您的位置: 首页 > 2024年11月 第39卷 第11期 > 文字全文
2023年7月 第38卷 第7期11
目录

全身麻醉在青光眼日间手术中的应用分析

The application of general anesthesia in the ambulatory glaucoma surgery

来源期刊: 眼科学报 | 2024年11月 第39卷 第11期 541-546 发布时间:2024-11-22 收稿时间:2024/11/21 11:53:29 阅读量:349
作者:
关键词:
麻醉方式青光眼全身麻醉局部麻醉眼压
anesthesia techniquesglaucoma general anesthesialocal anesthesia intraocular pressure
DOI:
10.12419/24071707
收稿时间:
2024-07-05 
修订日期:
2024-08-30 
接收日期:
2024-09-30 
目的:分析全身麻醉在青光眼日间手术中的应用特点。方法:回顾性收集2023年1月—6月于中山大学中山眼科中心在全身麻醉下接受青光眼日间手术患者71例(全麻组),并选择同时期在局部麻醉下接受青光眼手术患者154例(局麻组),同时以年龄为配对因素行倾向评分匹配分析。主要观察指标为患者术后离院时间,并对患者的手术时间、手术前后眼压、视力、中央前房深度、周边前房深度、甘露醇使用情况以及术后较术前眼压降低差值进行分析。结果:与局麻组比较,全麻组患者术后离院时间未有延长(P>0.05);全麻组患者术前眼压较高(P<0.001)、中央前房深度浅(P=0.018)、周边前房深度浅(P<0.001);且全麻组患者在术后较术前眼压降低差值更大(P=0.002)。组间术后中央前房深度、术后使用甘露醇者比例及术后视力提高者比例比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:术前眼部条件较差的青光眼患者能在全身麻醉下完成日间手术,且不延长术后离院时间。
Objective: To analyze the application of general anesthesia in the ambulatory glaucoma surgery. Methods: This retrospective study collected 71 patients who underwent ambulatory glaucoma surgery with general anesthesia at Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center of Sun Yat-sen University from January 2023 to June 2023, and 154 patients who underwent similar glaucoma surgery with local anesthesia during the same period. Age differences between the two groups were balanced by propensity score-matched analysis. The main outcome measures were the patients' post-operative discharge time, and the secondary end points included the duration of surgery, the patients' preoperative and postoperative intraocular pressure (IOP), visual acuity status, central anterior chamber depth, peripheral anterior chamber depth, mannitol use, the difference in IOP reduction after surgery compared to preoperative. Results: After propensity score-matched analysis, as compared with group L, general anesthesia did not prolong the patients' post-operative discharge time(P>0.05).Patients in the group G displayed significant higher IOP (P<0.001), shallower central anterior chamber depth (P=0.018), and shallower peripheral anterior depth (P<0.001). The dramatic reductions in IOP after surgery were exhibited in group G as compared with group L(P=0.002). There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative central anterior chamber depth, incidences in postoperative mannitol use, as well as incidences in visual acuity improvement on the first day after surgery. Conclusion: Glaucoma patients with poor preoperative ocular conditions were able to complete the complex glaucoma surgery under general anesthesia without prolonging their post-operative discharge time.

