北京大学学报(医学版) ›› 2023, Vol. 55 ›› Issue (2): 324-327. doi: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2023.02.017

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

丙泊酚用于无痛胃肠镜检查对患者术后精神活动的影响

史成梅,周阳,杨宁,李正迁,陶一帆,邓莹,郭向阳*()   

  1. 北京大学第三医院麻醉科,北京 100191
  • 收稿日期:2020-06-12 出版日期:2023-04-18 发布日期:2023-04-12
  • 通讯作者: 郭向阳 E-mail:puthmzk@hsc.pku.edu.cn

Quality of psychomotility recovery after propofol sedation for painless gastroscopy and colonoscopy

Cheng-mei SHI,Yang ZHOU,Ning YANG,Zheng-qian LI,Yi-fan TAO,Ying DENG,Xiang-yang GUO*()   

  1. Department of Anesthesiology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China
  • Received:2020-06-12 Online:2023-04-18 Published:2023-04-12
  • Contact: Xiang-yang GUO E-mail:puthmzk@hsc.pku.edu.cn

RICH HTML

  

摘要:

目的: 观察丙泊酚静脉麻醉对无痛胃肠镜检查患者术后精神活动的影响。方法: 选择100例美国麻醉医师协会(American Society of Anesthesiologist,ASA)Ⅰ~Ⅱ级、年龄18~72岁拟接受择期无痛胃肠镜检查的消化内科患者,将患者分为青年组(20~39岁,27例)、中年组(40~54岁,37例)、老年组(55~64岁,36例)。所有患者采用丙泊酚静脉麻醉,维持脑电双频指数(bispectal index,BIS)值在55~64。麻醉过程中监测心率、血压、脉搏血氧饱和度、心电图及BIS,记录胃肠镜操作时间、苏醒时间、丙泊酚用量、离院时间。术前30 min及满足离院标准时接受数字划消试验、数字连接试验、插板试验测试,如果满足离院标准时三项测试结果未恢复至术前水平,静息30 min后进行第三次测试。结果: 100例患者均完成了前两次测试,其中25例患者进行了第三次测试。与术前相比,达到离院标准时患者整体的精神活动测试结果差异无统计学意义。进一步按年龄划分后,达到离院标准时,青年组、中年组的数字划消准确率、数字连接时间、插板时间与术前相比差异均无统计学意义,但青年组的数字划消效率术后明显优于术前(P < 0.05)。老年组的数字划消效率、数字连接时间、插板时间都明显劣于术前(P < 0.05),但数字划消准确率与术前相比差异无统计学意义。老年组中需要进行第三次测试的比例明显高于其他年龄组(P < 0.05)。与术前相比,完成第三次测试者的各项测试结果差异均无统计学意义。结论: 丙泊酚静脉麻醉下行无痛胃肠镜检查术后患者的精神活动在满足离院标准时已基本恢复,老年患者恢复较慢,但可通过适当延长离院时间得以恢复。

关键词: 丙泊酚, 胃镜检查, 结肠镜检查, 麻醉恢复期, 精神活动

Abstract:

