切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华产科急救电子杂志 ›› 2013, Vol. 02 ›› Issue (02) : 136 -140. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-3259.2013.02.012

所属专题: 文献

论著

饱胃急诊剖宫产患者行腰硬联合麻醉的危险因素分析
陈郡兴1, 白虹2, 蓝绮云1, 陈裕中1, 靳三庆2,(), 詹鸿1   
  1. 1. 510150 广州医学院第三附属医院麻醉科
    2. 中山大学附属第六医院麻醉科
  • 收稿日期:2013-03-06 出版日期:2013-05-18
  • 通信作者: 靳三庆
  • 基金资助:
    广东省科技计划基金项目(2010B080701077)

The risk factors of combined spinal and epidural anesthesia for pregnant women with full stomach in emergency cesarean section

Jun-xing CHEN1, Hong BAI2, Qi-yun LAN1, Yu-zhong CHEN1, San-qing JIN2,(), Hong ZHAN1   

  1. 1. Department of Anethesiology, the Third Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou 510150, China
  • Received:2013-03-06 Published:2013-05-18
  • Corresponding author: San-qing JIN
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: JIN San-qing, Email:
引用本文:

陈郡兴, 白虹, 蓝绮云, 陈裕中, 靳三庆, 詹鸿. 饱胃急诊剖宫产患者行腰硬联合麻醉的危险因素分析[J]. 中华产科急救电子杂志, 2013, 02(02): 136-140.

Jun-xing CHEN, Hong BAI, Qi-yun LAN, Yu-zhong CHEN, San-qing JIN, Hong ZHAN. The risk factors of combined spinal and epidural anesthesia for pregnant women with full stomach in emergency cesarean section[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetric Emergency(Electronic Edition), 2013, 02(02): 136-140.

目的

分析饱胃患者急诊剖宫产行腰硬联合麻醉(CSEA)的危险因素。

方法

选择2010年1月至2012年1月在广州医学院第三附属医院在CSEA下行ASA Ⅰ~Ⅱ级剖宫产手术的220例患者病例进行研究,其中饱胃急诊剖宫产136例为饱胃组,择期剖宫产84例为对照组。两组患者均采用CSEA。对饱胃组患者术中恶心、呕吐的相关因素进行偏相关分析,然后剔除两组术中使用卡前列素氨丁三醇注射液的病例后,再对术中不良事件和新生儿出生情况参数进行比较。

结果

饱胃组患者中,与恶心存在偏相关关系的因素是术中使用卡前列素氨丁三醇注射液(r=0.440)和术中发生低血压(r=0.274);与呕吐存在偏相关关系的因素是术中使用卡前列素氨丁三醇注射液(r=0.646)。饱胃组与对照组在剔除使用卡前列素氨丁三醇注射液的病例后比较,对照组术中低血压的发生率高于饱胃组( χ2=20.455,P<0.05),两组其余指标的差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。

结论

术中使用卡前列素氨丁三醇注射液与低血压是饱胃患者在CSEA下行急诊剖宫产麻醉的危险因素。

Objective

To analyze the risk factors of combined spinal and epidural anesthesia (CSEA) for pregnant women with full stomach in emergency cesarean section.

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted in 220 pregnant women undergoing ASAⅠ-Ⅱcesarean section with CSEA, including 136 cases under emergent cesarean section with full stomach (full stomach group) and 84 cases under elective cesarean section (control group), who were admitted to the Third Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medial University from January 2010 to January 2012. Partial correlation analysis was used for risk factors of pregnancy women with full stomach, such as nausea, vomiting, and so on. After excluded the cases of using hemabate, adverse effects in cesarean section and the outcomes of the newborns were compared in the two groups.

Results

In full stomach group, nausea partial correlated with using hemabate (r=0.440) and hypotensive during operation(r=0.274). And vomiting partial correlated with using hemabate(r=0.646). Compared in full stomach group and control group, the incidence rate of intraoperative hypotension was higher in control group than in full stomach group, excluded the cases of using hemabate, ( χ2=20.455, P<0.05). But there were no significantly difference in the comparison of the other risk factors(P>0.05).

Conclusion

Using hemabate during cesarean section and hypotension were the main risk factors of pregnant women with full stomach, who underwent emergent cesarean section with CSEA.