文章亮点

1. 关键发现

 • 对于术前青光眼病情较重、眼部条件较差的患者,全身麻醉可能带来潜在的获益且不影响术后离院时间。

2. 已知与发现

 • 全身麻醉能提供良好的镇痛、镇静作用以及保证眼球制动,为手术创造良好的操作环境。日间手术的广泛开展提高了眼科手术的周转效率。

3. 意义与改变

 • 全身麻醉相比局部麻醉并不延迟日间手术患者术后离院时间,为青光眼日间手术患者选择麻醉方式提供证据。

       青光眼会造成视力下降、视神经损伤及视野缺[1-2],全球青光眼患者逐年增加[3]。手术是闭角型青光眼、药物控制效果较差或青光眼合并其他眼科疾病患者的重要治疗手段,可及时减缓视力下降及挽救视力丧失[4]。在青光眼手术施行过程中,麻醉的基本要求是进行结膜和眼前段操作时患者无痛感,且眼位居中、放松和相对固定。
       局部麻醉通常选择表面麻醉和球后神经阻滞,达到瞳孔扩张、眼球制动以及镇痛的效果[5]。局部麻醉优势在于术后恶心呕吐发生率较低[6-7]、住院时间更[8]。局部麻醉的效果与实施者的操作技术密切相关,但患者在手术过程中是清醒的,容易产生焦虑和紧张情绪,难免会发生体动或无法保持眼位居中而影响手术的精准性[9-10]
       随着麻醉技术及麻醉药物的不断发展,全身麻醉不仅可以安全、有效地管理患者气道,也能提供良好的镇痛、镇静作用以及保证眼球制动,为手术创造良好的操作环境,并可避免患者对手术的恐惧,从而满足患者舒适化及日间手术开展的需要。然而,全身麻醉管理不当,导致相关的并发症例如呛咳、屏气、喉痉挛等气道并发症,处理时使用面罩加压给氧对眼球的压迫均可能升高眼压、延迟苏醒时间,从而影响日间手术的顺利开展[11-14]
       因此,本研究回顾性分析全身麻醉在青光眼日间手术中的应用特点,并匹配同时期在局部麻醉下行同类型手术的青光眼患者进行比较,从而为全身麻醉在青光眼日间手术中的合理利用提供临床依据。

1 对象与方法

1.1 研究对象

       收集2023年1月—6月在中山大学中山眼科中心接受青光眼+白内障联合手术的患者225例进行回顾性分析,所有病例均为日间手术。
       纳入标准:纳入择期行青光眼+白内障联合手术的患者;年龄≥18岁;由2名具有10年以上独立手术经验、可在全身麻醉或局部麻醉下开展此手术的医生主刀。排除标准:有术侧眼外伤史者;术侧眼存在角膜损伤或水肿导致无法测量眼压者;有相关麻醉药物过敏史者;精神障碍及智力低下导致无法获得眼压资料者。本研究获得中山大学中山眼科中心医学伦理委员会批准(批件号:2024KYPJ058),并获豁免患者个人知情同意。

1.2 方法

       1.2.1 病例分组与麻醉方法
       按照患者所接受的麻醉方式分为全麻组和局麻组。全麻组患者麻醉诱导采用丙泊酚2~3 mg/kg或环泊酚0.4~0.6 mg/kg、芬太尼1~2 μg/kg或阿芬太尼10 μg/kg及顺式阿曲库铵0.1~0.2 mg/kg静脉注射,置入合适型号喉罩后行机械通气。麻醉维持采用瑞芬太尼[0.10~0.15 μg/(kg·min)]联合丙泊酚[5~7 mg/(kg·h)]或环泊酚[0.8~1.0 mg/(kg·h)]持续静脉泵注,辅助吸入0.4~1.0 最低肺泡有效浓度(minimum alveolar concentration, MAC)的七氟烷或地氟烷,手术中眼位偏离正中时适当加深麻醉深度。手术结束后,全麻组患者停止所有药物,带喉罩转入麻醉恢复室(post-anesthesia care unit, PACU)。15 min后给予阿托品0.5 mg、新斯的明1 mg静脉注射拮抗肌松药物残余作用,由PACU护士唤醒,若患者未清醒则5分钟唤醒一次,清醒后拔除喉罩,在改良Alderete评分(Modified Aldrete Scoring System)≥9分时出PACU,车床送回病房继续观察。返回病房后,患者留观至麻醉后离院评分(Post-Anesthesia Discharge Scoring, PADS)>9分,达到日间手术出院标准后离院。局麻组包含表面麻醉及球后神经阻滞麻醉,表面麻醉采用0.5%盐酸丙美卡因,球后神经阻滞麻醉采用1%利多卡因联合0.5%罗哌卡因,手术结束后步行或轮椅送回病房。
       1.2.2 病历资料收集
       本研究主要指标为患者的术后离院时间,即患者术后回到病房到办理出院的时间。次要指标包括麻醉方式、手术时间、麻醉时间、麻醉相关用药、术后眼压、术后较术前眼压降低差值、苏醒延迟、呼吸抑制、术后恶心呕吐、术后镇痛药使用情况。术后眼压指术后第一次测眼压,即患者术毕回到病房后2 h内首次测的眼压。此外,收集患者的一般情况,包括年龄、性别、身高、体质量、体质量指数(body mass index, BMI)、是否合并高血压或糖尿病。记录两组患者术前诊断、手术方式、术前使用甘露醇次数、术侧眼术前眼压、术侧眼术前视力情况、术侧眼术前中央前房深度(central anterior chamber depth, CACD)、术侧眼术前周边前房深度(peripheral anterior chamber depth, PACD),记录患者的术后情况包括术后使用甘露醇次数、术侧眼术后眼压、术侧眼术后视力情况、术侧眼术后CACD。