Objective: To study the effect of propofol used for painless gastroscopy and colonoscopy on psychomotility recovery. Methods: One hundred adult patients undergoing painless gastroscopy and colonoscopy were recruited, aged 18-72 years, with American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) physical status Ⅰ-Ⅱ. According to age, the patients were divided into youth group (20-39 years old, 27 cases), middle age group (40-54 years old, 37 cases), and elder group (55-64 years old, 36 cases). Propofol was continuously infused according to the patients' condition to mantain the bispectal index (BIS) score 55-64. All the patients received psychomotility assesment 30 min before the operations when the discharge criteria were met including number cancellation test, number connection test and board test. The heart rate, blood pressure, saturation of pulse oximetry, electrocardiograph and BIS were monitored during the operation. The operating time, recovery time, total volume of propofol and discharge time were recorded. If the results obtained were inferior to those before operation, a third assessment was taken 30 minutes later until the results recovered or being superior to the baseline levels. Results: All the patients completed the first and second assessments, and 25 patients had taken the third assessment. There was no statistically significant difference in the results of psychomotility assessment when the patients met the discharge standard. Furthermore, the results were analyzed by grouping with age, and there was no statistical difference in the test results of the youth and middle age groups compared with the preoperative group, among which, the efficiency of the number cancellation test was significantly better than that before operation in the youth group (P < 0.05). However, in the elderly patients the number cancellation efficiency, number connection test and board test were significantly inferior to that before operation (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the accuracy of number cancellation compared with that before operation. The patients who needed the third test in the elder group were significantly more than in the other groups (P < 0.05). Compared with the preoperative results, there was no statistical difference in the test results of those who completed the third test. Conclusion: The psychomotility function of the patients who underwent painless gastroscopy and colonoscopy was recovered when they met discharge criteria. The elderly patients had a prolonged recovery period.

Key words: Propofol, Gastroscopy, Colonoscopy, Anesthesia recovery period, Psychomotility

中图分类号: 

  • R614

表1

三组患者的一般资料"

Items Youth group (n=27) Middle age group (n=37) Elder group (n=36)
Gender, Female/Male 12/15 18/19 16/20
BMI/(kg/m2), ${\bar x}$±s 23.7±4.3 24.0±3.8 23.7±5.0
Operating time/min, ${\bar x}$±s 27.6±3.8 29.4±5.8 28.7±7.6
Emergence time/min, ${\bar x}$±s 5.3±2.3 5.8±2.0 6.3±2.0
Dosage of propofol/mg, ${\bar x}$±s 299.9±45.2 288.7±40.2 265.6±58.4

表2

术前30 min和达到离院标准时患者整体及三个亚组的精神活动测试结果"

