Advances in Clinical Medicine
Vol. 12  No. 05 ( 2022 ), Article ID: 51178 , 6 pages
10.12677/ACM.2022.125550

气道表面麻醉对术中全麻药物使用量的影响

韩富意,褚海辰,刘玉梅,温翠丽*

青岛大学附属医院,山东 青岛

收稿日期:2022年4月9日;录用日期:2022年5月3日;发布日期:2022年5月11日

摘要

目的:研究气道表面麻醉对术中全麻药的用量和对患者术中血流动力学变化的影响。方法:选取2021年5月至2021年7月于我院行全麻下膝关节双间室置换术的患者60例。随机分为A、B两组,每组30人,A组插管前给予2%利多卡因5 ml喷喉,B组插管前给予生理盐水5 ml喷喉。推注舒芬太尼0.2 μg/kg、丙泊酚20 mg/kg、顺式阿曲库铵0.2 mg/kg至患者入睡。用喉麻管向声门上方推注药液后,插入气管导管。术中丙泊酚4~6 mg/(kg·h)静脉泵入、间断静注舒芬太尼0.2 μg/kg,维持患者脑电双频谱指数(BIS)值40~50,血压(BP)和HR的变化幅度 < 30%基础值。记录麻醉诱导前(基础值,T1)、麻醉诱导后(T2)、插入气管导管即刻(T3),气管插管后1 min (T4)、5 min (T5),插管后15 min (T6),拔管即刻(T7)的血压和心率。术后记录全麻药用量和气管插管时间,随访患者是否发生术中知晓、声音嘶哑、恶心呕吐和痛觉过敏。结果:术中2组患者麻醉诱导前(T1)、麻醉诱导后(T2)、插入气管导管即刻(T3)的SBP、DBP、HR变化趋势大致相似,差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。两组的SBP、DBP、HR在气管插管后1 min (T4)、5 min (T5),拔管即刻(T6)统计学差异显著(P < 0.05)。2组舒芬太尼的用量有统计学差异(P < 0.05),丙泊酚的用量无统计学差异。结论:气道表面麻醉不仅能减少舒芬太尼的用药量,还能降低维持术中血流动力学稳定的难度,减少术中应激反应,体现了现代外科学加速术后康复的理念,具有一定的临床应用价值。

关键词

表面麻醉,全麻需求药量,全麻

Effect of Airway Surface Anesthesia on the Use of General Anesthesia during Operation

Fuyi Han, Haichen Chu, Yumei Liu, Cuili Wen*

The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao Shandong

Received: Apr. 9th, 2022; accepted: May 3rd, 2022; published: May 11th, 2022

ABSTRACT

Objective: To study the effect of airway surface anesthesia on the amount of total anesthesia and hemodynamic changes during operation. Methods: This study involved 60 patients who underwent joint replacement surgery in The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University between May 2021 and July 2021. They were randomly divided into two groups, A and B, with 30 people in each group. Group A was given 2% lidocaine before intubation, and group B was given normal saline before intubation. Anesthesia was induced with propofol 20 mg/kg, sufentanil 0.2 μg/kg, Cis-atracurium 0.2 mg/kg. The laryngeal hemp tube is injected above the glottis at a uniform speed. After the liquid is fully infiltrated, the tracheal tube is inserted. During the operation, 4~6mg/(kg·h) of propofol was pumped intravenously and 0.2 μg/kg of sufentanil was intermittently injected intravenously. Bispectral index (BIS) value was maintained at 40~50, and the variation range of blood pressure (BP) and HR was less than 30% of the basic value. Blood pressure and heart rate were recorded before induction of anesthesia (basal value, T1), after induction of anesthesia (T2), immediately after endotracheal catheter insertion (T3), 1 min after endotracheal intubation (T4), 5 min after endotracheal intubation (T5), 15 min after intubation (T6), and immediately after extubation (T7). Postoperative total anesthetic dosage and endotracheal intubation time were recorded, and patients were followed up for intraoperative awareness, hoarseness, nausea and vomiting, urinary retention, intestinal obstruction and hyperalgesia. Results: During operation, SBP, DBP and HR of the 2 groups were similar before anesthesia induction (T1), after anesthesia induction (T2), and immediately after endotracheal catheter insertion (T3), but the differences were not statistically significant (P > 0.05). SBP, DBP and HR of the two groups were significantly different in 1 min (T4) and 5 min (T5) after tracheal intubation, and immediately after extubation (T6) (P < 0.05). The dosage of sufentanil in the two groups was statistically different (P < 0.05), and there was no statistical difference in the dosage of propofol. Conclusions: Airway surface anesthesia can not only reduce the dosage of sufentanil, but also reduce the difficulty of maintaining intraoperative hemodynamic stability and reduce intraoperative stress response, which embodies the concept of modern surgery to accelerate postoperative rehabilitation and has certain clinical application value.

