右美托咪定-艾斯氯胺酮-利多卡因用于无阿片类药物的全静脉麻醉。

IF 1.6 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Journal of clinical medicine research Pub Date : 2023-09-01 Epub Date: 2023-09-30 DOI:10.14740/jocmr5000
Xia Li Qian, Ping Li, Ya Jie Chen, Shi Qin Xu, Xian Wang, Shan Wu Feng
{"title":"右美托咪定-艾斯氯胺酮-利多卡因用于无阿片类药物的全静脉麻醉。","authors":"Xia Li Qian, Ping Li, Ya Jie Chen, Shi Qin Xu, Xian Wang, Shan Wu Feng","doi":"10.14740/jocmr5000","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of the study was to evaluate the feasibility of the opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) technique with dexmedetomidine, esketamine, and lidocaine among patients diagnosed with benign breast mass and scheduled for lumpectomy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We enrolled 80 female patients who were aged from 18 to 60 years, graded with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I or II, diagnosed with benign breast mass, and scheduled for lumpectomy. These patients were randomly treated with OFA or opioid-based anesthesia (OBA). Dexmedetomidine-esketamine-lidocaine and sufentanil-remifentanil were administered in OFA and OBA group, respectively. We mainly compared the analgesic efficacy of OFA and OBA technique, as well as intraoperative hemodynamics, the quality of recovery, and satisfaction score of patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no significant difference between the two groups with regard to visual analogue scale (VAS) score at 2, 12, and 24 h after extubation. However, the time to first rescue analgesic was prolonged in OFA group than that in OFB group (6.18 ± 1.00 min vs. 7.40 ± 0.92 min, P = 0.000). Further, mean arterial pressure and heart rate at T0 (entering operating room), T1 (before anesthesia induction), T2 (immediately after intubation), T3, T4, and T5 (1, 5, and 10 min after surgical incision, respectively) were significantly higher in OFA group than that in OBA group. Incidence of hypotension and bradycardia was lower in OFA group. Consistently, fewer patients in OFA group consumed atropine (8% vs. 32%, P = 0.019) and ephedrine (5% vs. 38%, P = 0.001) compared to OBA group. Furthermore, patients in OFA group had a longer awakening time (7.14 ± 2.63 min vs. 4.54 ± 1.14 min, P = 0.000) and recovery time of orientation (11.76 ± 3.15 min vs. 6.92 ± 1.19 min, P = 0.000). Fewer patients in the OFA group experienced postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) (11% vs. 51%, P = 0.000) and consumed ondansetron (5% vs. 35%, P = 0.003) compared to OBA group. And patients in OFA group had a higher satisfaction score than those in OBA group (9 (8 - 9) vs. 7 (7 - 8), P = 0.000).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>For patients undergoing lumpectomy, OFA technique with dexmedetomidine-esketamine-lidocaine showed a better postoperative analgesic efficacy, a more stable hemodynamics, and a lower incidence of PONV. However, such advantage of OFA technique should be weighed against a longer awakening time and recovery time of orientation in clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":94329,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical medicine research","volume":"15 8-9","pages":"415-422"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/e9/cb/jocmr-15-415.PMC10563822.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Opioid Free Total Intravenous Anesthesia With Dexmedetomidine-Esketamine-Lidocaine for Patients Undergoing Lumpectomy.\",\"authors\":\"Xia Li Qian, Ping Li, Ya Jie Chen, Shi Qin Xu, Xian Wang, Shan Wu Feng\",\"doi\":\"10.14740/jocmr5000\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of the study was to evaluate the feasibility of the opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) technique with dexmedetomidine, esketamine, and lidocaine among patients diagnosed with benign breast mass and scheduled for lumpectomy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We enrolled 80 female patients who were aged from 18 to 60 years, graded with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I or II, diagnosed with benign breast mass, and scheduled for lumpectomy. These patients were randomly treated with OFA or opioid-based anesthesia (OBA). Dexmedetomidine-esketamine-lidocaine and sufentanil-remifentanil were administered in OFA and OBA group, respectively. We mainly compared the analgesic efficacy of OFA and OBA technique, as well as intraoperative hemodynamics, the quality of recovery, and satisfaction score of patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no significant difference between the two groups with regard to visual analogue scale (VAS) score at 2, 12, and 24 h after extubation. However, the time to first rescue analgesic was prolonged in OFA group than that in OFB group (6.18 ± 1.00 min vs. 7.40 ± 0.92 min, P = 0.000). Further, mean arterial pressure and heart rate at T0 (entering operating room), T1 (before anesthesia induction), T2 (immediately after intubation), T3, T4, and T5 (1, 5, and 10 min after surgical incision, respectively) were significantly higher in OFA group than that in OBA group. Incidence of hypotension and bradycardia was lower in OFA group. Consistently, fewer patients in OFA group consumed atropine (8% vs. 32%, P = 0.019) and ephedrine (5% vs. 38%, P = 0.001) compared to OBA group. Furthermore, patients in OFA group had a longer awakening time (7.14 ± 2.63 min vs. 4.54 ± 1.14 min, P = 0.000) and recovery time of orientation (11.76 ± 3.15 min vs. 6.92 ± 1.19 min, P = 0.000). Fewer patients in the OFA group experienced postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) (11% vs. 51%, P = 0.000) and consumed ondansetron (5% vs. 35%, P = 0.003) compared to OBA group. And patients in OFA group had a higher satisfaction score than those in OBA group (9 (8 - 9) vs. 7 (7 - 8), P = 0.000).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>For patients undergoing lumpectomy, OFA technique with dexmedetomidine-esketamine-lidocaine showed a better postoperative analgesic efficacy, a more stable hemodynamics, and a lower incidence of PONV. However, such advantage of OFA technique should be weighed against a longer awakening time and recovery time of orientation in clinical practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94329,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of clinical medicine research\",\"volume\":\"15 8-9\",\"pages\":\"415-422\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/e9/cb/jocmr-15-415.PMC10563822.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of clinical medicine research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14740/jocmr5000\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/9/30 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical medicine research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14740/jocmr5000","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:本研究的目的是评估右美托咪定、爱斯基胺和利多卡因无阿片类药物麻醉(OFA)技术在诊断为良性乳腺肿块并计划进行肿块切除术的患者中的可行性。方法:我们招募了80名年龄在18-60岁之间的女性患者,她们根据美国麻醉师协会的身体状况I或II进行分级,诊断为良性乳腺肿块,并计划进行肿块切除术。这些患者随机接受OFA或阿片类药物麻醉(OBA)治疗。OFA组和OBA组分别给予右美托咪定-艾司他明-利多卡因和舒芬太尼-瑞芬太尼。我们主要比较了OFA和OBA技术的镇痛效果,以及术中血液动力学、恢复质量和患者满意度评分。结果:两组在拔管后2、12和24小时的视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分方面没有显著差异。然而,OFA组的首次镇痛时间比OFB组延长(6.18±1.00分钟vs.7.40±0.92分钟,P=0.000)。此外,T0(进入手术室)、T1(麻醉诱导前)、T2(插管后立即)、T3、T4,和T5(分别为手术切口后1、5和10分钟)在OFA组中显著高于OBA组。OFA组低血压和心动过缓的发生率较低。与OBA组相比,OFA组服用阿托品(8%对32%,P=0.019)和麻黄碱(5%对38%,P=0.001)的患者较少。此外,与OBA组相比,OFA组患者的苏醒时间更长(7.14±2.63分钟vs.4.54±1.14分钟,P=0.000),定向恢复时间更长(11.76±3.15分钟vs.6.92±1.19分钟,P=0.000)。术后恶心呕吐(PONV)(11%vs.51%,P=0.0000)和服用昂丹司琼(5%vs.35%,P=0.003)的患者更少。OFA组患者的满意度评分高于OBA组(9(8-9)vs.7(7-8),P=0.000)。然而,OFA技术的这种优势应该与临床实践中较长的苏醒时间和定向恢复时间相权衡。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Opioid Free Total Intravenous Anesthesia With Dexmedetomidine-Esketamine-Lidocaine for Patients Undergoing Lumpectomy.

