切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华卫生应急电子杂志 ›› 2015, Vol. 01 ›› Issue (03) : 22 -25. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-9133.2015.03.007

论著

瑞芬太尼-咪达唑仑清醒镇静镇痛在急诊医学应用的可行性研究
卢魁1, 郭嘉1, 张秋婷1, 刘宗元1, 叶雄伟1, 谭杜勋1,(), 谭新宇2,()   
  1. 1.510630 广州,南方医科大学第三附属医院急危重症医学救部
    2.510630 广州,南方医科大学第三附属医院创伤骨科
  • 收稿日期:2015-05-13 出版日期:2015-03-18
  • 通信作者: 谭杜勋, 谭新宇

Application of remifentanil-midazolam conscious-sedation and analgesia in emergency medicine

Kui Lu1, Jia Guo1, Qiuting Zhang1, Zongyuan Liu1, Xiongwei Ye1, Duxun Tan1,(), Xinyu Tan,1()   

  1. 1.Department of Emergency,The Third Affiliated Hospital of Southern Medical University,Guangzhou 510630,China
  • Received:2015-05-13 Published:2015-03-18
  • Corresponding author: Duxun Tan, Xinyu Tan
引用本文:

卢魁, 郭嘉, 张秋婷, 刘宗元, 叶雄伟, 谭杜勋, 谭新宇. 瑞芬太尼-咪达唑仑清醒镇静镇痛在急诊医学应用的可行性研究[J/OL]. 中华卫生应急电子杂志, 2015, 01(03): 22-25.

Kui Lu, Jia Guo, Qiuting Zhang, Zongyuan Liu, Xiongwei Ye, Duxun Tan, Xinyu Tan. Application of remifentanil-midazolam conscious-sedation and analgesia in emergency medicine[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Hygiene Rescue(Electronic Edition), 2015, 01(03): 22-25.

目的

观察和探讨瑞芬太尼-咪达唑仑清醒镇静镇痛在急诊医学应用的有效性、安全性和可行性。

方法

回顾性分析急诊科接受清醒镇静镇痛患者166 例,其中男性70 例,女性96 例;年龄15 ~72 岁。 ASAⅠ级142 例,Ⅱ级24 例。 禁食>4 h 29 例,2 ~4 h 137 例。 78 例骨折和脱位的患者,24 例组织裂伤的患者,36 例脓肿患者,8 例金属异物患者。 瑞芬太尼1 μg/kg静脉负荷,然后给予0.05 μg·kg-1·min -1持续泵注,直至NRS 疼痛评分为3,根据疼痛评分调整泵注速度。 咪达唑仑静脉负荷,然后0.05 mg·kg-1min· -1持续泵注,直至Ramsy2 级后根据镇静评级调整泵注速度。 每一例用标准的麻醉记录单记录患者的年龄、性别、ASA级别、诊断和处理、禁食时间、不良反应、抢救措施以及离院时间。 监测记录患者的收缩压、舒张压、呼吸频率和脉搏血氧饱和度。

结果

166 例中165 例(99.4%)完成清醒镇静镇痛,9 例(5.4%)出现轻微不良反应,无一例需要气管插管,离院后1 个月随访无一例出现不良反应。 不同性别患者间不良反应发生率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。发生不良反应的患者与未发生不良反应的患者年龄差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。 发生不良反应的患者最小年龄是19 岁,平均年龄是40 岁,而未发生不良反应患者的平均年龄是22 岁。 禁食2 ~4 h与禁食超过4 h 发生不良反应的差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。

结论

瑞芬太尼-咪达唑仑清醒镇静镇痛在急诊医学应用临床效果良好,是一种安全、有效、可行的方法。

Objective

To observe the efficacy,safety and feasibility of remifentanil-midazolam conscious-sedation and analgesia in emergency medicine.

Methods

A retrospective descriptive study was made on 166 patients who received remifentanil-midazolam conscious-sedation and analgesia in the Emergency Department between July 2014 and February 2015.There were 70 males and 96 females,at age of 15-72 years.According to ASA grade,there were 142 cases at gradeⅠ,24 at gradeⅡ.The fasting was for>4 h in 29 cases and for 2-4 h in 137.There were 78 patients with reduction of fractures and common dislocations,36 with incision and drainage of abscesses,24 with laceration repair and 8 with foreign body removal.A bolus of remifentanil(1 μg/kg) and midazolam(0.02 mg/kg) was applied as loading dose,followed by infusion of remifentanil(0.05 μg/kg/min) and midazolam(0.05 mg/kg/min).The dosage was adjusted every 3 mins according to the numeric rating scale and the Ramsay rank,respectively.Each sedation case was recorded on a standardised anaesthetic record sheet.The variables included age,sex,ASA status,presenting problem,fasting status,adverse effects,rescue manoeuvres performed and time to discharge.Patients were monitored throughout the procedure in aspects of continuous pulse oximetry,and heart rate and blood pressure.

Results

The intended procedures could be completed in 165 cases(99.4%) of 166 patients,with 9 cases(54.42%) experiencing minor adverse effects.There was no intubation required.There was no statistically significant difference between complication rates for male and female patients(P>0.05).A statistical difference was found in age(P=0.0024) between the patients with complications and those without complications.Patients who experienced side-effects from their treatment were older on average,with a median age of 40 years versus a median age of 22 years for those who did not experience side-effects.There was little difference in the adverse effect rate between fasted and nonfasted patients(P>0.05).

