Loading…
The use of Esketamine in CT-guided percutaneous liver tumor ablation reduces the consumption of remifentanil: a randomized, controlled, double-blind trial
BackgroundIn the anesthesia management of percutaneous liver tumor ablation, the requirement of analgesia is very strict. Currently, intravenous anesthesia is commonly used, such as remifentanil combined with sedative drugs. However, the pain relief is not instantaneous after increasing the dosage o...
Saved in:
Published in: | Annals of translational medicine 2022-06, Vol.10 (12), p.704-704 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | BackgroundIn the anesthesia management of percutaneous liver tumor ablation, the requirement of analgesia is very strict. Currently, intravenous anesthesia is commonly used, such as remifentanil combined with sedative drugs. However, the pain relief is not instantaneous after increasing the dosage of remifentanil. Esketamine, a medium- or long-term analgesic drug, does not inhibit respiration to maintain patient comfort during the ablation and reduces the consumption of remifentanil. Therefore, this experiment was designed to investigate the potential of combinational therapy and the most appropriate dose of esketamine. MethodsA total of 120 patients were randomly divided into three groups by SPSS. The regular anesthesia model included dexmedetomidine 0.5 µg/kg, intravenous glucose tolerance test, remifentanil continuous infusion, flurbiprofen 50 mg, i.v., palonosetron 0.225 mg, i.v., and 1% lidocaine for local anesthesia. Group A was the regular control group, only using the regular model; Group B also received with 0.1 mg/kg esketamine, i.v.; and Group C also received 0.2 mg/kg esketamine, i.v.. The whole experiment was double-blind. ResultsFrom December 2020 to March 2021, 120 patients were randomized in total, and 108 were included in the analysis: 36, 37, 35 were allocated to Group A, Group B, and Group C, respectively. The total dosage of remifentanil in Group A, Group B, Group C was 179.38±123.37, 120.31±57.96 and 115.91±62.42 µg, respectively. We found the total dosage of remifentanil in Group B and Group C were significantly decreased in comparison to that of Group A (P=0.004, P=0.003, respectively). The maximum dosage of remifentanil in Group A, Group B, and Group C was 1.76±0.62, 1.37±0.47, and 1.33±0.56 ng/mL, respectively. The maximum dosage of remifentanil in Group B and Group C were significantly decreased in comparison to that of Group A (P=0.003, P=0.001, respectively). The incidence of severe pain during the ablation in Group B was significantly lower than that in Group A (3 vs. 12, P |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2305-5839 2305-5839 |
DOI: | 10.21037/atm-22-2756 |