1.3 统计学方法

       采用SPSS 22.0分析数据。连续变量以(±s)表示,采用Student's 检验,非正态分布数据采用Mann-Whitney U检验,以M(P25, P75),分表示。分类变量以n(%)表示,采用χ2检验。使用倾向评分匹配分析对两组年龄进行匹配比较,卡钳值为0.3,以 1:1 的比例匹配。P <0.05 为差异具有统计学意义。

2 结果

2.1 一般资料和术前指标

       共纳入225例患者,其中全麻组患者71例,局麻组患者154例。全麻组患者的年龄、术前眼压、术前周边前房深度小于1/4角膜厚度(corneal thick, CT)比例均高于局麻组患者(P<0.001)。全麻组患者术前CACD低于局麻组患者(P=0.008)。两组患者术前使用甘露醇比例及其他一般资料比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。以年龄为配对因素,将两组数据进行倾向评分匹配,得到匹配病例全麻组66例,局麻组66例。结果显示匹配后两组间年龄及其他一般资料比较差异无统计学意义,但术前眼压(P<0.001)、术前CACD(P=0.018)、术前PACD小于1/4 CT占比(P=0.013)比较差异仍具有统计学意义。见表1。

表 1 患者基本资料的比较
Table 1 Comparisons of characteristics in different modes of anesthesia groups

项目

全麻组 (n=71)

局麻组(n=154)

检验值

P

倾向评分匹配

 

全麻组(n=66

局麻组(n=66

检验值

P

年龄/岁

56.0±14.5

63.8±9.8

4.143a

<0.001

58.2±12.3

54.9±6.9

-1.911a

0.059

身高/cm

160.6±9.2

158.9±8.4

-1.406a

0.161

160.1±8.8

161.2±8.1

0.742a

0.460

体质量/kg

58.2±11.5

57.1±9.4

-0.784a

0.434

57.5±10.5

58.2±10.0

0.428a

0.670

BMI /(kg/m2

22.5±3.2

22.6±3.0

0.231a

0.817

22.4±3.1

22.4±3.1

-0.019a

0.985

性别(男/女)/例

26/45

46/108

1.017b

0.313

22/44

27/39

0.811b

0.368

合并糖尿病[n(%)]

811.3

159.7

0.124b

0.725

812.1

69.1

0.320b

0.572

合并高血压[n(%)]

1115.5

3824.7

2.405b

0.121

1116.7

46.1

3.685b

0.055

术前眼压/mmHg

25.5±12.3

17.9±8.3

-4.738a

<0.001

25.4±12.4

18.5±9.2

-3.604a

<0.001

术前CACDCT比值

2.2±0.7

2.5±0.5

2.689a

0.008

2.2±0.7

2.5±0.5

2.401a

0.018

术前PACD小于1/4CT[n(%)]

3853.5

4529.2

12.326b

<0.001

3451.5

2030.3

6.142b

0.013

术前使用甘露醇[n(%)]

58(81.7)

132(85.7)

0.599b

0.439

5583.3

5989.4

1.029b

0.310

2.2 两组患者主要指标和术后指标的比较

       全麻组患者术后离院时间为(2.7±1.1) h,与局麻组(2.6±1.3) h比较差异无统计学意义(P=0.629),且经过倾向性评分匹配差异也无统计学意义[(2.7±1.1) h vs.(2.6±1.2) h,P=0.600)。两组患者在病房留观期间均未发现恶心呕吐、中重度疼痛病例。全麻组患者在PACU的停留时间为(29.8±4.2) min,麻醉复苏期未发现苏醒延迟、恶心呕吐、呼吸抑制和需紧急使用镇痛药病例。与局麻组患者相比,全麻组患者术后较术前的眼压降低差值下降幅度更大,全麻组降低平均值为9.5 mmHg (1 mmHg=0.133 kPa),中位数为6.7 mmHg,局麻组降低平均值为3.8 mmHg,中位数为2.4 mmHg(P=0.001),但全麻组的手术时间更长(P=0.004),差异具有统计学意义。以年龄为匹配因素进行倾向评分匹配后,全麻组患者术后眼压降低差值下降幅度仍大于局麻组,全麻组降低平均值为9.6 mmHg,中位数为7.0 mmHg,局麻组降低平均值为3.8 mmHg,中位数为1.5 mmHg(P=0.002),且手术时间更长(P=0.001),差异有统计学意义。两组患者匹配前后,其术后CACD、术后使用甘露醇、术后视力提高者比例的差异均无统计学意义。见表2。

