Objective To evaluate the sedative effects of fentanyl on ventilated patients in intensive care unit (ICU ).Methods Thirty orotracheal intubated and mechanical ventilated medical patients in ICU were randomly divided into two groups，ie.Midazolam group (group M) and midazolam combined with fentanyl group with a proportion of 100∶1 (group M+F) The sedatives were continuously intravenously infused to achieve a target motor activity assessment scale (MAAS) of 3 and ventilator synchrony score of adaptation to the intensive care environment (ATICE) ≥3 after loading dose of midazolam.The sedation level was evaluated and the infusion rate was adjusted to maintain the target sedation goal every 2 h and the hemodynamic，respiratory and sedative parameters were recorded simultaneously.The oxygenation index were measured at 12 and 24 h.The infusion were ceased after 24 h,then the sedative degree was assessed every 30 min until MAAS ≥3 and the recover time were recorded.Results There were no significant differences in blood pressure，oxygenation index and adjustive frequency of drugs between the two groups (all Pgt;0.05).The heart rate，respiratory rate and airway pressure in group M+F decreased significantly than those in Group M (Plt;0.05).The amount of midazolam used and cost of sedatives were lower than those in group M (Plt;0.05).Satisfactory degree of sedation or ventilator synchrony and awakeness score of ATICE in group M+F were higher than those in group M.The recover time was shorter in groupM+F (Plt;0.05).Conclusion In medical ventilated patients, fentanyl improves the sedative effect of midazolam and reduces the dose of midazolam,hence,reduce the total cost of sedatives.
Objective To assess the correlation between bispectral index (BIS) and richmond agitation sedation scale (RASS) and sedation-agitation scale (SAS) through the spearman correlation coefficient by systematic review. Methods Databases including PubMed, EMbase, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library (Issue 7, 2016), CNKI, VIP, WanFang Data and CBM were searched from inception to July 2016 to collect literature on the correlation between BIS and RASS and SAS. The studies were screened according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. After extracting data and assessing the quality of the included studies, meta-analysis was conducted using Comprehensive Meta Analysis 3.0 software. Results A total of 12 studies involving 397 patients were included. BIS was positively correlated with RASS score and SAS, and the summary correlation coefficient was 0.742 with 95% CI 0.678 to 0.795 and 0.605 with 95% CI 0.517 to 0.681, respectively. Conclusion BIS has a good correlation with RASS and SAS, which will provide more options for assessing sedation of patients with mechanical ventilation in ICU.
ObjectiveTo know the fundamental status of painless digestive endoscopy in China. MethodsA 23-item survey including multiple choices and fill-in-the-blank questions on 3 pages was performed on anesthesiologists in China excluding Taiwan, Macao and Hong Kong on www.xqnmz.com and www.dxy.cn/bbs from November 1 to December 31, 2013, among which 5 questions were on personal details, 9 on hospital and department, and 9 on clinic details. The results about the basic facts, risk factors of anesthesia and drug use and monitoring of painless digestive endoscopy in China were analyzed. ResultsA total of 726 questionnaires were collected, among which 667 (91.87%) were considered valid. Interviewed hospitals included hospitals from 31 provinces, municipalities and autonomous regions excluding Taiwan, Macao and Hong Kong. Thirty questionnaires were from the first-grade hospitals (4.5%), 292 from the second-grade (43.78%), and 345 from the third-grade (51.72%). And 69.12% of the questionnaires showed these hospitals could only carry out painless gastroscopy and/or colonoscopy, while 80.81% showed the number of the mean painless endoscopy cases was 0-30 per day; 47.23% of the respondents working in digestive endoscopy center had to complete the anesthesia procedure alone, and 35.83% of the respondents illustrated their digestive endoscopy centers had established the post anesthesia care unit; 62.97% were equipped with anesthesia apparatus or ventilator; 89.96% were equipped with tracheal intubation tool; and 21.44% were equipped with defibrillator. Among them, 25.79% did not prepare rescue medicines regularly in digestive endoscopy center. Propofol was the most frequently used anesthetic, and composited fentanyl was at the highest use rate for gastrointestinal endoscopy. Respondents who used electrocardiogram, non-invasive blood pressure and pulse oxygen saturation the least to monitor during painless gastroscopy and colonoscopy took up 43.48% and 46.08% respectively. ConclusionPainless digestive endoscopy needs further development and standardization with the regulation of related guidelines and standardized residents training.
