, 咪达唑仑

Abstract: Objective To compare the safety of propofol fentanyl and midazolam fentanyl for gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients with advanced liver disease. 
Methods A total of 86 patients with advanced liver disease who underwent gastrointestinal endoscopy due to cirrhosis were recruited. All patients underwent upper gastrointestinal endoscopy examination. Patients were divided into propofol fentanyl group (n=43) and midazolam fentanyl group (n=43), according to the anesthesia medications. The propofol fentanyl group received intravenous propofol 2 mg/kg and fentanyl 0.5 μg/kg, while the midazolam fentanyl group received intravenous midazolam 3 mg and fentanyl 0.5 μg/kg. Changes in hemodynamic parameters [oxygen saturation (SpO2), heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP)] before induction (T0), at 5 min after sedation (T1), 10 min after sedation (T2), 15 min after sedation (T3), 30 min after sedation (T4), and at 5 min before surgery (T5). The Ramsay sedation scores at T0 to T5 were compared. The bispectral index (BIS) values, and postoperative electroencephalogram (EEG) θ wave and δ wave band frequency before surgery, before anesthesia induction, before tracheal intubation and after surgery were compared. The occurrence of adverse reactions during surgery among the subjects was compared. 
Results The SpO2 levels in the two groups showed a gradual upward trend, while the HR levels showed a gradual downward trend. The increase in SpO2 levels in the propofol fentanyl group was greater than that in the midazolam fentanyl group, while the decrease in HR level was greater than that in the midazolam fentanyl group. There were statistically significant difference in the interaction between groups, time points, and time points between groups (P<0.05). The Ramsay sedation scores and EEG δ wave band showed a trend of initial increasing and then decreasing in the two groups, while BIS and EEG θ wave band showed a trend of initial decreasing and then increasing. The Ramsay sedation score, BIS, and fluctuation amplitude of EEG θ wave band, EEG δ wave band were greater in the propofol fentanyl group than in the midazolam fentanyl group, and there were statistically significant difference in the interaction between groups, time points, and time points between groups (P<0.05). The incidence of hypotension in the propofol fentanyl group was higher than that in the midazolam fentanyl group (P<0.05). 
Conclusion Propofol or midazolam in combination with fentanyl is effective in sedating patients with advanced liver disease undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Compared with midazolam, propofol can better exert effects of deep sedation, which is reflected in a decrease in BIS and an increase in EEG δ wave band frequency. However, it increases the risk of hypotension. 


Key words: end-stage liver disease, endoscopy, propofol, midazolam