药物与临床

单次不同诱导剂量环泊酚在无痛四维子宫输卵管超声造影术中有效性和安全性

  • 卿朝辉 ,
  • 萧肖兰 ,
  • 彭少琴 ,
  • 徐庆微
展开
  • 1.广东省生殖科学研究所/广东省生殖医院麻醉科 (广东 广州 510600 )
    2.国家卫生健康委员会男性生殖与遗传重点实验室 (广东 广州 510600 )

收稿日期: 2024-08-21

  网络出版日期: 2024-11-25

基金资助

广东省医学科研基金项目(B2024273)

Efficacy and safety of a single induction dose of cyclopofol in painless four⁃dimensional hysterosalpingography

  • Zhaohui QING ,
  • Xiaolan XIAO ,
  • Shaoqin PENG ,
  • Qingwei. XU
Expand
  • *.Department of Anesthesiology,Guangdong Provincial Feproductive ScienceInstitute/Guangdong Provincial Fertility Hospital,Guangzhou 510600,Guangdong,China
    *.NHC Key Laboratory of Male Reproduction and Genetics,Guangzhou 510600,Guangdong,China

Received date: 2024-08-21

  Online published: 2024-11-25

摘要

目的 探讨单次不同诱导剂量环泊酚在无痛四维子宫输卵管超声造影术中的有效性和安全性。 方法 选取120例需行无痛经阴道四维超声子宫输卵管造影作为研究对象,每组随机选取40例,单次环泊酚诱导用量分别为0.3 mg/kg(C1组)、0.5 mg/kg(C2组)和0.7 mg/kg(C3组)。观察3组患者检查前(T1)、造影剂注入期间(T2)、检查后(T3)的3个时间点相对应的心率(HR)和无创袖带动脉平均血压(MAP)、术毕清醒时间、不良反应发生率。 结果 3组患者的HR、MAP在T1、T3差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05);C1组HR、MAP在T2比较,高于C2组,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05),而C2组、C3组的HR、MAP在T2比较,差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05);C2组患者术毕清醒时间短于C3组(P < 0.05),而C1组和C2组患者术毕清醒时间比较,差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05);C2组不良反应的发生率为10.0%,低于C1组的32.5%,C3组37.5%(P < 0.05)。 结论 0.5 mg/kg环泊酚在无痛四维子宫输卵管超声造影术具有良好的镇静,清醒迅速,不良反应发生率低等优势。

本文引用格式

卿朝辉 , 萧肖兰 , 彭少琴 , 徐庆微 . 单次不同诱导剂量环泊酚在无痛四维子宫输卵管超声造影术中有效性和安全性[J]. 实用医学杂志, 2024 , 40(22) : 3221 -3225 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-5725.2024.22.017

Abstract

Objective To investigate the efficacy and safety of a single induction dose of cyclopofol in painless four?dimensional hysterosalpingography, this study aims to assess its academic significance and adherence to Nature journal's publication standards. Methods A total of 120 patients admitted to Guangdong Reproductive Hospital between February 2022 and December 2022, requiring painless vaginal four?dimensional ultrasound hysterosalpingography, were selected as the study population. Random selection was performed with 40 patients in each group. The dosage of cyclopofol administered was 0.3 mg/kg (C1 group), 0.5 mg/kg (C2 group), and 0.7 mg/kg (C3 group). Heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure measured non?invasively using a cuff, time to wake after surgery, and incidence of adverse reactions were observed at three time points: before examination (T1), during contrast agent injection (T2), and after examination (T3). Results There were no significant differences in heart rate (HR) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) between T1 and T3 among the three groups (P > 0.05). However, at T2, group C1 exhibited significantly higher HR and MAP compared to group C2 (P < 0.05), while there was no statistically significant difference in HR and MAP between group C2 and C3 at T2 (P > 0.05). The duration of wakefulness was shorter in group C2 than in group C3 (P < 0.05), but there was no statistical significance in wakefulness duration between group C1 and C2 (P > 0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions was lower in group C2 (10.0%) compared to both group C1 (32.5%) and group C3 (37.5%) with statistical significance (P < 0.05). Conclusion The administration of cyclopofol at a dosage of 0.5 mg/kg exhibits notable advantages in painless four?dimensional hysterotubal ultrasonography, including effective sedation, prompt wakefulness, and a low occurrence rate of adverse reactions.