表 2 不同麻醉方式患者的眼压及其他眼部情况和术后资料对比
Table 2 Comparisons of Intraocular pressure, ocular condition, duration of surgery and hospital stays in different modes of anesthesia groups

项目

全麻组 (n=71)

局麻组(n=154)

P 

倾向评分匹配

全麻组(n=66

局麻组(n=66

P 

术后眼压/mmHg

14.9(9.9,17.1)a

12.6(9.9,20.7)a

0.148b

14.9(9.7,20.4)a

13.0(11.1,17.6)a

0.781b

术后较术前眼压降低差值/mmHg

6.7(-0.5,19.3)a

2.4(-2.0,7.9)a

0.001b

7.0(0.5,19.3)a

1.5(-2.4,6.5)a

0.002b

术后眼压降低[n(%)]

52(73.3)

100(64.9)

0.216

5075.8

4162.1

0.090

术后视力提高[n(%)]

24(33.8)

64(41.6)

0.268

2334.8

3147.0

0.157

术后使用甘露醇[n(%)]

9(12.7)

15(9.7)

0.507

812.1

710.6

0.784

术后CADA与CT比值

4.1±0.5

4.0±0.5

0.243

4.1±0.5

4.0±0.5

0.309

手术时间/min

21.1±8.5

17.7±6.9

0.004

21.2±8.7

16.7±6.0

0.001

术后离院时间/h

2.7±1.1

2.6±1.3

0.629

2.7±1.1

2.6±1.2

0.600

3 讨论

       本研究通过对本中心不同麻醉方式下青光眼手术患者的分析发现,全身麻醉相比局部麻醉并不延迟日间手术患者术后离院时间。此外,对于高眼压、浅前房等眼部条件较差的患者,手术医生更倾向于选择全身麻醉,从而便于手术操作。这为青光眼日间手术患者的全身麻醉选择提供了有力的临床数据支撑。本研究纳入的青光眼手术方式为“青光眼-白内障联合手术”,包括前房角分离术、小梁切开/切除术联合白内障超声乳化及人工晶体植入术。小梁切除术都需要通过巩膜造口形成一定厚度的巩膜瓣,从而控制房水的流出,保护瓣的阻力和巩膜上层组织的阻力决定了最终的眼压[15]。有报道指,术前眼压控制不良的患者在接受小梁切除术时,其疼痛感会更加剧烈,增加术中并发症的发生率[16]。此外,一部分药物控制不良或既往接受过其他青光眼手术(如激光)的患者,其房角的病理改变较为复杂,增加小梁切除/切开术的难度,从而增加对镇痛及眼球制动的要求,也增加了局部麻醉实施的风险。
       全身麻醉能为手术提供合适的镇痛、镇静、肌松效果,能够使眼压更为稳定以及保证眼球制动,从而便于手术操作[1]。静脉使用丙泊酚[17]或联合瑞芬太[18],以及静脉应用右美托咪定[19-20]都可以提高眼科手术患者的舒适性,且能提供足够的镇痛、镇静作用,显示出良好的有效性和安全性。一项关于眼科手术中吸入性麻醉剂和混合性麻醉剂对眼压影响的横断面研究结果显示,全身麻醉后眼压明显下降,与诱导前的眼压比较差异具有统计学意义,这对于青光眼的管理决策是非常有指导意义的[21]。除了静脉使用镇静药物和阿片类药物外,肌肉松弛药物顺式阿曲库铵或罗库溴铵对眼压无不利影响[22-23]。此外,本研究中的全身麻醉患者均采用喉罩通气的模式,喉罩的优势在于置入时不增加眼压且能提高患者苏醒期的舒适感。日间手术的广泛开展为患者的治疗与管理提供了很大便利[24],提高了眼科手术的周转效率[25]。然而,全身麻醉潜在的并发症如苏醒时间延长、术后离院时间延长等,可能影响到日间手术的顺利开展。本研究结果显示,与局麻组相比,全麻组患者的术后离院时间无明显差别。本研究中全麻组患者在PACU停留最长时间为37 min,未观察到苏醒延迟、低氧血症、屏气、喉痉挛等急性气道不良事件。这与本中心选择的短效麻醉药物及声门上通气工具(喉罩)的使用有关。因此,在青光眼日间手术中,合适的全身麻醉管理方案并不会延长患者离院时间,这也间接地为不同条件下的青光眼手术患者如何选择麻醉方式提供证据。本研究受限于回顾性数据的混杂以及眼科医生对于麻醉方式的选择偏倚,两组患者在术前的眼部条件及手术时间存在差异,但两组术后眼压恢复水平、术后CACD、术后视力提高及术后使用甘露醇者比例比较差异无统计学意义,说明全身麻醉患者的近期预后与局部麻醉患者相当,提示全身麻醉在青光眼手术中的应用是安全的。
       综上所述,对于术前青光眼病情较重、眼部条件较差以及预计施行复杂术式的患者,全身麻醉可能带来潜在的获益且不影响术后离院时间。

