...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia >Target-controlled infusion or manually controlled infusion of propofol in high-risk patients with severely reduced left ventricular function.
【24h】

Target-controlled infusion or manually controlled infusion of propofol in high-risk patients with severely reduced left ventricular function.

机译:在左室功能严重降低的高危患者中,靶控输注或手动控制输注丙泊酚。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

OBJECTIVE: To compare hemodynamics, time to extubation, and costs of target-controlled infusion (TCI) with manually controlled infusion (MCI) of propofol in high-risk cardiac surgery patients. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized. SETTING: Major community university-affiliated hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty patients undergoing first-time implantation of a cardioverter-defibrillator with severely reduced left ventricular function (left ventricular ejection fraction <30%). INTERVENTIONS: Anesthesia was performed using remifentanil, 0.2 to 0.3 microg/kg/min, and propofol. Propofol was used as TCI (plasma target concentration, 2 to 3 microg x mL; n = 10) or MCI (2.5 to 3.5 mg/kg/hr; n = 10). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Hemodynamics were measured at 6 data points: T1, before anesthesia; T2, after intubation; T3, after skin incision; T4, after first defibrillation; T5, after third defibrillation; and T6, after extubation. There were no significant hemodynamic differences between the 2 groups. Dobutamine was required to maintain cardiac index >2 L/min/m(2) in significantly more patients of the TCI group than of the MCI group. Mean dose of propofol was higher in the TCI patients (6.0 +/- 1.0 mg/kg/hr) than in the MCI patients (3.0 +/- 0.4 mg/kg/hr) (p < 0.05), whereas doses of remifentanil did not differ. Time to extubation was significantly shorter in the MCI (11.9 +/- 2.4 min) versus the TCI group (15.6 +/- 6.8 min). Costs were significantly lower in MCI patients (34.73 dollars) than in TCI patients (44.76 dollars). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severely reduced left ventricular function, TCI and MCI of propofol in combination with remifentanil showed similar hemodynamics. TCI patients needed inotropic support more often than MCI-treated patients. Although extubation time was longer in TCI patients and costs were higher, both anesthesia techniques can be recommended for early extubation after implantation of a cardioverter-defibrillator. Copyright 2001 by W.B. Saunders Company.
机译:目的:比较高危心脏手术患者丙泊酚的靶控输注(TCI)和手动控制输注(MCI)的血流动力学,拔管时间和费用。设计:前瞻性,随机分组。地点:主要的​​社区大学附属医院。参与者:20例首次植入心脏复律除颤器的患者,其左心室功能严重降低(左心室射血分数<30%)。干预措施:使用瑞芬太尼,0.2至0.3 microg / kg / min和丙泊酚进行麻醉。丙泊酚用作TCI(血浆目标浓度,2至3微克x mL; n = 10)或MCI(2.5至3.5 mg / kg / hr; n = 10)。测量和主要结果:在6个数据点测量血流动力学:麻醉前T1; T2,插管后; T3,切开皮肤后; T4,先进行除颤; T5,第三次除颤后;和T6,拔管后。两组之间没有明显的血液动力学差异。 TCI组患者的多巴酚丁胺维持心脏指数> 2 L / min / m(2)的需求明显高于MCI组。 TCI患者的丙泊酚平均剂量(6.0 +/- 1.0 mg / kg / hr)比MCI患者的平均丙泊酚(3.0 +/- 0.4 mg / kg / hr)高(p <0.05),而瑞芬太尼的剂量确实更高没有区别。与TCI组(15.6 +/- 6.8分钟)相比,MCI的拔管时间明显缩短(11.9 +/- 2.4分钟)。 MCI患者的费用(34.73美元)显着低于TCI患者的费用(44.76美元)。结论:在左心功能严重下降的患者中,丙泊酚的TCI和MCI与瑞芬太尼联合使用具有相似的血流动力学。 TCI患者比接受MCI治疗的患者更需要正性肌力支持。尽管TCI患者拔管时间更长,费用也更高,但是两种麻醉技术都可以推荐用于植入心脏复律除颤器后的早期拔管。 W.B.版权所有2001桑德斯公司。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号