专家评述 >文章正文
专家评述 >文章正文
Object: The aim of this human study was to determine the effects of rocuronium priming, ephedrine pretreatment and rocuronium priming combined with ephedrine pretreatment on the onset time of rocuronium, to observe the extent of neuromuscular blockade and intubating conditions, and to compare with succinylcholine. Methods: One hundred patients ASAⅠ~Ⅱ, aged 23~64 years, scheduled for elective surgery were investigated and randomly allocated to 5 groups (n=20). Just before induction the patients were intravenously injected with groupⅠ saline 0.5ml, groupⅡ rocuronium 0.06mg•kg-1, group Ⅲ ephedrine 70µg•kg-1, group Ⅳ rocuronium 0.06mg•kg-1 and ephedrine 70µg•kg-1, group Ⅴ saline 0.5ml. The patients were induced with midazolam 2 mg~5mg, propofol 2 mg•kg-1~2.5mg•kg-1, fentanyl 2µg•kg-1. Followed a 4 min priming or/and pretreatment interval, the intubation dose of rocuronium were intravenously injected, groupⅠand group Ⅲ were given rocuronium 0.6mg•kg-1, groupⅡand group Ⅳ were given rocuronium 0.54mg•kg-1, group Ⅴ were given succinylcholine 1mg•kg-1. The neuromuscular block was monitored by mechanomyography (TOF-Watch SX, Organon) by using train-of four stimulation every 15s. Then endotracheal intubation was performed by a blinded investigator immediately after twitch disappeared. Th25, Th10 and Onset time (twitch disappearing time) were recorded. Jaw relaxation, vocal cord position, and diaphragmatic response were used to assess intubating conditions. Heart rate and blood pressure were observed as hemodynamic effects in all patient. Results: The onset time in groupⅠ,Ⅱ, Ⅲ , Ⅳ and Ⅴ, inseparately, was 122s±28s, 82s±18s, 83s±23s, 62s±14s, 57s±16s. The onset time of rocuronium was significantly shorter in groupⅠ, when compared with groupⅡ, Ⅲ and group Ⅳ (P<0.05). The onset time of rocuronium in group Ⅳ was faster than in groupⅡand group Ⅲ (P<0.05). But there were no differences in onset time between group Ⅳ and group Ⅴ (P=0.375). The intubating conditions were scored 8~10 in all groups, and rate of good to excellence was 100%. There were no significant changes on hemodynamic effects during induction in all groups. Conclusion: The onset time of rocuronium can be accelerate either by rocuronium priming or by ephedrine pretreatment. Accordingly, rocuronium priming combined with ephedrine pretreatment is superior to either technique used separately, the onset time and intubating conditions of which aresimilar to those of succinylcholine, a good choice for rapid tracheal intubation.
【Key words】 Priming principle; Pretreatment; Rocuronium; Ephedrine; Onset time
罗库溴铵是目前起效最快的非去极化甾类肌松药,但仍不如琥珀胆碱。本研究拟观察罗库溴铵预注、麻黄碱预处理及两种方法复合对罗库溴铵起效时间的影响,并与琥珀胆碱进行比较,为临床合理使用肌松药提供依据。
资料和方法
一般资料 选择ASAⅠ~Ⅱ级择期手术病人100例,其中男40例,女60例,年龄23~64岁,体重42~88 kg,身高150~181 cm。普外科手术 49 例,五官科手术 32 例,妇科手术 12 例,泌尿外科手术 3 例,骨科手术 2 例,神经外科手术 1 例,胸外科手术 1 例。全部病例术前无严重心肺肝肾功能不全,内分泌失调及神经肌肉传导疾病。
病人分组和麻醉诱导 100例病人随机分为5组:Ⅰ组(n=20)罗库溴铵对照组,Ⅱ组(n=20)罗库溴铵预注组,Ⅲ组(n=20)麻黄碱预处理组,Ⅳ组(n=20)预注法复合麻黄碱预处理组,Ⅴ组(n=20)琥珀胆碱对照组。入室后开放前臂静脉,常规监测EKG、NIBP、SpO2,连接加速度肌松监测仪。在麻醉诱导前预先静注:Ⅰ组生理盐水0.5ml,Ⅱ组罗库溴铵0.06mg•kg-1,Ⅲ组麻黄碱70µg•kg-1,Ⅳ组罗库溴铵0.06mg•kg-1和麻黄碱70µg•kg-1,Ⅴ组生理盐水0.5ml。然后进行麻醉诱导,咪唑安定2mg~5mg,异丙酚2mg•kg-1~2.5mg•kg-1,芬太尼2µg•kg-1。病人入睡后进行肌松定标。麻醉诱导的第4min静注插管剂量的肌松药,Ⅰ组、Ⅲ组罗库溴铵0.6mg•kg-1,Ⅱ组、Ⅳ组罗库溴铵0.54mg•kg-1,Ⅴ组琥珀胆碱1 mg•kg-1。
肌松和循环监测 采用加速度肌松监测仪(TOF-Watch SX,Organon)进行神经肌肉功能监测。麻醉前,在病人腕部尺神经位置安放表面电极,在拇指腹侧贴上加速度换能器,待病人入睡后开机,电流为60mA,肌颤高度(Th)定标为100%,然后采用四个成串刺激(TOF)每15s监测一次,Th和TOF比值由TOF-Watch SX Monitor V 1.2软件自动采样存入计算机。当Th消失时,进行气管插管。根据下颌松弛程度、声门大小和有无呛咳等情况评定气管插管条件[1],行气管插管者不知道病人分组和麻醉诱导方法。记录Th25、Th10和最大阻滞的起效时间,计算肌松临床作用时间(静注插管剂量的肌松药至Th25恢复的时间)。观察并记录麻醉诱导期间的心率及血压变化。
统计分析 采用SPSS 13.0进行统计分析,计量资料以均数±标准差(x ±s)表示,组间比较采用析因设计方差分析,循环功能指标采用重复测量的方差分析,等级资料采用Kruskal-Wallis检验法。P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。
结 果
一般资料 病人的一般资料(表1)和麻醉诱导用药量,各组间均无统计学差别(P>0.05)。表1 病例一般资料(x ±s)
(男/女) (y) (kg) (cm)
Ⅱ组 20 8/12 50±7 65±9 166±10
Ⅲ组 20 8/12 43±11 64±9 166±8
Ⅳ组 20 8/12 47±8 63±12 165±9
Ⅴ组 20 8/12 45±11 64±12 165±8
表2 肌松效应
Ⅱ组 45±10 56±12 83±19 33±7 38±13
Ⅲ组 51±14 61±18 86±23 34±11 38±13
Ⅳ组 39±12 47±8 62±13 33±10 37±12
Ⅴ组 41±14 49±15 56±15 7±2 7±1
起效时间 Ⅰ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ、Ⅳ、Ⅴ组的最大阻滞起效时间分别为122s±28s、82s±18s、83s±23s、62s±14s、57s±16s;Ⅱ组、Ⅲ组、Ⅳ组的起效时间明显快于Ⅰ组(P<0.05);Ⅳ组的起效时间较Ⅱ组、Ⅲ组加快(P<0.05);Ⅳ组与Ⅴ组之间起效时间的差别无统计学意义(P=0.375)。