利益冲突

所有作者均声明不存在利益冲突。

开放获取声明

本文适用于知识共享许可协议 (Creative Commons),允许第三方用户按照署名(BY)-非商业性使用(NC)-禁止演绎(ND)(CC BY-NC-ND)的方式共享,即允许第三方对本刊发表的文章进行复制、发行、展览、表演、放映、广播或通过信息网络向公众传播,但在这些过程中必须保留作者署名、仅限于非商业性目的、不得进行演绎创作。
1、Davids%20AM%2C%20Pahlitzsch%20M%2C%20Bertelmann%20E%2C%20et%20al.%20XEN%C2%AE%20implantation%3A%20an%20%0Aeffective%20strategy%20to%20stop%20glaucoma%20progression%20despite%20prior%20minimally%20%0Ainvasive%20glaucoma%20surgery%5B%20J%5D.Albrecht%20VonGraefes%20Arch%20Fur%20Klin%20Und%20%0AExp%20Ophthalmol%2C%202023%2C%20261(4)%3A%201063-1072.%20DOI%3A%2010.1007%2Fs00417-%0A022-05872-7.Davids%20AM%2C%20Pahlitzsch%20M%2C%20Bertelmann%20E%2C%20et%20al.%20XEN%C2%AE%20implantation%3A%20an%20%0Aeffective%20strategy%20to%20stop%20glaucoma%20progression%20despite%20prior%20minimally%20%0Ainvasive%20glaucoma%20surgery%5B%20J%5D.Albrecht%20VonGraefes%20Arch%20Fur%20Klin%20Und%20%0AExp%20Ophthalmol%2C%202023%2C%20261(4)%3A%201063-1072.%20DOI%3A%2010.1007%2Fs00417-%0A022-05872-7.
2、Stein JD, Khawaja AP, Weizer JS. Glaucoma in adults-screening, diagnosis, and management: a review[ J]. JAMA, 2021, 325(2): 164- 174. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.21899.Stein JD, Khawaja AP, Weizer JS. Glaucoma in adults-screening, diagnosis, and management: a review[ J]. JAMA, 2021, 325(2): 164- 174. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.21899.
3、European glaucoma society terminology and guidelines for glaucoma, 5th edition[ J]. Br J Ophthalmol, 2021, 105(Suppl 1): 1-169. DOI: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2021-egsguidelines.European glaucoma society terminology and guidelines for glaucoma, 5th edition[ J]. Br J Ophthalmol, 2021, 105(Suppl 1): 1-169. DOI: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2021-egsguidelines.
4、Qiao C, Zhang H, Cao K, et al. Changing trends in glaucoma surgery over the past 5 years in China[ J]. J Glaucoma, 2022, 31(5): 329-334. DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000002004.Qiao C, Zhang H, Cao K, et al. Changing trends in glaucoma surgery over the past 5 years in China[ J]. J Glaucoma, 2022, 31(5): 329-334. DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000002004.
5、Dutton JJ, Hasan SA, Edelhauser HF, et al. Anesthesia for intraocular surgery[ J]. Surv Ophthalmol, 2001, 46(2): 172-184. DOI: 10.1016/ s0039-6257(01)00246-6.Dutton JJ, Hasan SA, Edelhauser HF, et al. Anesthesia for intraocular surgery[ J]. Surv Ophthalmol, 2001, 46(2): 172-184. DOI: 10.1016/ s0039-6257(01)00246-6.
6、Singh RB, Khera T, Ly V, et al. Ocular complications of perioperative anesthesia: a review[ J].Albrecht VonGraefes Arch Fur Klin Und Exp Ophthalmol, 2021, 259(8): 2069-2083. DOI: 10.1007/s00417-021- 05119-x.Singh RB, Khera T, Ly V, et al. Ocular complications of perioperative anesthesia: a review[ J].Albrecht VonGraefes Arch Fur Klin Und Exp Ophthalmol, 2021, 259(8): 2069-2083. DOI: 10.1007/s00417-021- 05119-x.
7、Kne%C5%BEevi%C4%87%20MM%2C%20Vlajkovi%C4%87%20GP%2C%20Stojkovi%C4%87%20M%C5%BD%2C%20et%20al.%20Comparison%20of%20%0Apostoperative%20pain%20and%20satisfaction%20after%20dacryocystorhinostomy%20in%20%0Apatients%20operated%20on%20under%20local%20and%20general%20anesthesia%5B%20J%5D.%20Med%20Sci%20%0AMonit%2C%202012%2C%2018(5)%3A%20CR265-CR270.%20DOI%3A%2010.12659%2Fmsm.882730.Kne%C5%BEevi%C4%87%20MM%2C%20Vlajkovi%C4%87%20GP%2C%20Stojkovi%C4%87%20M%C5%BD%2C%20et%20al.%20Comparison%20of%20%0Apostoperative%20pain%20and%20satisfaction%20after%20dacryocystorhinostomy%20in%20%0Apatients%20operated%20on%20under%20local%20and%20general%20anesthesia%5B%20J%5D.%20Med%20Sci%20%0AMonit%2C%202012%2C%2018(5)%3A%20CR265-CR270.%20DOI%3A%2010.12659%2Fmsm.882730.
