曹雪峰 劉旭東 李艷 趙亮 常韜 郭淑娟 劉玉伶
中圖分類號(hào) R681.8;R614 文獻(xiàn)標(biāo)志碼 A 文章編號(hào) 1001-0408(2018)20-2832-05
DOI 10.6039/j.issn.1001-0408.2018.20.21
摘 要 目的:觀察氟比洛芬酯聯(lián)合氫嗎啡酮用于骨科術(shù)后靜脈自控鎮(zhèn)痛(PCIA)的鎮(zhèn)痛、鎮(zhèn)靜效果及安全性。方法:選擇2016年5月-2018年1月承德醫(yī)學(xué)院附屬醫(yī)院麻醉科收治的90例椎管內(nèi)麻醉下行骨科下肢手術(shù)的患者,按隨機(jī)數(shù)字表法分為SF組、H組和KH組,每組30例。術(shù)后PCIA泵藥液配方SF組為枸櫞酸舒芬太尼注射液2~3 μg/kg+注射用鹽酸托烷司瓊10 mg+0.9%氯化鈉注射液稀釋至100 mL;H組為鹽酸氫嗎啡酮注射液0.12 mg/kg+注射用鹽酸托烷司瓊10 mg+0.9%氯化鈉注射液稀釋至100 mL;KH組為鹽酸氫嗎啡酮注射液0.12 mg/kg+氟比洛芬酯注射液50 mg+注射用鹽酸托烷司瓊10 mg+0.9%氯化鈉注射液稀釋至100 mL。觀察3組患者的手術(shù)時(shí)間及術(shù)中用藥情況(硬膜外腔追加羅哌卡因次數(shù)和麻黃堿、阿托品使用次數(shù))、鎮(zhèn)痛泵有效按壓次數(shù)、PCIA鎮(zhèn)痛效果;術(shù)后2、6、12、24、48 h的視覺模擬量表(VAS)評(píng)分及Ramsay鎮(zhèn)靜評(píng)分;術(shù)前及術(shù)后焦慮抑郁量表(HAD)評(píng)分和心境量表(POMS)評(píng)分;不良反應(yīng)發(fā)生情況。結(jié)果:3組患者手術(shù)時(shí)間、硬膜外腔追加羅哌卡因次數(shù)、麻黃堿及阿托品使用次數(shù)比較,差異均無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05)。KH組患者鎮(zhèn)痛泵有效按壓次數(shù)顯著少于SF組和H組,PCIA鎮(zhèn)痛效果優(yōu)、良的比例均顯著高于SF組和H組(P<0.05),而SF組與H組比較差異均無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05)。3組患者術(shù)后48 h VAS評(píng)分均顯著低于同組術(shù)后6、12、24 h,且KH組同時(shí)點(diǎn)評(píng)分均顯著低于SF組、H組(P<0.05),而SF組與H組比較差異均無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05)。3組患者術(shù)后不同時(shí)點(diǎn)的Ramsay鎮(zhèn)靜評(píng)分比較,差異均無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05)。術(shù)前,3組患者HAD評(píng)分、POMS評(píng)分比較,差異均無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05);術(shù)后,KH組、H組患者HAD評(píng)分、POMS評(píng)分均顯著低于同組術(shù)前及SF組(P<0.05),而KH組與H組比較及SF組術(shù)前與術(shù)后比較差異均無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05)。3組患者均無(wú)嘔吐、呼吸抑制、皮膚瘙癢及消化道出血發(fā)生;KH組和H組患者惡心、眩暈發(fā)生率均顯著低于SF組(P<0.05),而KH組與H組比較差異均無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05)。結(jié)論:氟比洛芬酯聯(lián)合氫嗎啡酮用于骨科術(shù)后PCIA的鎮(zhèn)痛、鎮(zhèn)靜效果較好,可明顯改善患者的情緒和心境,且安全性較好。
關(guān)鍵詞 骨科手術(shù);靜脈自控鎮(zhèn)痛;氫嗎啡酮;氟比洛芬酯;鎮(zhèn)痛;鎮(zhèn)靜;安全性
ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE: To observe analgesia, sedation effects and safety of flurbiprofen axetil combined with hydromorphone for postoperative patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) after orthopedics surgery. METHODS: Totally 90 patients with combined spinal epidural anesthesia underwent lower limb surgery were selected from anesthesology department in the Affiliated Hospital of Chengde Medical College during May 2016-Jan. 2018. They were divided into SF group, H group and KH group according random number table, with 30 cases in each group. The postoperative PCIA pump drug liquid formula of SF group included Sufentanil