摘要
目的研究舒芬太尼2种镇痛方法的效果及对家兔免疫球蛋白的影响。方法健康家兔18只,随机分为3组,每组6只。各组家兔均予足底注射2%甲醛溶液0.5mL致痛,A、B组致痛后分别经静脉和硬膜外注射舒芬太尼0.66和0.92μg·kg-1,C组静脉注射等容量生理盐水作为对照。根据行为判断标准评估动物的疼痛反应记录评分,并检测致痛前(T0),致痛后1h(T1)、24h(T2)、48h(T3)和72h(T4)时的家兔血清中IgG、IgM和IgA水平。结果3组免疫球蛋白水平在致痛前无差异。致痛后45min内,A、B组疼痛评分稳定下降,10min后无明显疼痛,C组家兔疼痛持续较长时间。与T0时比较,3组家兔免疫球蛋白水平在T1和T2时均明显下降(P<0.01)。A组在T4时免疫球蛋白上升到正常水平,B组在T3时上升到正常水平,C组在T4时仍低于正常水平。结论舒芬太尼镇痛有助于疼痛与应激引起的家兔体液免疫功能抑制的稳定和恢复,硬膜外镇痛途径疗效优于静脉镇痛。
AIM To study the effects of two methods of sufentanil analgesia on rabbit immunoglobulin. METHODS Eighteen healthy rabbits were randomly divided into three groups (n=6 in each), namely intravenous analgesia group (group A), epidural analgesia group (group B) and control group (group C). The 2% formaldehyde solution 0.5 mL was injected into the hind paw of rabbits in each group to set up formalin pain model. Rabbits in the group A and B were respectively administered with sufentanil 0.66μg·kg^-1 intravenously and 0.92 μg·kg^-1 epidurally, rabbits in the group C were injected with saline 0.5 mL intravenously. The spontaneous nociceptive behavior was quantified. Serial blood samples were taken before the experiment (T0), 1h after analgesia (T1), 24 h after analgesia (T2), 48 h after analgesia (T3) and 72 h after analgesia (T4) to determine the levels of IgG, IgM and IgA. RESULTS There were no significant difference in IgG, IgM and IgA among three groups before experiment. The pain in rabbits of group A and B reduced effectively by sufentanil analgesia and the pain score of group A and group B decreased steadily. The pain in rabbits of group C last longer than those group A and group B. Compared with To, the levels of immunoglobulin in three groups showed a significant decline at Tt and T2 (P 〈 0.01 ). The levels of immunoglobulin in group A and B rose to normal levels at the T4 and T3 separately, but in the control group it still remained at a low level at T4. CONCLUSION The sufentanil analgesia can provide the protective effect on the stability and recovery of inhibiting immune function induced by pain and stress, and the effect of epidural method is better than that of intravenous method.
出处
《中国新药与临床杂志》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2010年第2期130-133,共4页
Chinese Journal of New Drugs and Clinical Remedies