参考文献

1 彭春晓,邵勇平,冯燕. 羟考酮复合丙泊酚在无痛取卵术中的应用[J]. 临床麻醉学杂志,2016,32( 10) : 957-959.
2 李志强. 子宫输卵管造影在不孕症中的应用价值[J]. 中国药物与临床,2020,20(1):40-41.
3 孙德峰. 日间手术麻醉规范化管理策略[J]. 实用医学杂志,2024,40(3):283-288.
4 XINGQU C, PING G, LI Y, et al. Comparison and Clinical Value of Ciprofol and Propofol in Intraoperative Adverse Reactions, Operation, Resuscitation, and Satisfaction of Patients under Painless Gastroenteroscopy Anesthesia[J]. Contrast Media Mol Imaging, 2022,18:2022:9541060. doi:10.1155/2022/9541060
5 WU B, ZHU W, WANG Q,et al. Efficacy and safety of ciprofol-remifentanil versus Propofol remifentanil during fiberoptic bron-choscopy:aprospective,randomized,double-blind,non-Inferi-ority trial[J]. Front Pharmacol, 2022,13:1091579. doi:10.3389/fphar.2022.1091579
6 白雪,罗昊,黄雅莹,等. 甲苯磺酸瑞马唑仑与丙泊酚在儿童无痛胃镜检查中的比较[J]. 实用医学杂志,2023,39(19):2529-2533.
7 方积乾. 医学统计学与电脑实验[M]. 北京:上海科学技术出版社,2006.
8 萧利霞. 经阴道子宫输卵管四维超声造影检查在不孕症诊断中的应用价值分析[J]. 影像研究与医学应用,2022,21(13) :116-117.
9 LI C, HUANG Y, XIE L,et al.The diagn-ostic value of hysterosalpingo-contrast sonography in female infertility of the fallopian tube[J]. Pak J Med Sci,2023,39(4):931-935. doi:10.12669/pjms.39.4.7462
10 靳琦,郑慧敏,尹平. 不孕症伴焦虑、抑郁状态的相关性及针灸干预研究进展[J]. 中华中医药杂志,2022,37(11):6597-6600.
11 王媛媛,刘文娟,黄莉,等. 输卵管因素不孕患者在体外受精-胚胎移植前行腹腔镜手术的获益程度[J]. 实用医学杂志,2023,39(4):442-446. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-5725.2023.04.009
12 汪韬,王晓彬,李静秋,等. 螺旋CT仿真子宫输卵管造影在女性不孕症诊断中的临床应用[J]. 中国CT和MRI杂志,2022,20(9):138-140.
13 辛洋,马晓静,李书琴,等. 实时三维超声输卵管造影评价未产妇药物流产次数与输卵管通畅度的关系[J]. 中国医学影像学杂志,2022,30(11):1145-1148.
14 郭睿,李彦. 经阴道三维超声输卵管造影评价卵巢异位囊肿介入效果研究[J]. 云南医药,2022,29(3):343-344.
15 李冬冬,荆秀娟,杨岚,等. “跨越征分型” 指导剖宫产术后子宫瘢痕妊娠手术方式的研究[J]. 中华妇产科杂志,2022,57(2):133-138.
16 浦雪,徐婧,王云慧. 经阴道实时三维超声输卵管造影与X线碘油输卵管造影的对比研究[J]. 航空航天医学杂志,2022,6(1):233-234.
17 杜小芳. 对比研究经阴道实时三维超声输卵管造影、X线碘油输卵管造影的临床价值[J]. 心理月刊,2019,14(3):131.
18 刘华平,周玉琴,董蕾,等. 超声与X线子宫输卵管造影对子宫发育异常分型及输卵管畅通情况的诊断价值[J]. 中国当代医药,2022,29(33):421-422.
19 王善钰,刘嘉嘉,王承华,等. 水囊调节在子宫输卵管超声造影术患者疼痛管理中的应用研究[J]. 中国超声医学杂志,2024,40(1):91-95.
20 ZHENG L, WANG Y, MA Q,et al. Efficacy and safety of a subanesthetic dose of esketamine combined with propofol in patients with obesity undergoing painless gastroscopy:A prospective, Double-blind,randomized controlled trial[J]. Drug Des Devel Ther,2023,17:1347-1356. doi:10.2147/dddt.s408076
21 XU C, HE L, REN J,et al. Efficacy and safety of remimazolam besylate combined with alfentanil in painless gastroscopy: A randomized,single-Blind,parallel controlled study[J]. Contrast Media Mol Imaging,2022,2022:7 102293. doi:10.1155/2022/7102293
22 TANG L, YE C, WANG N,et al. The median effective doses of propofol combined with two different doses of nalbuphine for adult patients during painless gastroscopy[J]. Front Pharmacol, 2022,13:1014486. doi:10.3389/fphar.2022.1014486
23 陈红芽,王惠军,王月,等. 瑞马唑仑与丙泊酚对老年眼底日间手术患者全麻恢复质量的影响[J]. 实用医学杂志,2024,40(8):1052-1057.
24 WEI Y, QIU G, LEI B,et al.Oral Delivery of propofol with methoxymethylphosphonic acid as the delivery vehicle[J]. J Med Chem, 2017,60(20):8580-8590.
25 LIAO J, LI M, HUANG C,et al.Pharmacodynamics and Pharmacokinetics of HSK3486, a Novel 2,6-Disubstituted Phenol Derivative as a General Anesthetic[J]. Front Pharmacol,2022,13:830791. doi:10.3389/fphar.2022.830791
26 CHAO H, XIAOFENG O, YI T, et al. Sedation Effects Produced by a Ciprofol Initial Infusion or Bolus Dose Followed by Continuous Maintenance Infusion in Healthy Subjects: A Phase 1 Trial[J]. Adv Ther,2021,38(11):5484-5500. doi:10.1007/s12325-021-01914-4
27 LI J, WANG X, LIU J, et al. Comparison of ciprofol (HSK3486) versus propofol for the induction of deep sedation during gastroscopy and colonoscopy procedures: A multi-center, non-inferiority, randomized, controlled phase 3 clinical trial[J]. Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol, 2022,131(2):138-148. doi:10.1111/bcpt.13761
文章导航

/