【摘要】 目的分析超快通道麻醉(UFCA)在胸腔镜体外循环心脏手术中的临床效果。方法选取50例行胸腔镜体外循环心脏手术患者,随机分为对照组(n=25)和观察组(n=25)。对照组采用传统麻醉,观察组采用UFCA。比较两组患者的麻醉时间、手术时间、体外循环时间、心脏阻断时间、 5 min拔管后警觉/镇静评分、意识恢复程度及不良反应情况。结果两组患者的麻醉时间、手术时间、体外循环时间、心脏阻断时间比较无统计学差异(P>0.05)。观察组5 min拔管后警觉/镇静评分5分比例显著高于对照组,拔管时间、睁眼时间及定位感恢复时间均明显短于对照组(P <0.05)。观察组的不良反应发生率为8.00%,显著低于对照组的32.00%(P <0.05)。结论与传统麻醉比较,行UFCA的胸腔镜体外循环心脏手术患者神经意识恢复更快,且安全性更高,值得临床推广。更多还原

【Abstract】 Objective To analyze the clinical effect of ultrafast channel anesthesia(UFCA) in thoracoscopic cardiopulmonary bypass surgery. Methods 50 cases of patients undergoing thoracoscopic cardiopulmonary bypass surgery were randomly divided into control group(n = 25) and observation group(n = 25). The control group received traditional anesthesia, and the observation group received UFCA. The anesthesia time, surgical time, extracorporeal circulation time, cardiac arrest time, alert/sedation score 5 min after extubation, consciousness recovery degree and adverse reactions were compared between the two groups. Results No statistical difference was found in anesthesia time, surgical time, extracorporeal circulation time and cardiac arrest time between the two groups(P >0.05). The rate of alert/sedation score5 min after extubation with 5 points in the observation group was significantly higher than that in the control group, and the extubation time,eye opening time and recovery time of localization sensation were significantly shorter than those in the control group(all P <0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions in the observation group was 8.00%, significantly lower than 32.00% in the control group(P <0.05).Conclusions Compared with traditional anesthesia, UFCA in patients with thoracoscopic cardiopulmonary bypass surgery has faster recovery of neurological consciousness and higher safety, which is worthy of clinical promotion.更多还原