8、Henzler D, Kramer R, Steinhorst UH, et al. Factors independently associated with increased risk of pain development after ophthalmic surgery[ J]. Eur J Anaesthesiol, 2004, 21(2): 101-106. DOI: 10.1017/ s0265021504002042.Henzler D, Kramer R, Steinhorst UH, et al. Factors independently associated with increased risk of pain development after ophthalmic surgery[ J]. Eur J Anaesthesiol, 2004, 21(2): 101-106. DOI: 10.1017/ s0265021504002042.
9、Verma S, Azad SV, Takkar B, et al. Posterior segment complications following glaucoma surgeries[ J]. Indian J Ophthalmol, 2020, 68(6): 988-993. DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_1040_19.Verma S, Azad SV, Takkar B, et al. Posterior segment complications following glaucoma surgeries[ J]. Indian J Ophthalmol, 2020, 68(6): 988-993. DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_1040_19.
10、Mete%20A%2C%20Kimyon%20S%2C%20Sayg%C4%B1l%C4%B1%20O%2C%20et%20al.%20Comparison%20of%20topical%20and%20%0Aretrobulbar%20anesthesia%20in%20terms%20of%20pain%20experience%20during%20silicone%20%0Aoil%20extraction%5B%20J%5D.%20Arq%20Bras%20Oftalmol%2C%202018%2C%2081(2)%3A%2095-101.%20DOI%3A%20%0A10.5935%2F0004-2749.20180023.Mete%20A%2C%20Kimyon%20S%2C%20Sayg%C4%B1l%C4%B1%20O%2C%20et%20al.%20Comparison%20of%20topical%20and%20%0Aretrobulbar%20anesthesia%20in%20terms%20of%20pain%20experience%20during%20silicone%20%0Aoil%20extraction%5B%20J%5D.%20Arq%20Bras%20Oftalmol%2C%202018%2C%2081(2)%3A%2095-101.%20DOI%3A%20%0A10.5935%2F0004-2749.20180023.
11、Sener EB, Ustun E, Ustun B, et al. Hemodynamic responses and upper airway morbidity following tracheal intubation in patients with hypertension: conventional laryngoscopy versus an intubating laryngeal mask airway[ J]. Clinics, 2012, 67(1): 49-54. DOI: 10.6061/ clinics/2012(01)08.Sener EB, Ustun E, Ustun B, et al. Hemodynamic responses and upper airway morbidity following tracheal intubation in patients with hypertension: conventional laryngoscopy versus an intubating laryngeal mask airway[ J]. Clinics, 2012, 67(1): 49-54. DOI: 10.6061/ clinics/2012(01)08.
12、Siddiqui NT, Khan FH. Haemodynamic response to tracheal intubation via intubating laryngeal mask airway versus direct laryngoscopic tracheal intubation[ J]. J Pak Med Assoc, 2007, 57(1): 11-14.Siddiqui NT, Khan FH. Haemodynamic response to tracheal intubation via intubating laryngeal mask airway versus direct laryngoscopic tracheal intubation[ J]. J Pak Med Assoc, 2007, 57(1): 11-14.
13、Obsa MS, Kanche ZZ, OlanaFite R, et al. Effect of laryngeal mask airway insertion on intraocular pressure response: systematic review and meta-analysis[ J]. Anesthesiol Res Pract, 2020, 2020: 7858434. DOI: 10.1155/2020/7858434.Obsa MS, Kanche ZZ, OlanaFite R, et al. Effect of laryngeal mask airway insertion on intraocular pressure response: systematic review and meta-analysis[ J]. Anesthesiol Res Pract, 2020, 2020: 7858434. DOI: 10.1155/2020/7858434.