Keywords:Surface Anesthesia, General Anesthetic Requirements, General Anesthesia

Copyright © 2022 by author(s) and Hans Publishers Inc.

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY 4.0).

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

1. 引言

在全身麻醉诱导期间,由于气管插管时巨大的刺激,患者的血流动力学会发生剧烈变化,此时麻醉深度的过深或过浅都可能导致血压骤升骤降、心律失常、支气管痉挛、术中知晓等 [1]。临床中降低插管反应的常用方法,包括:静推丙泊酚、艾司洛尔、舒芬太尼、利多卡因,利多卡因、罗哌卡因喷喉等 [2] [3] [4] [5]。舒芬太尼作为一种常用于术中镇痛的阿片类药物,有阿片类药物常见的副作用,如术中低血压、术后恶心呕吐、痛觉过敏等 [6] [7] [8]。有研究称瑞芬太尼作为一种强效、起效快且作用时间短的阿片类药物,气管插管期间可以避免气管插管期间血流动力学的剧烈变化 [9] [10] [11]。然而仍然不能解决其需要预给药并后需根据血流动力学变化调整用量的滞后性,对麻醉医师的给药经验有较高要求。气管插管插入前实施的气道表面麻醉,能明显降低气管插管对气管的刺激。有些研究报道局部麻醉还能明显减少手术的吸入麻醉药用量 [12]。我们通过气管插管前用利多卡因气道表面麻醉,在满足手术麻醉深度、血流动力学稳定的情况下,观察术中全麻药的用量和对患者术中血流动力学变化的影响。

2. 资料与方法

2.1. 临床资料

选取2021年5月至2021年7月于我院行全麻下膝关节双间室置换术的患者60例,ASA I级或II级,年龄19~69岁,体重40~90 kg,身高150~180 cm,体重指数18~30 kg/m²。排除标准:肝肾功能不全,癫痫,利多卡因过敏,严重循环、呼吸系统疾病,存在插管困难、二次插管或插管时间超过180 s。将其用随机数字法分为A、B两组,每组30人,A组插管前给予2%利多卡因5 ml喷喉,B组插管前给予生理盐水喷喉。

2.2. 麻醉方法

患者入手术室后建立外周静脉通路。连接心电监护仪,持续监测心电图、有创血压、心率、脉搏氧饱和度,连接脑电图分析仪持续监测脑电双频指数(bispectral index, BIS)。取稳定5 min后的数值作为麻醉诱导前基础值。

研究方案全身麻醉是标准化的,并由同一麻醉医师在所有患者中执行,该麻醉医师不知道患者的分配。加强型气管导管内插入导丝,润滑备用,抽出2%利多卡因或生理盐水5 ml,喉麻管预塑成合适的“J”形。研究药物由一名麻醉医师配制,该麻醉医师既不参与患者护理,也不参与研究变量的收集。预充氧3 min,开始麻醉诱导。麻醉诱导用药:推注舒芬太尼0.2 μg/kg、推注丙泊酚40 mg/kg至患者入睡,待 BIS值至60,给予顺式阿曲库铵0.2 mg/kg。充分面罩加压通气去氮后,在视频喉镜直视下,置入含有药液注射器的喉麻管,此时可见喉麻管尖端位于声门上方,匀速推注注射器中的药液,使其呈雾状喷出至声门及声门下,渗透到组织。再行面罩加压通气30 s使药液充分浸润后,插入气管导管,行机械通气。新鲜气流设为2.5 L/min,通过调整呼吸参数设定来维持呼气末二氧化碳至35~45 mmHg。术中丙泊酚4~6 mg/(kg·h)静脉泵入、间断静注舒芬太尼0.2 μg/kg,维持患者脑电双频谱指数(BIS)值40~50,血压(BP)和HR的变化幅度<30%基础值。手术结束前10 min停止丙泊酚的泵注,常规阿托品0.5 mg与新斯的明1 mg组合进行拮抗。