citrate injection 2-3 μg/kg+Tropisetron hydrochloride for injection 10 mg+0.9% Sodium chloride injection diluted to 100 mL; that of H group included Hydromorphone hydrochloride injection 0.12 mg/kg+Tropisetron hydrochloride for injection 10 mg+0.9% Sodium chloride injection diluted to 100 mL; that of KH group included Hydromorphone hydrochloride injection 0.12 mg/kg+Flurbiprofen axetil injection 50 mg+Tropisetron hydrochloride for injection 10 mg+0.9% Sodium chloride injection diluted to 100 mL. The operation time, intraoperative medication (epidural application frequency of additional ropivacaine, frequency of ephedrine and atropine), effective pressing times of analgesic pump and the analgesic effect of PCIA were observed in 3 groups. VAS score and Ramsay sedation score were observed 2, 6, 12, 24, 48 h after surgery. The hospital anxiety and depression scale (HAD) score, profile of mood states (POMS) score and the occurrence of ADR were observed before and after surgery. RESULTS: There was no statistical significance in operation time, epidural application frequency of additional ropivacaine or frequency of ephedrine and atropine among 3 groups (P>0.05). The effective pressing times of analgesic pump in KH group were significantly lower than SF group and H group. The proportion of patients with excellent and good anesthesia effect in KH group was significantly higher than SF group and H group (P<0.05); there was no statistical significance between SF group and H group (P>0.05). VAS score of 3 groups 48 h after surgery were significantly lower than 6, 12, 24 h after surgery; that of KH group was significantly lower than SF group and H group (P<0.05); there was no statistical significance between SF group and H group (P>0.05). There was no statistical significance in Ramsay score among 3 groups at different time points (P>0.05). Before surgery, there was no statistical significance in HAD score or POMS score among 3 groups (P>0.05). After surgery, HAD score and POMS score of KH group and H group were significantly lower than before surgery and SF group (P<0.05); there was no statistical significance in KH group and H group, before and after surgery in SF group (P>0.05). No vomiting, respiratory depression, pruritus and digestive tract bleeding were observed in 3 groups. The incidence of dizziness and nausea in H group and KH group were significantly lower than SF group (P<0.05); there was no statistical significance between KH group and H group (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The flurbiprofen axetil combined with hydromorphone show good analgesic and sedative effect for PCIA after orthopedics operation, and can significantly improve emotion and mood of patients with good safety.
