[1]叶庆明,张华丹①,李文杰②,等.输尿管镜下气压弹道碎石术2种麻醉方法的前瞻、随机、对照研究[J].中国微创外科杂志,2008,08(4):353-359.
　Ye Qingming*,Zhang Huadan,Li Wenjie,et al.Prospective Randomized Controlled Study on Two Anesthesia Methods for Ureteroscopic Pneumatic Lithotripsy[J].Chinese Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery,2008,08(4):353-359.
点击复制

输尿管镜下气压弹道碎石术2种麻醉方法的前瞻、随机、对照研究()
分享到：

《中国微创外科杂志》[ISSN:1009-6604/CN:11-4526/R]

卷:
08
期数:
2008年4期
页码:
353-359
栏目:
出版日期:
2008-10-26

文章信息/Info

Title:
Prospective Randomized Controlled Study on Two Anesthesia Methods for Ureteroscopic Pneumatic Lithotripsy
作者:
叶庆明; 张华丹①; 李文杰②; 罗晓敏; 奉光举
深圳市第六人民医院麻醉科，深圳518052
Author(s):
Ye Qingming*;  Zhang Huadan;  Li Wenjie;  et al.
*Department of Anesthesiology, Shenzhen Sixth People’s Hospital, Shenzhen 518052, China
关键词:
输尿管结石; 输尿管镜; 气压弹道碎石术; 腰麻硬膜外联合麻醉; 硬膜外麻醉; 罗哌卡因
Keywords:
Ureteral calculi; Ureteroscopy; Pneumatic lithotripsy; Combined spinalepidural anesthesia; Epidural anesthesia; Ropivacaine
分类号:
R693+.4；R614.4+2
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
目的比较腰麻硬膜外联合麻醉与硬膜外麻醉用于输尿管镜下气压弹道碎石术的效果及不良反应。方法输尿管结石60例，ASA Ⅰ～Ⅱ级，采用密闭信封法随机分为A、B 2组，各30例。A组行腰麻硬膜外联合麻醉，B组行硬膜外麻醉。观察2组的麻醉效果与不良反应。结果2组均获良好的麻醉效果，无术后头痛不适。A组麻醉起效时间（7.2±41）min明显快于B组（17.4±3.3）min （t=-10.615，P=0.000），A组运动阻滞强于B组（χ2=40.000，P=0.000）。低血压A组6例，B组3例，2组比较无统计学差异（χ2=0523，P=0.470）；寒战A组9例，B组6例，2组比较无统计学差异（χ2=0800，P=0.371）。结论腰麻硬膜外联合麻醉与硬膜外麻醉均可用于输尿管镜下气压弹道碎石术，腰麻硬膜外联合麻醉的效率高于硬膜外麻醉。
Abstract:
ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy and sideeffects of combined spinalepidural anesthesia (CSEA) and epidural anesthesia (EA) for ureteroscopic pneumatic lithotripsy. MethodsA total of 60 patients with ureteral calculi (ASA gradeⅠ-Ⅱ) were divided into A and B groups randomly (30 in each). CSEA was performed in group A, and EA was carried out in group B. Anesthetic effects and sideeffects were observed in both the groups.ResultsAnesthetic effects were satisfying in both the groups, no patient had headache after the operation. The onset time of anesthesia in group A was shorter than that in group B ［(7.2±4.1) min vs (17.4±3.3) min, t=-10.615, P=0.000］. The level of motor block of CSEA was stronger than that of EA (χ2=40.000, P=0.000). No significant differences were found between the two groups in the number of patients who developed hypotension (6 in group A and 3 in group B, χ2=0.523，P=0.470) or shivering (9 in group A and 6 in group B, χ2=0.800，P=0.371). ConclusionsBoth CSEA and EA are applicable to ureteroscopic pneumatic lithotripsy. CSEA is more efficient than EA.

参考文献/References:

[1]Ceylan K,Sunbul O,Sahin A,et al.Ureteroscopic treatment of ureteral lithiasis with pneumatic lithotripsy: analysis of 287 procedures in a public hospital.Urol Res,2005,33(6):422-425.
[2]景卫，曹灵敏，陈素伟.腰麻-硬膜外联合麻醉用于输尿管镜下碎石术30例报告.中国医师杂志，2002，4：399-399.
[3]敖兴亮，何仁亮，彭李华，等.不同麻醉方法用于输尿管镜下气压弹道碎石术的临床观察.广东医学，2002，23：83-84.
[4]陈丽青.双管硬膜外阻滞下输尿管镜气压弹道碎石术的麻醉效果观察.中国微创外科杂志，2004，4：156.
[5]郭艳辉，王俊科.罗哌卡因用于蛛网膜下腔阻滞的实验研究.中华麻醉学杂志，2002，22（1）：42-45.
[6]孙志华，郭曲练，邹望远.间断鞘内注射不同浓度罗哌卡因对大鼠脊髓及神经根早期超微结构的影响.中华麻醉学杂志，2005，25（4）：283-286.
[7]Matsukak T,Sessler D,Christensen R,et al.Heat flow and distribution during epidural anaesthesia.Anesthesiology,1995,83:959-961.
[8]宋吉贵,译.曲马多治疗麻醉后寒战.国外医学·麻醉与复苏分册，1998，19（2）：121-122.

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
①（北京大学深圳医院麻醉科，深圳518000）②（深圳市第六人民医院泌尿外科，深圳518052）
更新日期/Last Update: 2013-10-22