Sedation and analgesia is an essential part of the emergency work. Presently, for adults, clinical assessment and application of sedation and analgesia has been gradually perfect, but in the face of pediatric patients, clinicians would always concern drug-related adverse reactions as well as a variety of uncontrollable factors, leading to reducing and even ignoring the sedation and analgesia in children. This review focuses on the current research status and relevant evidence of pediatric sedation depth and risk assessment, pain assessment, as well as the principles, application methods, advantages and disadvantages of various commonly used clinical drugs, and the aim is to provide evidence for higher quality sedation and analgesia for children.
【摘要】 目的 观察丙泊酚在重症监护室（ICU） 外科术后对患者的镇静效果及作用。 方法 2006年7月-2008年7月，对行外科手术后在ICU观察室采用丙泊酚镇静的45例患者的镇静效果、停药苏醒时间及给药前后呼吸、循环参数的变化进行观察，并与治疗前进行比较。 结果 丙泊酚镇静起效快，镇静治疗后大多数患者开始血压有所下降（Plt;0.05）但不久恢复正常，所有患者心率、呼吸频率、血氧饱和度无明显变化（Pgt;0.05），停药后苏醒快。 结论 丙泊酚是外科术后患者较理想的镇静剂，但应根据患者情况调整给药速度、剂量及时间。 【Abstract】 Objective To observe the sedative effect of propofol on the patients after surgical operations in intensive care unit (ICU). Methods Forty-five patients underwent the injection with propofol after surgical operations in ICU from July 2006 to July 2008. The sedative efficacy, recovery time after the propofol administration, and changes of respiratory, circulate parameter before and after medication were observed, which were compared with those before the treatment. Results The sedative reactive time of propofol was short. Most of the patients had decreased blood pressure after injection with propofol (Plt;0.05) but recovered soon. The heart rate, respiratory rate, and pulse oxygen saturation did not significantly changed (Pgt;0.05). The recovery time was short after propofol administration was stopped. Conclusion Propofol is an effective sedative for the patients after surgical operations in ICU, but the medicated speed, amount and time according to state of the patients should be adjusted.
ObjectiveTo explore the efficacy and safety of different sedative and analgesic methods in emergent endotracheal intubations in RICU. Methods110 cases of tracheal intubation in critically ill patients were divided into 5 groups randomly: ① control group(given no sedative or analgesic drug before intubation); ② fentanyl group(given intravenous fentanyl 2 μg/kg before intubation,followed by fentanyl 2 μg·kg-1·h-1 maintenance); ③ dexmedetomidine hydrochloride+fentanyl group(given dexmedetomidine hydrochloride 1 μg/kg+fentanyl 2 μg/kg before intubation,followed by dexmedetomidine hydrochloride 0.5 μg·kg-1·h-1+fentanyl 2 μg·kg-1·h-1 maintenance); ④ midazolam+fentanyl group(given midazolam 0.05 mg/kg+fentanyl 2 μg/kg before intubation,followed by midazolam 0.05 mg·kg-1·h-1+fentanyl 2 μg·kg-1·h-1 maintenance); ⑤ Propofol+fentanyl group(given propofol 1 mg/kg+fentanyl 2 μg/kg before intubation,followed by propofol 0.4 mg·kg-1·h-1+fentanyl 2 μg·kg-1·h-1 maintenance).The mean arterial pressure(MAP),heart rate(HR),respiratory frequency(RR),PaO2/FiO2,Riker sedation score and agitation were monitored before,during and after intubations.The one-time success rate of intubation and severe arrhythmia (sinus bradycardia,frequent ventricular premature,ventricular fibrillation,and cardiac arrest) incidence rate were recorded. ResultsThe one-time success rates of intubations of the propofol+fentanyl group (95.4%) and the midazolam+fentanyl group (90.9%) were higher than that in the dexmedetomidine hydrochloride+fentanyl group (86.4%,P<0.05),while one-time intubation success rate of three groups were higher than that of the fentanyl group (45.4%) and the control group (31.8%,P<0.05).5 minutes after intubation,the PaO2/FiO2 index of 5 groups of patients were