KEYWORDS Orthopedics surgery; Patient-controlled intravenous analgesia; Hydromorphone; Flurbiprofen axetil; Analgesia; Sedation; Safety
骨科術(shù)后疼痛尤其是功能鍛煉時(shí)的運(yùn)動(dòng)痛會(huì)給患者帶來(lái)痛苦,患者往往疼痛難忍、煩躁不安、情緒低落,嚴(yán)重者可患抑郁癥,甚至有自殺傾向。傳統(tǒng)的術(shù)后鎮(zhèn)痛、鎮(zhèn)靜主要以阿片類藥物為主,如舒芬太尼、芬太尼等。雖然上述藥物鎮(zhèn)痛、鎮(zhèn)靜效果確切,但常會(huì)引發(fā)頭痛、眩暈、嗜睡、惡心、嘔吐、呼吸抑制等不良反應(yīng)[1-2]。氫嗎啡酮是一種強(qiáng)效的阿片類藥物,鎮(zhèn)痛、鎮(zhèn)靜效果明確且有改善患者情緒的作用[3-4],但目前用于骨科術(shù)后鎮(zhèn)痛、鎮(zhèn)靜尤其是改善患者情緒等國(guó)內(nèi)外鮮有相關(guān)報(bào)道。氟比洛芬酯是一種具有抗炎和鎮(zhèn)痛雙重作用的非甾體類抗炎藥[2]。在本研究中,筆者觀察了氟比洛芬酯聯(lián)合氫嗎啡酮用于骨科術(shù)后靜脈自控鎮(zhèn)痛(PCIA)的鎮(zhèn)痛、鎮(zhèn)靜效果和安全性,旨在為臨床提供參考。
1 資料與方法
1.1 納入與排除標(biāo)準(zhǔn)
納入標(biāo)準(zhǔn):(1)按美國(guó)麻醉醫(yī)師協(xié)會(huì)(ASA)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)分級(jí)為Ⅰ~Ⅱ級(jí);(2)心、肝、腎功能無(wú)異常;(3)近2周無(wú)上呼吸道感染。
排除標(biāo)準(zhǔn):(1)有椎管內(nèi)麻醉禁忌證者;(2)患嚴(yán)重消化性潰瘍者;(3)患嚴(yán)重高血壓者;(4)對(duì)氫嗎啡酮或氟比洛芬酯過(guò)敏者。
1.2 研究對(duì)象
選擇2016年5月-2018年1月承德醫(yī)學(xué)院附屬醫(yī)院麻醉科收治的椎管內(nèi)麻醉下行骨科下肢手術(shù)患者90例,按隨機(jī)數(shù)字表法將所有患者分為SF組、H組和KH組,每組30例。3組患者性別、年齡、體質(zhì)量指數(shù)、ASA分級(jí)、手術(shù)類型等一般資料比較,差異均無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05),具有可比性,詳見表1。本研究方案經(jīng)醫(yī)院醫(yī)學(xué)倫理委員會(huì)審核通過(guò),所有患者及其家屬均知情同意且簽署了知情同意書。
1.3 麻醉方法
術(shù)前所有患者均禁食、禁飲8 h,入室后開放靜脈通路,監(jiān)測(cè)無(wú)創(chuàng)血壓、心率、血氧飽和度,后于腰椎椎體間隙L2-3采用直入法行椎管內(nèi)麻醉,蛛網(wǎng)膜下腔給予鹽酸羅哌卡因注射液[齊魯制藥有限公司,批準(zhǔn)文號(hào):國(guó)藥準(zhǔn)字H20153780,規(guī)格:10 mL ∶ 0.1 g,給藥濃度:0.5%(重比重)]2~3 mL(10~15 mg),硬膜外腔置管3~5 cm,調(diào)控麻醉平面在T8以下。麻醉效果確切后開始手術(shù),待鹽酸羅哌卡因給藥1 h后,硬膜外腔追加0.8%鹽酸羅哌卡因5 mL,每隔1 h追加1次,至手術(shù)結(jié)束。術(shù)中維持患者血壓和心率波動(dòng)在基礎(chǔ)值的±30%范圍內(nèi),當(dāng)心率小于55次/min或血壓低于基礎(chǔ)值的30%時(shí)給予硫酸阿托品注射液(天津金耀藥業(yè)有限公司,批準(zhǔn)文號(hào):國(guó)藥準(zhǔn)字H12020383,規(guī)格:1 mL ∶ 1 mg)0.3 mg/次,鹽酸麻黃堿注射液(東北制藥集團(tuán)沈陽(yáng)第一制藥有限公司,批準(zhǔn)文號(hào):國(guó)藥準(zhǔn)字H20122412,規(guī)格:1 mL ∶ 30 mg)6 mg/次,靜脈注射。手術(shù)結(jié)束前10 min連接PCIA泵,其藥液配方為——SF組:枸櫞酸舒芬太尼注射液(宜昌人福藥業(yè)有限責(zé)任公司,批準(zhǔn)文號(hào):國(guó)藥準(zhǔn)字H20054171,規(guī)格:1 mL ∶ 50 μg)2~3 μg/kg+注射用鹽酸托烷司瓊(瑞陽(yáng)制藥有限公司,批準(zhǔn)文號(hào):國(guó)藥準(zhǔn)字H20060460,規(guī)格:5 mg)10 mg+0.9%氯化鈉注射液(辰欣藥業(yè)股份有限公司,批準(zhǔn)文號(hào):國(guó)藥準(zhǔn)字H37022337,規(guī)格:500 mL)稀釋至100 mL;H組:鹽酸氫嗎啡酮注射液(宜昌人福藥業(yè)有限責(zé)任公司,批準(zhǔn)文號(hào):國(guó)藥準(zhǔn)字H20120100,規(guī)格:2 mL ∶ 2 mg)0.12 mg/kg+注射用鹽酸托烷司瓊10 mg+0.9%氯化鈉注射液稀釋至100 mL;KH組:鹽酸氫嗎啡酮注射液0.12 mg/kg+氟比洛芬酯注射液(北京泰德制藥股份有限公司,批準(zhǔn)文號(hào):國(guó)藥準(zhǔn)字H20041508,規(guī)格:5 mL ∶ 5 mg)50 mg+注射用鹽酸托烷司瓊10 mg+0.9%氯化鈉注射液稀釋至100 mL。3組患者PCIA:背景劑量2 mL,追加劑量2 mL,輸注速率3 mL/h,自控鎖定時(shí)間15 min。
