论文部分内容阅读
目的:对两种不同麻醉方式(腰硬联合阻滞复合全麻、单纯全麻)在腹腔镜直肠癌根治术中的运用效果进行观察与对比。方法:选择2013年3月至2016年2月本院接收的腹腔镜直肠癌根治术患者88例作为观察对象,按就诊前后顺序分成观察组与对照组,前者采取腰硬联合阻滞复合全麻,后者采取单纯全麻;对比两组患者的临床麻醉效果。结果:观察组患者各时段平均动脉压(MAP)、心率(HR)、血浆皮质醇(Cor)、血糖(Glu)相比,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);两组患者T2时段的呼气末二氧化碳分压(PETCO_2)显著高于本组其他时段,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05);观察组患者T2时段的MAP、HR、Cor、Glu低于对照组,T3时段的Cor显著低于对照组,不良反应发生率9.1%显著低于对照组22.7%,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:对腹腔镜直肠癌根治术患者采取腰硬联合阻滞复合全麻,可抑制患者的应激反应,且不良反应发生率低。
OBJECTIVE: To observe and compare the effects of two different anesthesia methods (combined spinal general anesthesia with general anesthesia, simple general anesthesia) in laparoscopic radical resection of rectal cancer. Methods: From March 2013 to February 2016, 88 patients undergoing laparoscopic radical resection of laparoscopic rectal cancer in our hospital were selected as observational objects. The patients were divided into observation group and control group according to the order of treatment before and after treatment. , The latter to take a simple general anesthesia; compared two groups of patients clinical anesthesia. Results: There was no significant difference in mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), plasma cortisol (Cor) and blood glucose (Glu) in observation group at each time point The end-tidal carbon dioxide partial pressure (PETCO_2) was significantly higher than the other time points in this group, the difference was statistically significant (P <0.05); MAP group HR, Cor, Glu at T2, Significantly lower than the control group, the incidence of adverse reactions 9.1% was significantly lower than the control group 22.7%, the difference was statistically significant (P <0.05). Conclusion: The combined spinal and hard combined general anesthesia for patients undergoing laparoscopic radical resection of rectal cancer can inhibit the patient’s stress response, and the incidence of adverse reactions is low.