Conclusion

Remifentanil-midazolam conscious-sedation and analgesia is an effective,safe and feasible measure for the painful procedure in Emergency Department.

表1 不良反应与禁食的关系
1
Beilin B,Shavit Y,Trabekin E,et al.The effects of postoperative pain management on immune response to surgery[J].Anesth Analg,2003,97(3):822-827.
2
Burton JH,Miner JR,Shipley ER,et al.Propofol for emergency department procedural sedation and analgesia: a tale of three centers[J].Acad Emerg Med,2006,13(1):24-30.
3
Weaver CS,Terrell KM,Bassett R,et al.ED procedural sedation of elderly patients: is it safe? [J].Am J Emerg Med,2011,29(5):541-544.
4
Cicero M,Graneto J.Etomidate for procedural sedation in the elderly:a retrospective comparison between age groups[J].Am J Emerg Med,2011,29(9):1111-1116.
5
Senula G,Sacchetti A,Moore S,et al.Impact of addition of propofol to ED formulary[J].Am J Emerg Med,2010,28(8):880-883.
6
Wenzel-Smith G,Schweitzer B.Safety and efficiency of procedural sedation and analgesia(PSA) conducted by medical officers in a level 1 hospital in Cape Town[J].S Afr Med J,2011,101(12):895-898.
7
吴新民,叶铁虎,岳云,等.国产注射用盐酸瑞芬太尼有效性和安全性的评价[J].中华麻醉学杂志,2004,23(4):245-248.
8
耿志宇,宋琳琳,许幸,等.异丙酚复合芬太尼或瑞芬太尼靶控静脉麻醉与静吸复合麻醉的比较[J].中华麻醉学杂志,2004,24(1):14-17.
9
Mensour M,Pineau R,Sahai V,et al.Emergency department procedural sedation and analgesia: A Canadian Community Effectiveness and Safety Study(ACCESS) [J].CJEM,2006,8(2):94-99.
10
American College of Emergency Physicians. Clinical policy:procedural sedation and analgesia in the emergency department[J].Ann Emerg Med,2005,45(2):177-196.
11
Ljungqvist O,Soreide E.Preoperative fasting[J].Br J Surg,2003,90(4):400-406.
12
StanderI M,WallisII LA.Procedural sedation in the emergency centre[J].South Afr Med J,2011,101(3):195-201.
[1] 许亚龙, 巩栋, 陈晓涛. 超前镇痛在全膝关节置换术中的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(04): 517-523.
[2] 李浩纶, 杨佳麒, 李羽. 盐酸氢吗啡酮在小儿术后镇痛作用中的研究现状[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(02): 166-171.
[3] 代莉, 郭华静, 邓恢伟. 镇痛-伤害性刺激指数指导下无阿片类药物麻醉对腔镜下甲状腺手术患者术后恢复质量的影响[J/OL]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2024, 18(04): 282-286.
[4] 方辉强, 黄杰, 随冰琰. 腰方肌阻滞与腹横肌平面阻滞对腹股沟疝腹腔镜手术患者术后镇痛效果的影响[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 697-702.
[5] 韦雅丽, 范利杰. 术前右美托咪定滴鼻在腹股沟斜疝患儿腹腔镜下疝囊高位结扎术中的应用[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(04): 446-450.
[6] 郭建丽, 珠娜, 宋飞, 柴国东. 七氟烷吸入复合瑞芬太尼麻醉在小儿腹腔镜疝修补术中的效果[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(02): 223-227.
[7] 马自达, 孟岩, 郭宏坤, 孙少川, 孙中伟. 腹腔镜辅助腹横肌平面阻滞在腹股沟疝修补术后镇痛中的应用[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 102-105.
[8] 于智慧, 赵建军. 后路腰方肌阻滞复合全身麻醉在腹股沟斜疝经腹腹膜前手术中的应用效果[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 734-739.
[9] 张婵, 吕瑶, 张小燕, 张鸣青. 不同时机局部神经阻滞在开腹肝切除中的镇痛效果比较[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(02): 189-194.
[10] 段文忠, 白延霞, 徐文亭, 祁虹霞, 吕志坚. 七氟烷和丙泊酚在肝切除术中麻醉效果比较Meta分析[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 640-645.
[11] 苗明月, 周建新. 肺保护性镇静:应重视呼吸驱动和吸气努力的床旁评估[J/OL]. 中华重症医学电子杂志, 2024, 10(04): 325-328.
[12] 唐韵, 杨小博, 余愿, 舒化青, 尚游. 苯磺酸瑞马唑仑的临床研究进展[J/OL]. 中华重症医学电子杂志, 2024, 10(04): 389-393.
[13] 张平骥, 徐钰, 李天水, 庞文翼, 符师宁, 张梦圆. 重症患者镇静治疗现状及期望的调查研究[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 562-567.
[14] 王晓艳, 朱利平, 侯顺玉, 岳永飞. 椎管内分娩镇痛对B族溶血性链球菌阳性孕妇阴道分娩结局的影响[J/OL]. 中华产科急救电子杂志, 2024, 13(02): 112-116.
[15] 王文珠, 刘建, 袁常秀, 石亚飞, 尤培军. 竖脊肌平面阻滞对非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术中阿片类药物用量的影响[J/OL]. 中华诊断学电子杂志, 2024, 12(03): 155-159.
阅读次数
全文


摘要