2.3. 监测指标

主要监测指标为手术过程中舒芬太尼和丙泊酚的用量 [13]。同时记录麻醉诱导前(基础值,T1)、麻醉诱导后(T2)、插入气管导管即刻(T3),气管插管后1 min (T4)、5 min (T5),拔管即刻(T6)的血压和心率 [2]。同时,由他人记录气管插管的时间。术后随访患者是否发生术中知晓、声音嘶哑、恶心呕吐和痛觉过敏。

2.4. 统计学处理

采用SPSS23.0软件进行统计分析。计量资料以均数 ± 标准差(±s)表示,组内比较采用重复测量数据的方差分析,组间比较采用独立样本t检验。计数资料组间比较采用卡方检验。P < 0.05为差异有显著性。

3. 结果

3.1. 患者基本情况

年龄、性别、体重和手术时间、插管时间等情况相似,差异无统计学意义,见表1

Table 1. Comparison of general data between experimental group and control group

表1. 实验组和对照组的一般资料比较

3.2. 生命体征

术中2组患者麻醉诱导前(T1)、麻醉诱导后(T2)、插入气管导管即刻(T3)的SBP、DBP、HR变化趋势大致相似,差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。两组的SBP、DBP、HR在气管插管后1 min (T4)、5 min (T5),拔管即刻(T6)统计学差异显著(P < 0.05),见表2

Table 2. Hemodynamic changes at different time points in the two groups

表2. 两组患者不同时点血流动力学变化

3.3. 全麻药的用量

2组舒芬太尼的用量有统计学差异(P < 0.05),丙泊酚的用量无统计学差异,见表3。由于手术时间较短且2组之间无统计学差异(表1),肌松药后续并未追加,此处不再赘述。

Table 3. Comparison of drug dosage data between experimental group and control group

表3. 实验组和对照组的术中全麻用药量资料比较

3.4. 不良反应

术后随访,2组均未发生术中知晓,无术后声音嘶哑、恶心呕吐和痛觉过敏等不良反应。

4. 讨论

气管插管时,由于咽喉和气管内感受器受机械刺激,激活交感–肾上腺髓质系统,引起儿茶酚胺释放增加,导致气道应激反应,引起流泪、呛咳、肌肉抽搐以及血压升高、心率增快等一系列的心血管反应 [14]。由于气管插管反应的发生剧烈而快速,麻醉医生通常会选择在插管前追加大量丙泊酚、舒芬太尼等全麻药物来维持插管时的麻醉深度,防止插管时的术中知晓,然而气管插管的反应也通常比全麻药物的持续作用时间短得多,不可避免地会出现插管后麻醉深度过深,过深的麻醉不仅与生命体征波动有关,也与术后远期死亡率增加有关 [15]。