Opioid Free Total Intravenous Anesthesia With Dexmedetomidine-Esketamine-Lidocaine for Patients Undergoing Lumpectomy.

Opioid Free Total Intravenous Anesthesia With Dexmedetomidine-Esketamine-Lidocaine for Patients Undergoing Lumpectomy.

Background: The aim of the study was to evaluate the feasibility of the opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) technique with dexmedetomidine, esketamine, and lidocaine among patients diagnosed with benign breast mass and scheduled for lumpectomy.

Methods: We enrolled 80 female patients who were aged from 18 to 60 years, graded with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I or II, diagnosed with benign breast mass, and scheduled for lumpectomy. These patients were randomly treated with OFA or opioid-based anesthesia (OBA). Dexmedetomidine-esketamine-lidocaine and sufentanil-remifentanil were administered in OFA and OBA group, respectively. We mainly compared the analgesic efficacy of OFA and OBA technique, as well as intraoperative hemodynamics, the quality of recovery, and satisfaction score of patients.

Results: There was no significant difference between the two groups with regard to visual analogue scale (VAS) score at 2, 12, and 24 h after extubation. However, the time to first rescue analgesic was prolonged in OFA group than that in OFB group (6.18 ± 1.00 min vs. 7.40 ± 0.92 min, P = 0.000). Further, mean arterial pressure and heart rate at T0 (entering operating room), T1 (before anesthesia induction), T2 (immediately after intubation), T3, T4, and T5 (1, 5, and 10 min after surgical incision, respectively) were significantly higher in OFA group than that in OBA group. Incidence of hypotension and bradycardia was lower in OFA group. Consistently, fewer patients in OFA group consumed atropine (8% vs. 32%, P = 0.019) and ephedrine (5% vs. 38%, P = 0.001) compared to OBA group. Furthermore, patients in OFA group had a longer awakening time (7.14 ± 2.63 min vs. 4.54 ± 1.14 min, P = 0.000) and recovery time of orientation (11.76 ± 3.15 min vs. 6.92 ± 1.19 min, P = 0.000). Fewer patients in the OFA group experienced postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) (11% vs. 51%, P = 0.000) and consumed ondansetron (5% vs. 35%, P = 0.003) compared to OBA group. And patients in OFA group had a higher satisfaction score than those in OBA group (9 (8 - 9) vs. 7 (7 - 8), P = 0.000).

Conclusion: For patients undergoing lumpectomy, OFA technique with dexmedetomidine-esketamine-lidocaine showed a better postoperative analgesic efficacy, a more stable hemodynamics, and a lower incidence of PONV. However, such advantage of OFA technique should be weighed against a longer awakening time and recovery time of orientation in clinical practice.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信