期刊文献+

两种麻醉方法用于子宫切除手术的比较 被引量:2

Two kinds of anesthesia used for hysterectomy
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的探讨两种麻醉方法在子宫切除术中的临床疗效。方法选取2010年1月至2011年2月我院收治的行子宫切除术患者86例,根据麻醉方法不同分为A、B两组,A组38例行连续硬膜外麻醉,B组48例行腰硬联合麻醉,观察两组患者麻醉前、麻醉后的血压(HP)、心率(HR)、呼吸频率、起效时间、手术时间及不良反应等指标。结果 B组的麻醉后舒张压(DBP)、收缩压(SBP)均显著低于A组(P<0.05);B组的麻醉起效时间、手术时间均显著低于A组,(P<0.05);B组不良反应发生率与A组差异无统计学意义。结论腰硬联合麻醉是子宫切除术患者较为有效、安全的麻醉方式,具有临床推广应用的价值。 Objective To evaluate in clinical efficacy two anesthetic techniques in hysterectomy.Methods From January 2010 to February 2011,86 patients of hysterectormy according to anesthesia were divided into A,B groups in our hospital A group of 38 patients were give continuous epidural anesthesia,B group 48 patients were givn ractine epidural anesthesia,were observed before anesthesia,after anesthesia blood pressure(HP),heart rate(HR),respiratory rate,onset time,surgical time,and adverse reactions.Results B group after anesthesia diastolic blood pressure(DBP),systolic blood pressure(SBP)were significantly lower than the A group(P0.05).The onset time of anesthesia,operative time was significantly lower than the A group,(P0.05);B group A the incidence of adverse reactions was no significant difference between two grops.Conclusion Lumbar epidural anesthesia is more effective in patients with hysterectomy,safe anesthesia,with the clinical application value.
出处 《中国实用医药》 2011年第21期37-38,共2页 China Practical Medicine
关键词 腰硬联合麻醉 连续硬膜外麻醉 子宫切除术 Lumbar epidural anesthesia Continuous epidural anesthesia Hysterectomy
  • 相关文献

参考文献3

二级参考文献5

  • 1[1]林洽瑾主编.临床病理学[M].天津:天津科学技术出版社,1992.600.
  • 2曲成业,李平,于明,等.Tuoby针引导改良局麻注射针行蛛网膜下腔阻滞121例报告[J].沈阳部队医药,1993,6(3):129-130.
  • 3[4]Lybecker H,Noller JT,May O,et el.Incidence and prediction of post dural puncture headache.A prospective study of 1021 spinal anesthesia[J].Anesth Analg,1990,70(4):389-394.
  • 4王伟鹏,李立环.临床麻醉学[M].4版.北京:人民卫生出版社,2004:1029.
  • 5曹培如,胡祖荣,邓显仔,贾杰,杨世辉.腰硬联合麻醉在子宫切除术中的应用[J].中国基层医药,2003,10(6):518-519. 被引量:15

共引文献9

同被引文献37

  • 1Kuczkowski KM. Implementing safe obstetric anesthesia in Eastern Europe. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine, 2009, 22(8): 540-645.
  • 2Regan KJ, O'Sullivan G. The extension of epidural blockage for emergency caesarean section: a survey of current UK practice. Anaesthesia, 2008, 63( 1 ) : 136-142.
  • 3Kinsella SM, Walton B, Sashidharan R, et al. Category-1 caesarean section a survey of anaesthetic and peri-operative management in the UK. Anaesthesia, 2010, 65(4): 362-368.
  • 4Miller RD, Efiksson LI, Fleisher LA, et al. Miller's anesthesia: anesthesia for obstetrics. 7th ed. Churchili Livingstone: Elsevier, 2010.
  • 5Mhyre JM. What's new in obstetric anesthesia in 2009? An update on maternal patient safety. Anesth Analg, 2010, 111(6): 1480- 1487.
  • 6Qian X, Smith H, Zhou L, et al. Evidence-based obstetrics in four hospitals in China: An observational study to explore clinical practice, women's preferences and provider's views. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 2001, 1(1): 1.
  • 7姚尚龙,吴新民,赵晶,等.产科麻醉临床指南.中华麻醉在线.2008[2008-04-12].http://www.csa01.cn/showsp.php?fid=l&id=2.
  • 8Macarthur AJ. Gerard W. Ostheimer "What's new in obstetric anesthesia" lecture. Anesthesiology, 2008, 108(5): 777-785.
  • 9杭燕南,周大春,主译.巡证麻醉学:剖宫产手术的麻醉:部位麻醉还是全麻?2版.北京:人民卫生出版社,2010.
  • 10Halpem SH, Soliman A, Yee J, et al. Conversion of epidural labour analgesia to caesarean section: a prospective study of tdeterminants of failure. Br J Anaesth, 2009, 102(2) : 240-243.

引证文献2

二级引证文献14

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部