14、Bharti N, Mohanty B, Bithal PK, et al. Intra-ocular pressure changes associated with intubation with the intubating laryngeal mask airway compared with conventional laryngoscopy[ J]. Anaesth Intensive Care, 2008, 36(3): 431-435. DOI: 10.1177/0310057X0803600315.Bharti N, Mohanty B, Bithal PK, et al. Intra-ocular pressure changes associated with intubation with the intubating laryngeal mask airway compared with conventional laryngoscopy[ J]. Anaesth Intensive Care, 2008, 36(3): 431-435. DOI: 10.1177/0310057X0803600315.
15、Lim R . The surgical management of glaucoma: a rev iew[ J]. ClinExpOphthalmol, 2022, 50(2): 213-231. DOI: 10.1111/ceo.14028.Lim R . The surgical management of glaucoma: a rev iew[ J]. ClinExpOphthalmol, 2022, 50(2): 213-231. DOI: 10.1111/ceo.14028.
16、田洁, 杨倩, 李春擎, 等. 不同麻醉方式下小梁切除术对新生 血管性青光眼患者血清PEDF和VEGF水平的影响[ J]. 分子诊 断与治疗杂志, 2023, 15(2): 306-309. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674- 6929.2023.02.032.
Tian J, Yang Q, Li CQ, et al. Effects of trabeculectomy under different anesthesia on serum PEDF and VEGF levels in patients with neovascular glaucoma[ J]. J Mol Diagn Ther, 2023, 15(2): 306-309. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-6929.2023.02.032.
Tian J, Yang Q, Li CQ, et al. Effects of trabeculectomy under different anesthesia on serum PEDF and VEGF levels in patients with neovascular glaucoma[ J]. J Mol Diagn Ther, 2023, 15(2): 306-309. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-6929.2023.02.032.
17、Chang CY, Chien YJ, Wu MY. Attenuation of increased intraocular pressure with propofol anesthesia: a systematic review with metaanalysis and trial sequential analysis[ J]. J Adv Res, 2020, 24: 223-238. DOI: 10.1016/j.jare.2020.02.008.Chang CY, Chien YJ, Wu MY. Attenuation of increased intraocular pressure with propofol anesthesia: a systematic review with metaanalysis and trial sequential analysis[ J]. J Adv Res, 2020, 24: 223-238. DOI: 10.1016/j.jare.2020.02.008.
18、Li MY, Fei YD, Zhang XX, et al. Application of propofol-remifentanil intravenous general anesthesia combined with regional block in pediatric ophthalmic surgery[ J]. BMC Anesthesiol, 2024, 24(1): 147. DOI: 10.1186/s12871-024-02531-8.Li MY, Fei YD, Zhang XX, et al. Application of propofol-remifentanil intravenous general anesthesia combined with regional block in pediatric ophthalmic surgery[ J]. BMC Anesthesiol, 2024, 24(1): 147. DOI: 10.1186/s12871-024-02531-8.
19、de Nucci A, Scialdone A, Lando G, et al. Effectiveness and safety of intravenous dexmedetomidine sedation for ophthalmic surgery under regional anesthesia[ J]. Eur J Ophthalmol, 2022, 32(5): 2598-2603. DOI: 10.1177/11206721211059013.de Nucci A, Scialdone A, Lando G, et al. Effectiveness and safety of intravenous dexmedetomidine sedation for ophthalmic surgery under regional anesthesia[ J]. Eur J Ophthalmol, 2022, 32(5): 2598-2603. DOI: 10.1177/11206721211059013.
20、Senthil S, Burugupally K , Rout U, et al. Effect of intravenous dexmedetomidine on intraocular pressure in patients undergoing glaucoma surgery under local anesthesia: a pilot study[ J]. J Glaucoma, 2020, 29(10): 846-850. DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000001621.Senthil S, Burugupally K , Rout U, et al. Effect of intravenous dexmedetomidine on intraocular pressure in patients undergoing glaucoma surgery under local anesthesia: a pilot study[ J]. J Glaucoma, 2020, 29(10): 846-850. DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000001621.