1.4 觀察指標(biāo)
觀察3組患者的手術(shù)時(shí)間及術(shù)中用藥情況(硬膜外腔追加羅哌卡因次數(shù)和麻黃堿、阿托品使用次數(shù))、鎮(zhèn)痛泵有效按壓次數(shù)、PCIA鎮(zhèn)痛效果;術(shù)后2、6、12、24、48 h的視覺模擬量表(VAS)評(píng)分及Ramsay鎮(zhèn)靜評(píng)分;術(shù)前及術(shù)后焦慮抑郁量表(HAD)評(píng)分和心境量表(POMS)評(píng)分;不良反應(yīng)發(fā)生情況。PCIA鎮(zhèn)痛效果:術(shù)后48 h VAS評(píng)分0分為鎮(zhèn)痛效果優(yōu),>0~<3分為鎮(zhèn)痛效果良,3~4分為鎮(zhèn)痛效果一般,>4分為鎮(zhèn)痛效果差[2]。VAS評(píng)分:評(píng)分范圍為0~10分,0分為無(wú)痛,10分為劇烈疼痛[2]。Ramsay鎮(zhèn)靜評(píng)分:1分為鎮(zhèn)靜不足,2~4分為鎮(zhèn)靜滿意,5~6分為鎮(zhèn)靜過(guò)度[2]。HAD評(píng)分:包括焦慮和抑郁兩個(gè)亞量表,兩個(gè)亞量表各7題(每題0~3分),0~7分為“無(wú)癥狀”,8~10分為“可疑存在”,11~21分為“肯定存在”[2]。POMS評(píng)分:題項(xiàng)涉及緊張、憤怒、抑郁、疲勞、慌亂等消極情緒,精力和自尊感等積極情緒,一共40題;每題評(píng)分范圍為0~4分,0分為“幾乎沒(méi)有”,1分為“有一點(diǎn)”,2分為“中等程度”,3分為“相當(dāng)明顯”,4分為“非常明顯”[2]。POMS總分=消極情緒總分-積極情緒總分+100分;分?jǐn)?shù)越低表示患者心境越佳。
1.5 統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)方法
采用SPSS 19.0軟件對(duì)數(shù)據(jù)進(jìn)行統(tǒng)計(jì)分析。計(jì)量資料以x±s表示,組內(nèi)比較采用重復(fù)測(cè)量的方差分析,組間比較采用t檢驗(yàn);計(jì)數(shù)資料以率表示,采用χ2檢驗(yàn)。P<0.05為差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。
2 結(jié)果
2.1 3組患者手術(shù)時(shí)間及術(shù)中用藥情況比較
3組患者手術(shù)時(shí)間、硬膜外腔追加羅哌卡因次數(shù)、麻黃堿及阿托品使用次數(shù)比較,差異均無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05),詳見表2。
2.2 3組患者鎮(zhèn)痛泵有效按壓次數(shù)比較
KH組患者鎮(zhèn)痛泵有效按壓次數(shù)顯著少于SF組和H組,差異均有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.05),而SF組與H組比較差異無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05),詳見表3。
2.3 3組患者PCIA鎮(zhèn)痛效果比較
KH組患者PCIA鎮(zhèn)痛效果優(yōu)、良的比例均顯著高于SF組和H組,差異均有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.05),而SF組與H組比較差異均無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05),詳見表4。
2.4 3組患者術(shù)后不同時(shí)點(diǎn)的VAS評(píng)分比較
3組患者術(shù)后48 h VAS評(píng)分均顯著低于同組術(shù)后6、12、24 h,且KH組同時(shí)點(diǎn)評(píng)分均顯著低于SF組、H組,差異均有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.05),而SF組與H組比較差異均無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05),詳見表5。
2.5 3組患者術(shù)后不同時(shí)點(diǎn)的Ramsay鎮(zhèn)靜評(píng)分比較
3組患者術(shù)后不同時(shí)點(diǎn)的Ramsay鎮(zhèn)靜評(píng)分比較,差異均無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05),詳見表6。
2.6 3組患者術(shù)前及術(shù)后HAD評(píng)分、POMS評(píng)分比較
術(shù)前,3組患者HAD評(píng)分、POMS評(píng)分比較,差異均無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05)。術(shù)后,KH組、H組患者HAD評(píng)分、POMS評(píng)分均顯著低于同組術(shù)前及SF組,差異均有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.05),而KH組與H組比較及SF組術(shù)前與術(shù)后比較差異均無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05),詳見表7。