higher than those before intubation,but the PaO2/FiO2 index of the control group and the fentanyl group were lower than those in the other three groups(P<0.05).The occurrence of serious arrhythmia rate in the dexmedetomidine hydrochloride+fentanyl group (0%),the midazolam+fentanyl group (9%) and the propofol+fentanyl group (9%) were lower than that in the control group (13.6%) and the fentanyl group (18.2%).The MAP during intubation and 2 minutes after intubation of the propofol+fentanyl group and the midazolam+fentanyl group were lower than that in the other three groups(P<0.05).The proportion of patients with Riker sedation and agitation score≤4 at intubation in the dexmedetomidine hydrochloride+fentanyl group (68.2%) was lower than that in the propofol+fentanyl group(90.9%) and the midazolam+fentanyl group (86.4%,P<0.05),but higher than those in the fentanyl group(22.7%)and the control group(18.2%,P<0.05). ConclusionPropofol,midazolam or dexmedetomidine hydrochloride with fentanyl are all effective and safe methods of sedation and analgesia in emergent endotracheal intubation in RICU.Dexmedetomidine hydrochloride with fentanyl is an ideal sedative relatively with less influence on cardiovascular system and less myocardial oxygen consumption.
ObjectiveTo investigate the effects of alcohol consumption status and labor intensity on the tolerance of patients undergoing bronchoscopy under mild to moderate sedation anesthesia. MethodsAdult patients scheduled for bronchoscopy under local anesthesia or mild to moderate sedation were included, and their clinical characteristics and bronchoscopy tolerance were recorded. The study compared changes in vital signs, severity of coughing, and procedure failure rates during bronchoscopy among patients with different drinking statuses (non-drinkers, former drinkers, and current drinkers) and different labor intensities (light, moderate, and heavy labor intensity) to assess the impact of drinking status and labor intensity on bronchoscopy tolerance.ResultsA total of 142 subjects were included in the study, with 50 patients receiving local anesthesia and 92 patients receiving mild to moderate sedation. Current drinkers had a higher procedure failure rate (2.9% vs. 1.9% vs. 25.0%, P<0.01, for non-drinkers, former drinkers, and current drinkers, respectively) and more significant intraoperative blood pressure drops (systolic pressure change, −3.5±9.1 vs. −0.2±8.1 vs. −9.3±17.9 mm Hg, P<0.01; diastolic pressure change, −0.5±5.6 vs. 2.9±7.9 vs. −3.2±12.4, P<0.05). Patients with moderate to heavy labor intensity also had higher procedure failure rates and more pronounced intraoperative blood pressure drops (procedure failure rate, 1.1% vs. 13.2% vs. 22.2%, P<0.01, for light, moderate, and heavy labor intensity, respectively; intraoperative systolic pressure change, −1.8±8.5 vs. 2.8±8.5 vs. −17.2±24.7 mm Hg, P<0.001; intraoperative diastolic pressure change, 1.3±6.4 vs. 0.2±6.7 vs. −8.1±17.2 mm Hg, P<0.01). The impact of drinking status and labor intensity on procedure tolerance was only observed in patients receiving mild to moderate sedation. After controlling for relevant confounding factors, current drinking and moderate to heavy labor intensity were identified as independent risk factors for procedure failure (current drinkers compared to non-drinkers or former drinkers, OR 47.2, 95%CI: 3.1-232.2, P<0.05; moderate to heavy labor intensity compared to low labor intensity, OR 25.7, 95%CI: 2.8-67.7, P<0.05).ConclusionsCurrent drinkers engaged in moderate to heavy labor intensity are less likely to tolerate bronchoscopy under mild to moderate sedation. It is essential to pay attention to the selection and evaluation of anesthesia methods, procedure types, and intraoperative monitoring for this population.