无肌肉松弛剂全麻维持对双气囊肠镜检查的影响:一项随机对照试验

Xiaoping Xia, E. Wang
{"title":"无肌肉松弛剂全麻维持对双气囊肠镜检查的影响:一项随机对照试验","authors":"Xiaoping Xia, E. Wang","doi":"10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.1007-5232.2019.10.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective \nTo evaluate the feasibility and safety of maintaining general anesthesia without neuromuscular blockade in oral double-balloon enteroscopy. \n \n \nMethods \nTotally 120 patients undergoing oral double-balloon enteroscopy under general anesthesia were randomly assigned into two groups: the observation group and the control group. The observation group was not given muscle relaxants for anesthesia maintenance, while the control group was given muscle relaxants punctually. Observation indexes were monitored, including the mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), peak airway pressure (Ppeak) and end-tidal CO2 partial pressure (PETCO2) before anesthesia (T0), immediately after intubation (T1), at the time of endoscopy placement (T2), at the end of endoscopy withdrawal (T3), and at the time of waking-up (T4). The cases of spontaneous breathing recovery before the end of endoscopy, postoperative recovery time, extubation time, length of PACU stay, postoperative adverse reactions and satisfactory rates were recorded. \n \n \nResults \nTwelve cases were removed by the exclusion criteria, and the remaining 108 cases completed the study, including 56 cases in the observation group and 52 cases in the control group. The one-time success rate of induction was both 100% in the two groups. There were no significant differences in MAP, HR, Ppeak, and PETCO2 between the two groups at each observation point (all P>0.05), and the same is true for within group comparison with T0 (all P>0.05). The recovery rate of spontaneous respiration in the observation group was significantly higher than that in the control group [100% (56/56) VS 42% (22/52), χ2=44.73, P=0.000]. The awaken time, extubation time and length of PACU stay were 6±2 min, 10±3 min, and 11±4 min, respectively, in the observation group, compared with 15±5 min (t=-12.64, P=0.000), 17±5 min (t=-8.90, P=0.000), and 17±7 min (t=-5.73, P=0.000) in the control group. None of the patients required assisted ventilation. Hypoxemia occurred in 2 cases and nausea in 3 cases in the control group, while only nausea occurred in 1 patient in the observation group. The overall incidence of adverse reactions was not statisticaly different between the two groups (P>0.05). Anesthesia satisfaction rate of two groups was 100%. \n \n \nConclusion \nIt is feasible and safe to perform oral double-balloon enteroscopy without muscle relaxants during maintaining under general anesthesia, with quick recovery of spontaneous breathing and awakening, early extubation and less cost. \n \n \nKey words: \nAnesthesia, intravenous; Without muscle relaxants; Double-balloon enteroscopy","PeriodicalId":10072,"journal":{"name":"中华消化内镜杂志","volume":"36 1","pages":"750-754"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effects of general anesthesia maintenance without muscle relaxants for double-balloon enteroscopy: a randomized controlled trial\",\"authors\":\"Xiaoping Xia, E. Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.1007-5232.2019.10.008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective \\nTo evaluate the feasibility and safety of maintaining general anesthesia without neuromuscular blockade in oral double-balloon enteroscopy. \\n \\n \\nMethods \\nTotally 120 patients undergoing oral double-balloon enteroscopy under general anesthesia were randomly assigned into two groups: the observation group and the control group. The observation group was not given muscle relaxants for anesthesia maintenance, while the control group was given muscle relaxants punctually. Observation indexes were monitored, including the mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), peak airway pressure (Ppeak) and end-tidal CO2 partial pressure (PETCO2) before anesthesia (T0), immediately after intubation (T1), at the time of endoscopy placement (T2), at the end of endoscopy withdrawal (T3), and at the time of waking-up (T4). The cases of spontaneous breathing recovery before the end of endoscopy, postoperative recovery time, extubation time, length of PACU stay, postoperative adverse reactions and satisfactory rates were recorded. \\n \\n \\nResults \\nTwelve cases were removed by the exclusion criteria, and the remaining 108 cases completed the study, including 56 cases in the observation group and 52 cases in the control group. The one-time success rate of induction was both 100% in the two groups. There were no significant differences in MAP, HR, Ppeak, and PETCO2 between the two groups at each observation point (all P>0.05), and the same is true for within group comparison with T0 (all P>0.05). The recovery rate of spontaneous respiration in the observation group was significantly higher than that in the control group [100% (56/56) VS 42% (22/52), χ2=44.73, P=0.000]. The awaken time, extubation time and length of PACU stay were 6±2 min, 10±3 min, and 11±4 min, respectively, in the observation group, compared with 15±5 min (t=-12.64, P=0.000), 17±5 min (t=-8.90, P=0.000), and 17±7 min (t=-5.73, P=0.000) in the control group. None of the patients required assisted ventilation. Hypoxemia occurred in 2 cases and nausea in 3 cases in the control group, while only nausea occurred in 1 patient in the observation group. The overall incidence of adverse reactions was not statisticaly different between the two groups (P>0.05). Anesthesia satisfaction rate of two groups was 100%. \\n \\n \\nConclusion \\nIt is feasible and safe to perform oral double-balloon enteroscopy without muscle relaxants during maintaining under general anesthesia, with quick recovery of spontaneous breathing and awakening, early extubation and less cost. \\n \\n \\nKey words: \\nAnesthesia, intravenous; Without muscle relaxants; Double-balloon enteroscopy\",\"PeriodicalId\":10072,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"中华消化内镜杂志\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"750-754\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"中华消化内镜杂志\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.1007-5232.2019.10.008\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"中华消化内镜杂志","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.1007-5232.2019.10.008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的评价口服双气囊肠镜在不使用神经肌肉阻滞的情况下维持全身麻醉的可行性和安全性。