2.7 不良反應(yīng)
3組患者均無(wú)嘔吐、呼吸抑制、皮膚瘙癢及消化道出血發(fā)生。KH組和H組患者惡心、眩暈發(fā)生率均顯著低于SF組,差異均有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.05),而KH組與H組比較差異均無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05),詳見表8。
3 討論
阿片類鎮(zhèn)痛藥引起的惡心、嘔吐和眩暈發(fā)生率較高,易加重患者對(duì)術(shù)后鎮(zhèn)痛的擔(dān)心和恐懼,進(jìn)而影響術(shù)后鎮(zhèn)痛效果[5]。本研究結(jié)果顯示,3組患者均無(wú)嘔吐發(fā)生,這可能與患者使用了托烷司瓊有關(guān)。氫嗎啡酮是一種半合成的阿片類藥物,分子結(jié)構(gòu)不同于嗎啡,其有一個(gè)6-酮基的基團(tuán)和在 7-8位置上的氫化雙鍵,對(duì)于μ和κ受體的親和力高于嗎啡,鎮(zhèn)痛效果為嗎啡的5~10倍[6]。Lussier D等[7]研究顯示,硬膜外腔使用0.075 mg/mL的氫嗎啡酮進(jìn)行PCIA(背景劑量3 mL)可使95%的剖宮產(chǎn)患者獲得良好的鎮(zhèn)痛效果。一項(xiàng)Meta分析表明,氫嗎啡酮用于術(shù)后鞘內(nèi)鎮(zhèn)痛,惡心、嘔吐等不良反應(yīng)的發(fā)生率較低[8]。本研究結(jié)果顯示,KH組和H組患者惡心、眩暈發(fā)生率均顯著低于SF組,差異均有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義,而KH組與H組比較差異均無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。有研究發(fā)現(xiàn),氫嗎啡酮沒(méi)有活性代謝產(chǎn)物,所以未見有延遲性呼吸抑制的發(fā)生,長(zhǎng)時(shí)間應(yīng)用較芬太尼等更安全,更適合用于術(shù)后鎮(zhèn)痛[9]。本研究結(jié)果顯示,3組患者術(shù)后48 h VAS評(píng)分均顯著低于同組術(shù)后6、12、24 h,且KH組同時(shí)點(diǎn)評(píng)分均顯著低于SF組、H組,差異均有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義,而SF組與H組比較差異均無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。
氟比洛芬酯是一種非選擇性的非甾體類抗炎藥,對(duì)骨關(guān)節(jié)、軟組織損傷造成的運(yùn)動(dòng)痛具有良好的治療效果應(yīng)[10]。當(dāng)患肢活動(dòng)時(shí),炎癥介質(zhì)釋放增多,疼痛加重,而氟比洛芬酯可抑制炎癥介質(zhì)的釋放,減輕患肢的腫脹及炎癥反應(yīng)對(duì)血管的刺激,從而較好地抑制運(yùn)動(dòng)痛[11]。該藥聯(lián)合氫嗎啡酮具有平衡鎮(zhèn)痛的作用。平衡鎮(zhèn)痛是將不同藥理作用的鎮(zhèn)痛藥物聯(lián)合應(yīng)用,由此可減少單一藥物的劑量,降低不良反應(yīng)發(fā)生率,增強(qiáng)鎮(zhèn)痛效果,是鎮(zhèn)痛的發(fā)展趨勢(shì),同時(shí)也是加速康復(fù)外科中提倡的術(shù)后鎮(zhèn)痛模式[12]。本研究結(jié)果顯示,KH組患者鎮(zhèn)痛泵有效按壓次數(shù)顯著少于SF組和H組,鎮(zhèn)痛效果優(yōu)、良的比例均顯著高于SF組和H組,差異均有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義,而SF組與H組比較差異均無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。
有文獻(xiàn)報(bào)道,氫嗎啡酮能夠改善患者情緒[13]。相關(guān)研究認(rèn)為,以鎮(zhèn)痛藥物為基礎(chǔ)的鎮(zhèn)靜方案,能夠減少鎮(zhèn)靜藥物用量,減輕對(duì)患者意識(shí)狀態(tài)的影響,從而改善患者心境[14]。本研究結(jié)果顯示,術(shù)后,KH組、H組患者HAD評(píng)分、POMS評(píng)分均顯著低于同組術(shù)前及SF組,差異均有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義,而KH組與H組比較及SF組術(shù)前與術(shù)后比較差異均無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。
綜上所述,氟比洛芬酯聯(lián)合氫嗎啡酮用于骨科術(shù)后PCIA的鎮(zhèn)痛、鎮(zhèn)靜效果較好,可明顯改善患者的情緒和心境,且安全性較好。由于本研究納入的樣本量較小,術(shù)中、術(shù)后的監(jiān)測(cè)指標(biāo)較少,故此結(jié)論有待大樣本、多中心研究進(jìn)一步證實(shí)。
參考文獻(xiàn)
[ 1 ] KARL HW,TYLER DC,MISER AW. Controlled trial of morphine vs hydromorphone for patient-controlled analgesia in children with postoperative pain[J]. Pain Med,2012,13(12):1658-1659.
