全凭静脉麻醉与静吸复合麻醉效果比较

Anesthesia effect comparison between total intravenous anesthesia and intravenous-inhalation anesthesia

目的：探讨全凭静脉麻醉与静吸复合麻醉的临床麻醉效果，从而为寻找更安全的麻醉方法提供依据。方法：选取2010年1～12月采用全凭静脉麻醉进行择期手术患者98例作为观察组，选取同期静吸复合麻醉择期手术98例患者作为对照组，比较两组血流动力学变化、术毕呼之睁眼时间、麻醉清醒后患者对术中疼痛的回忆、术后24h不良反应发生情况。结果：观察组术中心率为（75±9）次／min，低于本组诱导前心率[（83±9）次／min]及对照组术中心率[（80±8）次／min]，差异有统计学意义（P〈O．05）；观察组不良反应为烦躁2例（2．04％）、恶心2例（2．04％），低于对照组[7例（7．14％）、9例（9．18％）1，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）；其他观察指标比较，差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论：全凭静脉麻醉与静吸复合麻醉比较，其可控性、麻醉效果均较好，且不良反应发生率低于静吸复合麻醉。

Objective： To investigate the clinical anesthesia effect of the total intravenous anesthesia and intravenous-inhalation anesthesia, in order to seek more safer anesthesia method. Methods： 98 cases of patients with total intravenous anesthesia were treated as the observation group from January to December 2010, and 98 cases with intravenous-inhalation anesthesia were treated as the control group at the same time. Then the hemodynamic changes, eyes opening time, recalling of pain, adverse reaction in 24 h of the two groups were compared. Results： The heart rate of the observation group during surgery was （75±9） times/min, which was lower than that of observation group postoperation [（83±9） times/min] and control group intraoperation [（80±8） times/min], the differences were statistically significant （P〈0.05）. 2 cases （2.04%） had adverse reaction of irritable and 2 cases （2.04%） had nausea of observation group which were lower than control group [7 cases （7.14%）, 9 cases （9.18%）], the differences were statistically significant （P〈0.05）. The other observation indexs had no significant difference statistically between the two groups （P〉0.05）. Conclusion： Compared with intravenous-inhalation anesthesia, the controllability and anesthesia effect of total intravenous anesthesia is good, and the adverse effects rate is lower than intravenous-inhalation anesthesia.