首页> 外文期刊>Medicine. >Comparative Effects of Dexmedetomidine and Propofol on US-Guided Radiofrequency Ablation of Hepatic Neoplasm Under Monitored Anesthesia Care A Randomized Controlled Study
【24h】

Comparative Effects of Dexmedetomidine and Propofol on US-Guided Radiofrequency Ablation of Hepatic Neoplasm Under Monitored Anesthesia Care A Randomized Controlled Study

机译:监测麻醉下右美托咪定和丙泊酚对美国引导的肝肿瘤射频消融的比较效果随机对照研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a useful and safe procedure for treating hepatic neoplasm. However, liver RFA causes severe pain, which thereby increases the demand for monitored anesthesia care (MAC). Here, we compared the efficacy and safety of propofol and dexmedetomidine, which are commonly administered during MAC when performing RFA to assess hepatic neoplasm.In this randomized controlled trial, 40 patients were randomly allocated to 2 groups for elective RFA. Patients received either dexmedetomidine (group D) or propofol (group P). Both groups received the continuous infusion of remifentanil for pain control. The primary outcomes were opioid consumption and differences in partial pressure of arterial carbon dioxide (PaCO2) between pre- and postprocedure RFA. In addition, hemodynamic parameters, patient satisfaction, and interventional radiologist satisfaction were determined.There were significant differences in opioid consumption (50.116.8ng/kg/min [group D] vs 71.2 +/- 18.7ng/kg/min [group P]; P=0.001) and delta PaCO2 (10.4 +/- 6.4mm Hg vs 17.2 +/- 9.2mm Hg, respectively; P=0.016). Moreover, respiratory rates were significantly different between groups during RFA (P<0.001). However, blood pressure and heart rate did not significantly change during RFA. Neither patient nor interventional radiologist satisfaction was significantly different between groups.Dexmedetomidine provides better respiratory stability and reduces opioid consumption in comparison with propofol when administered under MAC when performing RFA for hepatic neoplasm.
机译:经皮射频消融(RFA)是治疗肝肿瘤的一种有用且安全的方法。但是,肝RFA会引起严重的疼痛,从而增加了对监测麻醉护理(MAC)的需求。在此,我们比较了在进行RFA评估肝肿瘤时在MAC期间常用的丙泊酚和右美托咪定的有效性和安全性。在这项随机对照试验中,将40例患者随机分为两组进行选择性RFA。患者接受右美托咪定(D组)或丙泊酚(P组)。两组均连续输注瑞芬太尼以控制疼痛。主要结局为阿片类药物的消耗以及RFA治疗前后RFA的动脉二氧化碳分压(PaCO2)差异。此外,还确定了血流动力学参数,患者满意度和放射线介入医师的满意度。阿片类药物的摄入量存在显着差异(D组为50.116.8ng / kg / min,P组为71.2 +/- 18.7ng / kg / min。 ; P = 0.001)和δPaCO2(分别为10.4 +/- 6.4mm Hg和17.2 +/- 9.2mm Hg; P = 0.016)。此外,RFA期间两组之间的呼吸频率显着不同(P <0.001)。但是,RFA期间血压和心率没有明显变化。两组间患者和介入放射科医生的满意度均无显着差异。与丙泊酚相比,右旋美托咪定在进行RFA肝癌治疗时与丙泊酚相比具有更好的呼吸稳定性,并减少了阿片类药物的消耗。

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