21、Senthil S, Nakka M, Rout U, et al. Changes in intraocular pressures associated with inhalational and mixed anesthetic agents currently used in ophthalmic surgery[ J]. Indian J Ophthalmol, 2021, 69(7): 1808- 1814. DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_2923_20.Senthil S, Nakka M, Rout U, et al. Changes in intraocular pressures associated with inhalational and mixed anesthetic agents currently used in ophthalmic surgery[ J]. Indian J Ophthalmol, 2021, 69(7): 1808- 1814. DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_2923_20.
22、李双双, 韩园, 李文献, 等. 非去极化肌松药对眼压升高的青光 眼患者全身麻醉诱导期眼压的影响[ J]. 眼科学报, 2022, 37(9): 733-739.DOI:10.3978/j.issn.1000-4432.2022.05.01.
Li SS ,Han Y ,Li WX, et al. Effects of non-depolarizing muscle relaxants on intraocular pressure of glaucoma patients with elevated intraocular pressure during induction of general anesthesia [ J]. Eye Sci, 2022,37(9):733-739. DOI:10.3978/j.issn.1000-4432.2022.05.01
Li SS ,Han Y ,Li WX, et al. Effects of non-depolarizing muscle relaxants on intraocular pressure of glaucoma patients with elevated intraocular pressure during induction of general anesthesia [ J]. Eye Sci, 2022,37(9):733-739. DOI:10.3978/j.issn.1000-4432.2022.05.01
23、Li S, Hu X, Tan F, et al. Effects of cisatracurium, rocuronium, and mivacurium on intraocular pressure during induction of general anesthesia in ophthalmic surgery[ J]. Drug Des Devel Ther, 2020, 14: 1203-1208. DOI: 10.2147/DDDT.S224544.Li S, Hu X, Tan F, et al. Effects of cisatracurium, rocuronium, and mivacurium on intraocular pressure during induction of general anesthesia in ophthalmic surgery[ J]. Drug Des Devel Ther, 2020, 14: 1203-1208. DOI: 10.2147/DDDT.S224544.
24、中国医药教育协会眼科委员会,解放军医学科学技术委员会 眼科学分会,中国老年医学学会眼科分会. 中国眼科日间手术 管理专家共识(2021年)[ J]. 中华眼科杂志,2021,57(6):406-414. DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn112142-20201117-00757.
The Ophthalmology Committee of the Chinese Medical Education Association, the Ophthalmology Branch of the Medical Science and Technology Committee of the People's Liberation Army, and the Ophthalmology Branch of the Chinese Geriatric Association. Consensus of Chinese Ophthalmology Day Surgery Management Experts (2021) [ J]. Chin J Ophthalmol, 2021, 57 (6): 406-414.DOI:10.3760/cma. j.cn112142-20201117-00757.
The Ophthalmology Committee of the Chinese Medical Education Association, the Ophthalmology Branch of the Medical Science and Technology Committee of the People's Liberation Army, and the Ophthalmology Branch of the Chinese Geriatric Association. Consensus of Chinese Ophthalmology Day Surgery Management Experts (2021) [ J]. Chin J Ophthalmol, 2021, 57 (6): 406-414.DOI:10.3760/cma. j.cn112142-20201117-00757.
25、McRae L, Presland A. A review of current ophthalmic anaesthetic practice[ J]. Br Med Bull, 2020, 135(1): 62-72. DOI: 10.1093/bmb/ ldaa022.McRae L, Presland A. A review of current ophthalmic anaesthetic practice[ J]. Br Med Bull, 2020, 135(1): 62-72. DOI: 10.1093/bmb/ ldaa022.
1、基金项目 (Foundation item): 国家自然科学基金(81901995)。
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81901995).()
上一篇
下一篇
其他期刊
  • 眼科学报

    主管:中华人民共和国教育部
    主办:中山大学
    承办:中山大学中山眼科中心
    主编:林浩添
    主管:中华人民共和国教育部
    主办:中山大学
    浏览
  • Eye Science

    主管:中华人民共和国教育部
    主办:中山大学
    承办:中山大学中山眼科中心
    主编:林浩添
    主管:中华人民共和国教育部
    主办:中山大学
    浏览
推荐阅读
出版者信息
目录