利多卡因具有起效快、弥散广、穿透性强等特点,用于气道表面麻醉时可降低插管引起的强烈的交感神经反射 [16]。从实验结果中可以明显看出,比起事先追加的全麻药物,气管插管前实施的气道表面麻醉,在减少插管引起的一系列心血管反应的同时,更能防止插管后血压的骤降,使血流动力学更加平稳,对于长期患有高血压、血压控制不理想的老年患者手术风险的降低更有益处。对于健康个体,一过性的血压骤升骤降和心率加快一般不会产生明显的不良后果,但对于长期患有心脑血管疾病的老年人来说,这意味着心肌耗氧量的剧增和心肌缺血,更容易导致心律失常和心力衰竭的发生 [17]。另外,从拔管时的血流动力学变化中也可以看出,实验组的血压和心率比对照组更低,因此尽管利多卡因作用时间较短,但是对于膝关节双间室置换术这类比较成熟且时间比较固定的手术来说,仍能在拔管时起到降低机体应激反应的作用 [18]。而对于手术时间较长的手术,有研究称对患者术中全程实行连续气管–咽喉内表面麻醉后,患者苏醒更加平稳 [13]。我们还观察到在手术结束即刻松开止血带时,实验组的血压波动远小于对照组。较长的止血带时间可能会发生血压的骤升,而松开止血带时麻醉深度过深和无手术刺激则会导致血压骤降。实验组的血压波动较低可能与局麻药吸收入血导致的全身作用有关,有待进一步实验验证。

有学者报道插管前不使用阿片类药物仅气管表面麻醉也可以完成气管插管而不出现剧烈的血流动力学改变,可有效降低术中阿片类药物使用量,符合快速康复的理念 [19] [20]。本实验为避免术中知晓的发生,在插管前仍给予少量舒芬太尼,之后根据患者的应激反应调整舒芬太尼的用量,最终统计舒芬太尼的用量,丙泊酚的用量则根据BIS值调整以维持适当的麻醉深度。2组丙泊酚用量无统计学意义可能是由于样本量较小,术中下肢手术对气管插管的刺激小。喷喉组舒芬太尼的用量远低于无喷喉组,可以降低发生术中低血压和术后相关不良反应的风险。可能由于样本量小且随访时间较短,术后未发现相关不良反应。实验中2组BIS在术中处于同一水平,术后随访均无术中知晓,麻醉深度控制的程度基本一致。因此,麻醉用量的统计有可比性。

综上所述,气道表面麻醉不仅能减少舒芬太尼的用药量,还能降低维持术中血流动力学稳定的难度,减少术中应激反应,体现了现代外科学加速术后康复的理念 [21],具有一定的临床应用价值。因样本量较少,尚需进一步进行大样本、多病种、甚至多中心临床研究,以及局麻药吸收后可能导致的全身作用的研究。

声明

该研究已取得病人知情同意。

文章引用

韩富意,褚海辰,刘玉梅,温翠丽. 气道表面麻醉对术中全麻药物使用量的影响
Effect of Airway Surface Anesthesia on the Use of General Anesthesia during Operation[J]. 临床医学进展, 2022, 12(05): 3813-3818. https://doi.org/10.12677/ACM.2022.125550

参考文献

  1. 1. Aggarwal, H., Kaur, S., Baghla, N., et al. (2019) Hemodynamic Response to Orotracheal Intubation: Comparison be-tween Macintosh, McCoy, and C-MAC Video Laryngoscope. Anesthesia, Essays and Researches, 13, 308-312. https://doi.org/10.4103/aer.AER_7_19

  2. 2. 傅润乔, 王雯, 彭晓风, 等. 注药型气管导管表面麻醉抑制气管插管心血管反应临床研究[J]. 国际麻醉学与复苏杂志, 2017, 38(5): 418-422.

  3. 3. 李彩虹. 气管表面麻醉与静注艾司洛尔对全麻诱导插管时血流动力学的影响[J]. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2009, 25(12): 1072-1073.

  4. 4. Yang, S.S., Wang, N.N., Postonogova, T., et al. (2020) Intravenous Lidocaine to Prevent Postoperative Airway Complications in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 124, 314-323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2019.11.033

  5. 5. 李荣, 张中军, 毛洪雅, 等. 罗哌卡因与利多卡因气道表面麻醉对气管插管及拔管反应影响的比较[J]. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2016, 32(5): 504-505.

