两种麻醉方法在支气管镜检查中的麻醉效果比较(1)
[摘要]目的 探讨两种不同麻醉方法在支气管镜检查中的麻醉效果。方法 选取2017年6月～2018年6月在我院进行支气管镜检查的140例患者作为研究对象，随机分为实验组和对照组，每组各70例。实验组采用氧驱动利多卡因雾化吸入加利多卡因喉头喷雾法，对照组采用氧驱动利多卡因雾化吸入加利多卡因鼻腔黏膜滴注法，比较两组的麻醉效果优良率、麻醉起效时间和利多卡因用量的差异。结果 实验组的麻醉效果优良率(95.71%)高于对照组(84.29%)，差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);实验组的麻醉起效时间短于对照组，差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);实验组利多卡因用量少于对照组，差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组患者术前3 min及术中3 min的心率、血氧饱和度比较，差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 氧驱动利多卡因雾化吸入加利多卡因喉头喷雾法的效果优于利多卡因鼻腔黏膜滴注法。
[关键词]支气管镜检查;麻醉方法;利多卡因;喉头喷雾
[中图分类号] R614 [文献标识码] A [文章编号] 1674-4721(2019)8(c)-0108-03
[Abstract] Objective To investigate the anesthetic effect of two different anesthesia methods in bronchoscopy. Methods A total of 140 patients who underwent bronchoscopy in our hospital from June 2017 to June 2018 were selected as the subjects. They were randomly divided into the experimental group and the control group， with 70 cases in each group. In the experimental group， patients were given oxygen-driven Lidocaine inhalation plus Lidocaine throat spray， and in the control group， patients were given oxygen-driven Lidocaine inhalation plus Lidocaine nasal mucosa dripping. The excellent and good rate， onset time of anesthesia， and dose of Lidocaine difference were compared in the two groups. Results The excellent and good rate of anesthesia in the experimental group was 95.71%， higher than that in the control group accounting for 84.29% (P<0.05). The onset time of the anesthesia in the experimental group was shorter than that in the control group with statistical significance (P<0.05). The dose of Lidocaine in the experimental group was less than that in the control group with a significant difference (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in heart rate and blood oxygen saturation between the two groups 3 min before surgery and 3 min after surgery (P>0.05). Conclusion Oxygen-driven Lidocaine aerosol inhalation plus Lidocaine throat spray is superior to Lidocaine nasal mucosal dripping.
[Key words] Bronchoscopy; Anesthesia methods; Lidocaine; Throat spray
隨着技术的快速发展，支气管镜成为临床医生诊断及治疗呼吸系统疾病不可或缺的设备工具[1]。支气管镜检查及治疗操作由患者口鼻经喉进入呼吸道，在检查过程中会出现恶心、咳嗽、憋气等不良反应[2]，因此，在做支气管镜检查前，良好的麻醉效果是支气管镜检查及治疗能否顺利进行的关键[3]。目前支气管镜检查前的麻醉方法有很多，但不同麻醉方法的麻醉效果也存在较大差异。本研究为探寻一种较好的支气管镜检查前麻醉方法，选取在我院进行支气管镜检查的140例患者作为研究对象，对目前医院常规开展的两种支气管检查前麻醉方法的麻醉效果进行分析比较，现报道如下。
1资料与方法
1.1一般资料
选取2017年6月～2018年6月在我院进行支气管镜检查的140例患者作为研究对象，随机分为实验组和对照组，每组各70例。实验组中，男39例，女31例;年龄18～73岁，平均(55.30±7.62)岁;身高147～184 cm，平均(168.30±13.25)cm;体重41～85 kg，平均(65.30±20.60)kg。对照组中，男34例，女36例;年龄19～75岁，平均(54.27±6.34)岁;身高150～183 cm，平均(169.12±10.34)cm;体重44～87 kg，平均(64.36±22.65)kg。两组患者的一般资料比较，差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)，具有可比性。本研究经医院医学伦理委员会批准，患者均知情同意。, http://www.100md.com(王莹莹 李瑞锐)
[关键词]支气管镜检查;麻醉方法;利多卡因;喉头喷雾
[中图分类号] R614 [文献标识码] A [文章编号] 1674-4721(2019)8(c)-0108-03
[Abstract] Objective To investigate the anesthetic effect of two different anesthesia methods in bronchoscopy. Methods A total of 140 patients who underwent bronchoscopy in our hospital from June 2017 to June 2018 were selected as the subjects. They were randomly divided into the experimental group and the control group， with 70 cases in each group. In the experimental group， patients were given oxygen-driven Lidocaine inhalation plus Lidocaine throat spray， and in the control group， patients were given oxygen-driven Lidocaine inhalation plus Lidocaine nasal mucosa dripping. The excellent and good rate， onset time of anesthesia， and dose of Lidocaine difference were compared in the two groups. Results The excellent and good rate of anesthesia in the experimental group was 95.71%， higher than that in the control group accounting for 84.29% (P<0.05). The onset time of the anesthesia in the experimental group was shorter than that in the control group with statistical significance (P<0.05). The dose of Lidocaine in the experimental group was less than that in the control group with a significant difference (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in heart rate and blood oxygen saturation between the two groups 3 min before surgery and 3 min after surgery (P>0.05). Conclusion Oxygen-driven Lidocaine aerosol inhalation plus Lidocaine throat spray is superior to Lidocaine nasal mucosal dripping.
[Key words] Bronchoscopy; Anesthesia methods; Lidocaine; Throat spray
隨着技术的快速发展，支气管镜成为临床医生诊断及治疗呼吸系统疾病不可或缺的设备工具[1]。支气管镜检查及治疗操作由患者口鼻经喉进入呼吸道，在检查过程中会出现恶心、咳嗽、憋气等不良反应[2]，因此，在做支气管镜检查前，良好的麻醉效果是支气管镜检查及治疗能否顺利进行的关键[3]。目前支气管镜检查前的麻醉方法有很多，但不同麻醉方法的麻醉效果也存在较大差异。本研究为探寻一种较好的支气管镜检查前麻醉方法，选取在我院进行支气管镜检查的140例患者作为研究对象，对目前医院常规开展的两种支气管检查前麻醉方法的麻醉效果进行分析比较，现报道如下。
1资料与方法
1.1一般资料
选取2017年6月～2018年6月在我院进行支气管镜检查的140例患者作为研究对象，随机分为实验组和对照组，每组各70例。实验组中，男39例，女31例;年龄18～73岁，平均(55.30±7.62)岁;身高147～184 cm，平均(168.30±13.25)cm;体重41～85 kg，平均(65.30±20.60)kg。对照组中，男34例，女36例;年龄19～75岁，平均(54.27±6.34)岁;身高150～183 cm，平均(169.12±10.34)cm;体重44～87 kg，平均(64.36±22.65)kg。两组患者的一般资料比较，差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)，具有可比性。本研究经医院医学伦理委员会批准，患者均知情同意。, http://www.100md.com(王莹莹 李瑞锐)