Items 30 min before operation Meeting the discharge criteria
Total patients (n=100)
   Number cancellation accuracy 94%±1% 93%±1%
   Number cancellation efficiencya 301.77±96.8 298.2±96.7
   Number connection time/s 103.76±31.95 104.63±37.04
   Board time/s 55.37±11.12 56.17±13.06
Youth group (n=27)
   Number cancellation accuracy 94%±46% 99%±31%*
   Number cancellation efficiencya 354.38±67.56 359.15±69.44
   Number connection time/s 59.15±69.44 79.11±14.11
   Board time/s 48.70±4.66 47.67±5.78
Middle age group (n=37)
   Number cancellation accuracy 97%±41% 96%±9%
   Number cancellation efficiencya 306.30±97.40 308.08±89.42
   Number connection time/s 95.27±16.84 96.37±25.10
   Board time/s 55.08±8.52 54.68±9.13
Elder group (n=36)
   Number cancellation accuracy 86%±11% 84%±15%
   Number cancellation efficiencya 257.70±96.04 242.33±91.92*
   Number connection time/s 129.83±34.39 135.94±38.74*
   Board time/s 60.67±13.98 64.08±15.80*
1 中华医学会麻醉学分会, 中华医学会消化内镜学分会. 中国消化内镜诊疗镇静/麻醉的专家共识[J]. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2014, 30 (9): 920- 927.
2 王菲, 赵阳阳, 关明, 等. 静脉给药镇静技术在2 582例口腔外科门诊手术中的临床应用[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2020, 52 (1): 181- 186.
3 Allampati S , Wen S , Liu F , et al. Recovery of cognitive function after sedation with propofol for outpatient gastrointestinal endoscopy[J]. Saudi J Gastroenterol, 2019, 25 (3): 188- 193.
doi: 10.4103/sjg.SJG_369_18
4 史成梅, 周永德, 张利萍, 等. 右美托咪定复合丙泊酚在高龄患者无痛胃肠镜检查中的应用[J]. 中国新药杂志, 2016, 25 (19): 2229- 2233.
5 武睿, 戈之铮, 戴军, 等. 无痛上消化道内镜检查对术后早期认知功能的影响[J]. 胃肠病学, 2014, 19 (9): 544- 548.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-7125.2014.09.008
6 Vasudevan AE , Goh KL , Bulgiba AM . Impairment of psychomotor responses after conscious sedation in cirrhotic patients undergoing therapeutic upper GI endoscopy[J]. Am J Gastroenterol, 2002, 97 (7): 1717- 1721.
doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2002.05831.x
7 赵国庆, 曹莉. 对武术运动员高级神经活动强度和灵活性的研究[J]. 湖北体育科技, 1996, (3): 68- 71.
8 鞠辉, 赫金鑫, 冯艺. 氟马西尼对使用丙泊酚无痛胃肠镜后苏醒和认知功能的影响[J]. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2013, 29 (2): 121- 123.
9 朱姝, 陈志勇, 朱美华. 不同剂量丙泊酚对无痛胃镜检查患者苏醒质量的影响[J]. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2016, 32 (7): 705- 706.
10 Willey J , Vargo JJ , Connor JT , et al. Quantitative assessment of psychomotor recovery after sedation and analgesia for outpatient EGD[J]. Gastrointest Endosc, 2002, 56 (6): 810- 816.
11 Maslekar S , Gardiner A , Hughes M , et al. Randomized clinical trial of Entonox versus midazolam-fentanyl sedation for colonoscopy[J]. Br J Surg, 2009, 96 (4): 361- 368.
12 李蓓蕾, 林磊, 董奇, 等. 儿童精细动作能力的发展及与其学业成绩的关系[J]. 心理学报, 2002, 34 (5): 494- 499.
13 朱丹瑶, 周加仙. 基本动作技能发展的神经机制及其教育促进策略[J]. 教育生物学杂志, 2021, 9 (3): 204- 210.
14 刘平平. 手部精细动作的意义及测量[J]. 武警医学, 2013, 24 (7): 639- 640.
[1] 刘鲲鹏,王宝宁,申琰琰,李卫霞,李昭,姚兰. 胸部硬膜外给予利多卡因对双腔气管插管患者血流动力学和唤醒水平的影响[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2019, 51(4): 742-747.
[2] 李炳艳, 耿志宇, 王东信. 右美托咪定复合丙泊酚全麻对骨科腰椎手术患者术后恢复的影响[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2016, 48(3): 529-533.
[3] 张喆,居瑞军,李学涛,张东晓,吴仁荣,陈学军,吕万良. 葡萄糖基化丙泊酚溶液型注射剂在大鼠体内的药物动力学[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2015, 47(5): 846-852.
[4] 李志红, 刘丹, 何自静, 范志毅. 地塞米松对新辅助化疗后乳腺癌患者术后恶心呕吐发生率的影响[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2015, 47(4): 685-689.
[5] 关明,王恩博,刘宇,张伟. 丙泊酚靶控输注联合芬太尼静脉镇静拔除下颌阻生智齿的效果评价[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2014, 46(1): 107-110.
[6] 张佳莹, 王晔, 张静, 丁士刚, 周丽雅, 林三仁 . 急性非静脉曲张性上消化道出血内镜治疗失败的危险因素分析[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2010, 42(6): 703-707.
[7] 杨璐, 魏滨, 张利萍, 毕姗姗, 卢炜, 郭向阳. 丙泊酚和瑞芬太尼在抑制强直电刺激中的药效学相互作用[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2010, 42(5): 547-553.
[8] 许川雅, 吴新民, 蒋建渝. 老年患者靶控输注瑞芬太尼和丙泊酚的临床评价[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2005, 37(5): 513-515.
[9] 范志毅, 马琼, 王庚. 丙泊酚与硫喷妥钠全麻诱导的血流动力学及儿茶酚胺反应的比较[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2001, 33(6): 576-576.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!