瑞芬太尼与芬太尼复合丙泊酚全凭静脉麻醉用于神经外科手术的系统评价

    Remifentanil-Propofol versus Fentanyl-Propofol during Total Intravenous Anesthesia for Neurosurgery: A Systematic Review

    • 摘要: 目的 系统评价瑞芬太尼与芬太尼复合丙泊酚全凭静脉用于神经外科手术的临床麻醉效果和安全性。 方法 计算机检索Cochrane图书馆(2013年第3期)、 Cochrane协作网麻醉组专业协作组数据库、MEDLINE、EMBASE、Ovid、Springer、CBM、CNKI、VIP、Wanfang数据库;手工检索图书馆馆藏期刊,收集瑞芬太尼与芬太尼复合丙泊酚用于神经外科手术全凭静脉麻醉的随机对照试验,检索时限均为从建库至2013年10月。由2位研究者按照纳入与排除标准独立筛选文献、提取资料和评价质量,然后采用RevMan 5.1软件进行Meta分析。 结果 共纳入8个随机对照试验,合计474例患者。Meta分析结果显示:①血流动力学:与瑞芬太尼组相比,芬太尼组插管时平均动脉压上升明显加权均数差-4.58,95%可信区间(-6.84,-2.32),P<0.000 1,两组差异有统计学意义。两组在诱导后、上头架、切皮和拔管时平均动脉压改变差异无统计学意义,诱导后、插管、上头架、切皮和拔管时心率改变差异无统计学意义。②药物用量:两组术中丙泊酚用量加权均数差-0.71,95%可信区间(-2.08,0.66),P=0.31差异无统计学意义。③苏醒时间及拔管时间:与瑞芬太尼组相比,芬太尼组苏醒时间加权均数差 -6.83,95%可信区间(-7.83,-5.84),P<0.000 01及拔管时间加权均数差-12.26,95%可信区间(-17.04,-7.48),P<0.000 01延长。④不良反应:两组患者术后恶心呕吐、拔管呛咳、心动过缓和低血压发生率差异无统计学意义。 结论 与芬太尼组相比,瑞芬太尼复合丙泊酚用于神经外科手术时患者术后苏醒快、苏醒质量好,术中血流动力学指标、丙泊酚用量及术后不良反应发生率无明显差异。

       

      Abstract: Objective To carry out a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Remifentanil-Propofol versus Fentanyl-Propofol during total intravenous anesthesia for neurosurgery. Methods Databases including the Cochrane library(Issue 3,2013), the database of the Cochrane anesthesia group, MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid, Springer, CNKI, VIP database and Wanfang data were electronically searched from inception to October 2013 for the randomized controlled trials (RCT) of Remifentanil-Propofol versus Fentanyl-Propofol during total intravenous anesthesia for neurosurgery. Two reviewers independently screened literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed the quality of the included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.1 software. Results 8 trials involving 474 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: ① Hemodynamic changes: Compared with Fentanyl-Propofol group, the MAP changes during intubation period (WMD= -4.58, 95%CI -6.84 to -2.32, P<0.000 1) were more stable in Remifentanil-Propofol group, but with no significant differences in the induction, headpins insertion, incision and extubation period. There were no significant differences between the two groups for HR in the 5 periods. ② Drug dosage: There were no significant differences in the Propofol dosage (WMD=-0.71, 95%CI -2.08 to 0.66, P=0.31) between the two groups. ③ Emergence time and Extubation time: Compared with Fentanyl-Propofol group, emergence time (WMD=-6.83, 95%CI -7.83 to -5.84, P<0.000 01) and extubation time (WMD=-12.26, 95%CI -17.04 to -7.48, P<0.000 01) were significantly shorter in Remifentanil-Propofol group.④ Side effects: There were no significant differences in side effects (such as nausea and vomiting, cough, bradycardia and hypotension between the two groups. Conclusion Remifentanil provides patients with the quicker and better postoperative awakening quality, but there were no differences in the incidence of side effects or the Propofol dosage.

       

    /

    返回文章
    返回