方法将120例全麻下经口双气囊肠镜检查的患者随机分为观察组和对照组。观察组未给予肌肉松弛剂维持麻醉,对照组则按时给予肌肉放松剂。监测观察指标,包括麻醉前(T0)、插管后(T1)、放置内窥镜时(T2)、停镜时(T3)和苏醒时(T4)的平均动脉压(MAP)、心率(HR)、气道峰值压力(Ppeak)和潮气末CO2分压(PETCO2)。记录内镜检查结束前自主呼吸恢复的情况、术后恢复时间、拔管时间、PACU停留时间、术后不良反应和满意率。结果12例按排除标准切除,其余108例完成研究,其中观察组56例,对照组52例。两组的一次性诱导成功率均为100%。两组在各观察点的MAP、HR、Ppeak和PETCO2均无显著差异(均P>0.05),组内与T0的比较也无显著差异。观察组自主呼吸恢复率显著高于对照组[100%(56/56)VS 42%(22/52),χ2=44.73,P=0.000],观察组拔管时间和PACU停留时间分别为6±2min、10±3min和11±4min,而对照组分别为15±5min(t=-12.64,P=0.000)、17±5min(t=-8.90,P=0.000。没有一名患者需要辅助通气。对照组出现低氧血症2例,恶心3例,观察组仅出现恶心1例。两组总不良反应发生率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),两组麻醉满意率均为100%。结论在全麻维持期间,在不使用肌肉松弛剂的情况下进行口服双气囊肠镜检查是可行和安全的,自主呼吸和苏醒恢复快,拔管早,费用低。关键词:麻醉,静脉注射;不含肌肉松弛剂;双气囊肠镜检查
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Effects of general anesthesia maintenance without muscle relaxants for double-balloon enteroscopy: a randomized controlled trial
Objective To evaluate the feasibility and safety of maintaining general anesthesia without neuromuscular blockade in oral double-balloon enteroscopy. Methods Totally 120 patients undergoing oral double-balloon enteroscopy under general anesthesia were randomly assigned into two groups: the observation group and the control group. The observation group was not given muscle relaxants for anesthesia maintenance, while the control group was given muscle relaxants punctually. Observation indexes were monitored, including the mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), peak airway pressure (Ppeak) and end-tidal CO2 partial pressure (PETCO2) before anesthesia (T0), immediately after intubation (T1), at the time of endoscopy placement (T2), at the end of endoscopy withdrawal (T3), and at the time of waking-up (T4). The cases of spontaneous breathing recovery before the end of endoscopy, postoperative recovery time, extubation time, length of PACU stay, postoperative adverse reactions and satisfactory rates were recorded. Results Twelve cases were removed by the exclusion criteria, and the remaining 108 cases completed the study, including 56 cases in the observation group and 52 cases in the control group. The one-time success rate of induction was both 100% in the two groups. There were no significant differences in MAP, HR, Ppeak, and PETCO2 between the two groups at each observation point (all P>0.05), and the same is true for within group comparison with T0 (all P>0.05). The recovery rate of spontaneous respiration in the observation group was significantly higher than that in the control group [100% (56/56) VS 42% (22/52), χ2=44.73, P=0.000]. The awaken time, extubation time and length of PACU stay were 6±2 min, 10±3 min, and 11±4 min, respectively, in the observation group, compared with 15±5 min (t=-12.64, P=0.000), 17±5 min (t=-8.90, P=0.000), and 17±7 min (t=-5.73, P=0.000) in the control group. None of the patients required assisted ventilation. Hypoxemia occurred in 2 cases and nausea in 3 cases in the control group, while only nausea occurred in 1 patient in the observation group. The overall incidence of adverse reactions was not statisticaly different between the two groups (P>0.05). Anesthesia satisfaction rate of two groups was 100%. Conclusion It is feasible and safe to perform oral double-balloon enteroscopy without muscle relaxants during maintaining under general anesthesia, with quick recovery of spontaneous breathing and awakening, early extubation and less cost. Key words: Anesthesia, intravenous; Without muscle relaxants; Double-balloon enteroscopy
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7555
期刊介绍: Chinese Journal of Digestive Endoscopy is a high-level medical academic journal specializing in digestive endoscopy, which was renamed Chinese Journal of Digestive Endoscopy in August 1996 from Endoscopy. Chinese Journal of Digestive Endoscopy mainly reports the leading scientific research results of esophagoscopy, gastroscopy, duodenoscopy, choledochoscopy, laparoscopy, colorectoscopy, small enteroscopy, sigmoidoscopy, etc. and the progress of their equipments and technologies at home and abroad, as well as the clinical diagnosis and treatment experience. The main columns are: treatises, abstracts of treatises, clinical reports, technical exchanges, special case reports and endoscopic complications. The target readers are digestive system diseases and digestive endoscopy workers who are engaged in medical treatment, teaching and scientific research. Chinese Journal of Digestive Endoscopy has been indexed by ISTIC, PKU, CSAD, WPRIM.
期刊最新文献
Risk assessment of cirrhosis patients with esophageal and gastric variceal bleeding by three scoring systems Effects of peroral endoscopic myotomy on esophageal motility in patients with achalasia Efficacy of hemostatic powder on preventing delayed bleeding after endoscopic submucosal dissection: a randomized controlled trial Comparison of long-term outcomes between endoscopic submucosal dissection and surgery on treatment of early esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma Clinical, endoscopic and pathological features of early Barrett esophageal adenocarcinoma and its treatment efficacy by endoscopic submucosal dissection
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1