期刊文献+

不同麻醉方式在剖宫产术中的麻醉效果及对胎儿血气水平的影响研究

Anesthetic effect of different anesthetic methods in cesarean section and its effect on fetal blood gas level
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的探讨不同麻醉方式在剖宫产术中的麻醉效果及对胎儿血气水平的影响。方法于2017年08月~2018年08月,对本院收治的80例剖宫产术患者进行分析,利用电脑随机的方式,将之分为常规组、研究组,两组各40例。常规组行全麻插管麻醉,研究组行腰硬联合麻醉。结果研究组麻醉见效时间明显短于常规组,组间差异显著(P<0.05);两组胎儿脐动脉血气pH值、新生儿Apgar评分对比,无差异统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论腰硬联合麻醉见效快,效果良好,可将其作为理想的剖宫产术麻醉方法,两种麻醉方式对胎儿均无不良影响。 Objective To investigate the anesthetic effect of different anesthesia methods in cesarean section and its effect on fetal blood gas level.Methods From August 2017 to August 2018, 80 cases of cesarean section patients were analyzed and randomly divided into routine group and research group,40 cases in each group.The general group received general anesthesia and intubation anesthesia,and the study group received combined spinal epidural anesthesia.Results The effective time of anesthesia in the study group was significantly shorter than that in the conventional group,and there was significant difference between the two groups (P<0.05).There was no significant difference in fetal umbilical artery blood gas pH value and neonatal Apgar score between the two groups (P>0.05).Conclusion Combined spinal-epidural anesthesia is an ideal anesthesia method for cesarean section. Both anesthesia methods have no adverse effects on the fetus.
作者 买迪娜.买买提明 MAI Di Na·Mai Mai Ti Ming(Department of Anesthesiology,Xinjiang Yili maternal and child health care hospital,Xinjiang Yili 835000,China)
出处 《实用妇科内分泌电子杂志》 2019年第3期3-4,共2页 Electronic Journal of Practical Gynecological Endocrinology
关键词 全麻置管麻醉 腰硬联合麻醉 剖宫产术 胎儿血气水平 Anesthesia under general anesthesia Combined spinal epidural anesthesia Cesarean section Fetal blood gas level
  • 相关文献

参考文献5

二级参考文献51

  • 1郑一行,王春华,郭亚静,李娟.开展剖宫产评审工作浅析[J].中国妇幼保健,1993,8(3):20-21. 被引量:2
  • 2朱春仙,陈宏,黄荷凤.剖宫产术时两种麻醉方式的对比研究[J].中华妇产科杂志,2005,40(4):253-255. 被引量:22
  • 3李崇华,朱春仙,贺晶.全身麻醉对剖宫产产妇分娩新生儿的影响[J].中华妇产科杂志,2006,41(3):162-164. 被引量:31
  • 4孟媛,黄引平,刘小利,黄艳君,周洁,熊春秋,吴丽群,王波,蔡彩萍.妊娠合并先天性心脏病伴肺动脉高压患者的围产结局分析[J].中华妇产科杂志,2007,42(10):662-665. 被引量:9
  • 5American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Obstet?ric Anesthesia. Practice guidelines for obstetric anesthesia: an updated report by the American society of anesthesiolo?gists' task force on obstetric anesthesia. Anesthesiology, 2007, 106: 843 - 863.
  • 6Cyna AM, DoddJ. Clinical update: obstetric anaesthesia. Lancet, 2007, 370: 640 - 642.
  • 7Algert CS, BowenJR, Giles WE, et al. Regional block versus general anaesthesia for caesarean section and neonatal outcomes: a population - based study. BMC Med , 2009, 7: 20.
  • 8Mancuso A, De Vivo A, Giacobbe A, et al. General versus spinal anaesthesia for elective caesarean sections: effects on neonatal short - term outcome. A prospective randomized study.J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med, 2010, 23: 1114- 1118.
  • 9Lee SY, Lew E, Lim Y, et al. Failure of augmentation of labor epidural analgesia for intrapartum cesarean delivery: a retrospective review. Anesth Analg , 2009, 108: 252 247.
  • 10Reynolds F, Seed PT. Anaesthesia for caesarean section and neonatal acid - base status: a meta - analysis. Anaesthesia, 2005; 60: 636 - 653.

共引文献102

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