[ 2 ] 高蓉,顧連兵. 舒芬太尼復(fù)合氟比洛芬酯用于婦科腫瘤術(shù)后靜脈自控鎮(zhèn)痛的觀察[J]. 中國(guó)腫瘤外科雜志,2013,5(3):173-175.
[ 3 ] FELDEN L,WALTER C,HARDER S,et al. Comparative clinical effects of hydromorphone and morphine:a meta-analysis[J]. Br J Anaesth,2011,107(3):319-328.
[ 4 ] P?PPING DM,ELIA N,MARRET E,et al. Opioids added to local anesthetics for single-shot intrathecal anesthesia in patients undergoing minor surgery:a meta-analysis of randomized trials[J]. Pain,2012,153(4):784-793.
[ 5 ] 任鵬程,安麗君,呂海港,等. 地佐辛抑制全麻氣管插管期應(yīng)激反應(yīng)的效果[J]. 江蘇醫(yī)藥,2011,37(11):1296- 1297.
[ 6 ] CHANG AK,BIJUR PE,DAVITT M,et al. Randomized clinical trial of an intravenous hydromorphone titration protocol versus usual care for management of acute pain in older emergency department patients[J]. Drugs Aging,2013,30(9):747-754.
[ 7 ] LUSSIER D,RICHARZ U,F(xiàn)INCO G. Use of hydromorphone,with particular reference to the OROS formulation,in the elderly[J]. Drugs Aging,2010,27(4):327-335.
[ 8 ] LIUKAS A,KUUSNIEMI K,AANTAA R,et al. Plasma concentrations of oral oxycodone are greatly increased in the elderly[J]. Clin Pharmacol Ther,2008,84(4):462- 467.
[ 9 ] KUMAR P,SUNKARANENI S,SIROHI S,et al. Hydromorphone efficacy and treatment protocol impact on tolerance and mu-opioid receptor regulation[J]. Eur J Pharmacol,2008,597(1/3):39-45.
[10] 范海哲,張婧杰. 不同劑量地佐辛復(fù)合氟比洛芬酯在下肢骨折手術(shù)術(shù)后鎮(zhèn)痛的效果[J]. 臨床麻醉學(xué)雜志,2014,30(10):1001-1004.
[11] 蘇毅,高明. 不同劑量氟比洛芬酯對(duì)下肢骨折術(shù)后運(yùn)動(dòng)痛鎮(zhèn)痛的臨床觀察[J]. 吉林醫(yī)學(xué),2013,34(19):3804- 3806.
[12] JIANG J,TENG Y,F(xiàn)AN Z,et al. The efficacy of periarticular multimodal drug injection for postoperative pain management in total knee or hip arthroplasty[J] . J Arthroplasty,2013,28(10):1882-1887.
[13] RAPP SE,EGAN KJ,ROSS BK,et al. A multidimensional comparison of morphine and hydromorphone patient- controlled analgesia[J]. Anesth Analg,1996,82(5):1043- 1048.
[14] BREEN D,KARABINIS A,MALBRAIN M,et al. Decreased duration of mechanical ventilation when comparing analgesia-based sedation using remifentanil with standard hypnotic-based sedation for up to 10 days in intensive care unit patients:a randomised trial[J]. Crit Care,2005,9(3):R200-R210.
(收稿日期:2018-05-28 修回日期:2018-08-27)
(編輯:陳 宏)