表1 136例饱胃患者术中发生恶心、呕吐的相关分析
表2 136例饱胃患者术中发生恶心、呕吐的偏相关分析
表3 两组患者一般情况的比较(±s)
表4 两组患者术中不良事件的比较
表5 两组患者新生儿出生时情况的比较(±s)
[1]
陈郡兴,白虹,庞婷,等. 饱胃急诊剖宫产麻醉选择现状的初步调查. 实用医学杂志,2012, 28(21):3648-3651.
[2]
李泽均. 饱胃产妇急诊剖宫产术的麻醉处理. 华夏医学,2004, 17(6):947-948.
[3]
刁伟光,鄂爽,李莉,等. 罗哌卡因和左旋布比卡因腰-腰硬联合麻醉用于急诊剖宫产手术的临床观察. 临床麻醉学杂志,2009, 25(7):637-638.
[4]
Joy L, James F, Richard T, et al. Practice Guidelines for Obstetric Anesthesia: An Updated Report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Obstetric Anesthesia. Anesthesiology, 2007, 106(4): 843-863.
[5]
Merchant R, Bosenberg C, Brown K, et al. Guidelines to the Practice of Anesthesia: Revised edition 2011. Can J Anaesth, 2011, 58(1):74-107.
[6]
孙忠实,史亦丽. 国家新药制剂总览. 北京:化工工艺出版社,2002: 371.
[7]
Balki M, Kasodekar S, Dhumne S, et al. Prophylactic granisetron does not prevent postdelivery nausea and vomiting during elective cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia. Anesth Analg, 2007, 104(3):679-683.
[8]
Tamilselvan P, Fernando R, Bray J, et al. The effects of crystalloid and colloid preload on cardiac output in the parturient undergoing planned cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia: a randomized trial. Anesth Analg, 2009, 109(6):1916-1921.
[9]
Teoh WH, Sia AT. Colloid preload versus coload for spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery: the effects on maternal cardiac output. Anesth Analg, 2009, 108(5):1592-1598.
[10]
Carvalho B, Mercier FJ, Riley ET, et al. Hetastarch co-loading is as effective as pre-loading for the prevention of hypotension following spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery. Int J Obstet Anesth, 2009, 18(2):150-155.
[11]
Siddik-Sayyid SM, Nasr VG, Taha SK, et al. A randomized trial comparing colloid preload to coload during spinal anesthesia for elective cesarean delivery. Anesth Analg, 2009, 109(4):1219-1224.
[12]
Muzlifah KB, Choy YC. Comparison between preloading with 10 ml/kg and 20 ml/kg of Ringer′s lactate in preventing hypotension during spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section. Med J Malaysia, 2009, 64(2):114-117.
[13]
Mercier FJ, Bonnet MP, De la Dorie A, et al. Spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section: fluid loading, vasopressors and hypotension. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim, 2007, 26(7-8):688-693.
[14]
Loubert C. Fluid and vasopressor management for cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia: continuing professional development. Can J Anaesth, 2012, 59(6):604-619.
[15]
McDonald S, Fernando R, Ashpole K, et al. Maternal cardiac output changes after crystalloid or colloid coload following spinal anesthesia for elective cesarean delivery: a randomized controlled trial. Anesth Analg, 2011, 113(4):803-810.
[16]
Gunusen I, Karaman S, Ertugrul V, et al. Effects of fluid preload (crystalloid or colloid) compared with crystalloid co-load plus ephedrine infusion on hypotension and neonatal outcome during spinal anaesthesia for caesarean delivery. Anaesth Intensive Care, 2010, 38(4):647-653.
[17]
Jaffe RA, Samuels SI. 斯坦福临床麻醉全书. 陈宁,韩建阁,译. 3版. 天津:天津科技翻译出版公司,2005:770.
[1] 刘欢颜, 华扬, 贾凌云, 赵新宇, 刘蓓蓓. 颈内动脉闭塞病变管腔结构和血流动力学特征分析[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(08): 809-815.
[2] 马艳波, 华扬, 刘桂梅, 孟秀峰, 崔立平. 中青年人颈动脉粥样硬化病变的相关危险因素分析[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(08): 822-826.
[3] 黄应雄, 叶子, 蒋鹏, 詹红, 姚陈, 崔冀. 急性肠系膜静脉血栓形成致透壁性肠坏死的临床危险因素分析[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 413-421.
[4] 张再博, 王冰雨, 焦志凯, 檀碧波. 胃癌术后下肢深静脉血栓危险因素的Meta分析[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 475-480.
[5] 唐旭, 韩冰, 刘威, 陈茹星. 结直肠癌根治术后隐匿性肝转移危险因素分析及预测模型构建[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 16-20.
[6] 吴方园, 孙霞, 林昌锋, 张震生. HBV相关肝硬化合并急性上消化道出血的危险因素分析[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 45-47.
[7] 陈旭渊, 罗仕云, 李文忠, 李毅. 腺源性肛瘘经手术治疗后创面愈合困难的危险因素分析[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 82-85.
[8] 侯超, 潘美辰, 吴文明, 黄兴广, 李翔, 程凌雪, 朱玉轩, 李文波. 早期食管癌及上皮内瘤变内镜黏膜下剥离术后食管狭窄的危险因素[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(06): 383-387.
[9] 张雯, 宋牡丹, 邓雪婷, 张云. 强化营养支持辅助奥曲肽治疗肝硬化合并食管胃底静脉曲张破裂出血的疗效及再出血危险因素[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(06): 456-460.
[10] 陆猛桂, 黄斌, 李秋林, 何媛梅. 蜂蛰伤患者发生多器官功能障碍综合征的危险因素分析[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(9): 1010-1015.
[11] 李达, 张大涯, 陈润祥, 张晓冬, 黄士美, 陈晨, 曾凡, 陈世锔, 白飞虎. 海南省东方市幽门螺杆菌感染现状的调查与相关危险因素分析[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(08): 858-864.
[12] 李琪, 黄钟莹, 袁平, 关振鹏. 基于某三级医院的ICU多重耐药菌医院感染影响因素的分析[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(07): 777-782.
[13] 孟科, 李燕, 闫婧爽, 闫斌. 胶囊内镜胃通过时间的影响因素分析[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 671-675.
[14] 杨艳丽, 陈昱, 赵若辰, 杜伟, 马海娟, 许珂, 张莉芸. 系统性红斑狼疮合并血流感染的危险因素及细菌学分析[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 694-699.
[15] 孙培培, 张二明, 时延伟, 赵春燕, 宋萍萍, 张硕, 张克, 周玉娇, 赵璨, 闫维, 吴蓉菊, 宋丽萍, 郭伟安, 马石头, 安欣华, 包曹歆, 向平超. 北京市石景山区40岁及以上居民慢性阻塞性肺疾病患病情况及相关危险因素分析[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 711-719.
阅读次数
全文


摘要