  6. 6. Chen, P., Zeng, P., Gong, Y., et al. (2021) Recommended Dose of Sufentanil during Induction of General Anesthesia to Avoid Coughing and Drastic Hemodynamic Fluctuations in Patients Undergoing Surgery. Journal of International Medical Research, 49, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1177/0300060521996143

  7. 7. Lee, H.M., Kil, H.K., Koo, B.N., et al. (2020) Comparison of Sufentanil- and Fentanyl-Based Intravenous Patient-Controlled Analgesia on Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting after Laparoscopic Nephrectomy: A Prospective, Double-Blind, Randomized-Controlled Trial. International Journal of Medi-cal Sciences, 17, 207-213. https://doi.org/10.7150/ijms.39374

  8. 8. Lee, M., Silverman, S.M., Hansen, H., et al. (2011) A Comprehensive Review of Opioid-Induced Hyperalgesia. Pain Physician, 14, 145-161. https://doi.org/10.36076/ppj.2011/14/145

  9. 9. 汤文喜, 王世端. 气道表面麻醉联合静注瑞芬太尼用于鼻内窥镜手术[J]. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2011, 27(11): 1086-1088.

  10. 10. Sridharan, K. and Sivaramakrishnan, G. (2019) Compar-ison of Fentanyl, Remifentanil, Sufentanil and Alfentanil in Combination with Propofol for General Anesthesia: A Sys-tematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Current Clinical Pharmacology, 14, 116-124. https://doi.org/10.2174/1567201816666190313160438

  11. 11. Lee, J.H., Koo, B.N., Jeong, J.J., et al. (2011) Dif-ferential Effects of Lidocaine and Remifentanil on Response to the Tracheal Tube during Emergence from General An-aesthesia. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 106, 410-415. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aeq396

  12. 12. Hodgson, P.S. and Liu, S.S. (2001) Epidural Lidocaine Decreases Sevoflurane Requirement for Adequate Depth of Anesthesia as Measured by the Bispectral Index Monitor. Anesthesiol-ogy, 94, 799-803. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000542-200105000-00018

  13. 13. 傅润乔, 王雯, 彭晓风, 等. 连续气管内-咽喉表面麻醉对全身麻醉药物用量的影响[J]. 麻醉安全与质控, 2018, 2(3): 145-149.

  14. 14. Cavallone, L.F. and Vannucci, A. (2013) Review Article: Extubation of the Difficult Airway and Extubation Failure. Anesthesia & Analgesia, 116, 368-383. https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0b013e31827ab572

  15. 15. Georgii, M.T. and Schneider, G. (2019) [Deep Anesthesia, Poorly Tolerated Anesthesia]? Der Anaesthesist, 68, 583-593. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00101-019-00647-y

  16. 16. 李景宾, 余志兵, 邓友勇. 不同剂量利多卡因表面麻醉对气管插管时血流动力学的影响[J]. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2010, 26(4): 356-357.

  17. 17. 刘丽丽, 李笃竽, 孙虎, 等. 利多卡因咽喉表面麻醉对老年患者麻醉诱导中血流动力学的影响[J]. 中国老年学杂志, 2017, 37(9): 2237-2238.

  18. 18. 刘建树, 吴成富, 李灵芝, 等. 表面麻醉气管导管在高血压病人拔管期的应用观察[J]. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2005, 21(1): 57-58.

  19. 19. Lee, S.Y., Min, J.J., Kim, H.J., et al. (2014) Hemodynamic Effects of Topical Lidocaine on the Laryngoscope Blade and Trachea during Endotracheal Intubation: A Prospective, Double-Blind, Randomized Study. Journal of Anesthesia, 28, 668-675. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00540-014-1812-z

  20. 20. Lv, L., Yan, L., Liu, X., et al. (2020) Effectiveness of Lidocaine/Prilocaine Cream on Cardiovascular Reactions from Endotracheal Intubation and Cough Events during Recovery Period of Older Patients under General Anesthesia: Prospective, Randomized Place-bo-Controlled Study. BMC Geriatrics, 20, Article No. 157. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-020-01567-y

  21. 21. Zhao, J. and Davis, S.P. (2019) An Integrative Review of Mul-timodal Pain Management on Patient Recovery after Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 98, 94-106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2019.06.010

  22. NOTES

    *通讯作者Email: wencuili12345@163.com

期刊菜单