球后阻滞是将局部麻醉药注入眼球后方的肌锥内，通过阻断鼻睫神经、动眼神经和睫状神经节，达到镇痛，限制眼球运动和降低眼内压的作用。现代球后阻滞技术是内眼手术眼球制动与麻醉的“金标准”，也是最常用的眼部区域阻滞方式。虽然与该技术相关的并发症少见，但可危害视力甚至危及生命。本专家共识介绍了球后阻滞的应用范围，系统描述了支配眼球运动与感觉的神经解剖、球后阻滞的安全性、操作方法、常用药物、禁忌证和并发症的处理等，为此技术的临床应用提供指导。

Retrobulbar block refers to the injection of local anesthetics into the muscle cone behind the eyeball, blocking the ciliary, oculomotor, and ciliary ganglion nerves, to provide pain relief, restrict eye movement, and reduce intraocular pressure. Modern retrobulbar block is the "gold standard" for eyeball immobilization and anesthesia in intraocular surgeries, and it is the one of the most commonly used methods for ocular regional block. Although the complications related to this method are rare, the complications will threaten the vision and even life. Th is expert consensus introduces the application scope of retrobulbar block, and systematically describes functional neuroanatomy of eye sensation and movements, safety and procedures of retrobulbar block, local anesthetics, contraindications and complications of the block, which can provide the reference for clinical application of this method.

目的：探讨全身麻醉诱导期应用不同种类的非去极化肌松药罗库溴铵、顺式阿曲库铵和米库氯铵对眼压升高的青光眼患者眼内压的影响。方法：将术侧眼眼压>21mmHg青光眼手术患者随机分配到罗库溴铵组、顺式阿曲库铵组和米库氯铵组。靶控输注丙泊酚至患者脑电双频指数(bispectral index，BIS)低于55后，根据组别分别静注0.6mg/kg罗库溴铵、0.1mg/kg顺式阿曲库铵及0.2mg/kg米库氯铵，待4个成串刺激(train of four stimulation，TOF)比值降至0后置入可弯曲喉罩，随后行机械通气并给予芬太尼1.5~2.0μg/kg，2%~3%七氟烷吸入维持麻醉。分别于麻醉诱导前(T0)、镇静后(T1)、肌松后(T2)及喉罩置入后(T3)测量三组青光眼患者术侧眼眼压并记录上述时间点血流动力学参数。结果：罗库溴铵组、顺式阿曲库铵组、米库氯铵组患者的眼压在T1、T2、T3时间点均较T0显著下降，差异有统计学意义(均P<0.001)；三组患者T2时间点眼压与T1相比差异均无统计学意义(P=0.337，P=0.520，P=0.062)；三组患者给予肌松药前后的眼压差值(T2–T1)分别为(0.68±4.39)、(0.36±3.72)和(1.27±3.91)mmHg，组间比较差异无统计学意义(P=0.353)。结论：非去极化肌松药罗库溴铵、顺式阿曲库铵及米库氯铵对眼压升高的青光眼患者的眼压无明显影响，且3种肌松药之间未见显著差异。

Objective: To compare the effects of different types of non-depolarizing muscle relaxants including rocuronium,cis-atracurium and mivacurium on intraocular pressure of glaucoma patients with elevated intraocular pressure during induction of general anesthesia. Methods: Glaucoma patients with intraocular pressure >21 mmHg were randomly assigned to rocuronium group, cis-atracurium group and mivacurium group. After target controlled infusion of propofol until the bispectral index (BIS) lower than 55, 0.6 mg/kg rocuronium, 0.1 mg/kg cisatracurium and 0.2 mg/kg mivacurium were injected intravenously according to different groups. The flexible laryngeal mask was placed after the train-of-four stimulation (TOF) ratio decreased to 0 and the mechanical ventilation was implemented immediately. General anesthesia was maintained by 1.5–2.0 μg/kg fentanyl and 2%– 3% sevoflurane. Intraocular pressure and hemodynamic parameters were measured before anesthesia induction (T0), after sedation (T1), after muscle relaxation (T2), and after laryngeal mask insertion (T3). Results: The intraocular pressure of patients in rocuronium group, cis-atracurium group and mivacurium group at T1, T2, T3 were lower than baseline (T0), and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.001); There was no significant difference in intraocular pressure at T2 compared with T1 in rocuronium group, cis-atracurium group and mivacurium group (P=0.337, P=0.520 and P=0.062 respectively); The difference of intraocular pressure between T2 and T1 in rocuronium group, cis-atracurium group and mivacurium group were (0.68±4.39), (0.36±3.72) and (1.27±3.91) mmHg respectively and there was no significant difference among the groups (P=0.353). Conclusion: The non-depolarizing muscle relaxants rocuronium, cis-atracurium and mivacurium have no significant effect on the intraocular pressure of glaucoma patients with elevated intraocular pressure, and there is no significant difference among the three muscle relaxants.

目的：在麻醉监测管理(monitored anesthesia care，MAC)中，通过与咪唑安定比较，观察右美托咪 定在玻璃体视网膜手术中应用的效果、安全性，探讨其应用可行性。方法：将择期玻璃体视网膜 手术患者40例随机双盲分入咪唑安定组(M组)和右美托咪定组(D组)。每组20例，两组患者均行球 后神经阻滞麻醉，连接脑电双频指数(bispectral index，BIS)监测仪监测并维持BIS值在70~90间， 观察和比较麻醉手术中及复苏期的平均动脉压(mean arterial pressure，MAP)、心率(heart rate， HR)、呼吸频率(respiratory rate，RR)、脉搏氧饱和度(oxygen saturation，SpO2)、Ramsay镇静评 分、疼痛数字评分法(Numerical Rating Scale，NRS疼痛评分)、手术医生和患者麻醉效果评分及不 良反应的差异。结果：与麻醉前比较，手术期D组用药后10 min内的心率、血压下降差异有统计学 意义(P<0.05)，且用药后10 min内D组心率下降幅度较M组更大(P<0.05)。在手术期和复苏期，D组 的NRS疼痛评分均显著低于M组且差异有统计学意义(均P<0.001)，而两组的Ramsay镇静评分差异 无统计学意义(P>0.05)。D组手术期患者的体动发生率和羟考酮使用率显著低于M组(均P<0.05)。 手术医生和患者的麻醉效果评分D组显著高于M组(均P<0.001)。结论：右美托咪定用于玻璃体视 网膜手术，较咪唑安定镇痛效果好且不良反应少，麻醉效果更好。

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine versus midazolam for the monitored anesthesia care (MAC) management of patients undergoing vitreoretinal surgery. Methods: Forty patients undergoing selective vitreoretinal surgery were double-blind and randomly dividedinto midazolam group (group M) and dexmedetomidine group (group D), each group had 20 patients. Patients in both groups were anesthetized with posterior bulbous nerve block. Bispectral index (BIS) monitor was connected and the BIS value was maintained between 70 and 90. The mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR), oxygen saturation (SpO2), Ramsay sedation score, numerical rating scale (NRS), surgeon’s and patient’s anesthesia effect score and adverse reactions were recorded during anesthesia and recovery period. Results: Compared with the data of pre-anesthesia, there were statistical differences of the decrease of HR and MAP in group D within the 10 minutes after medication (P<0.05), and the decrease of HR in group D was greater than that in group M (P<0.05). The NRS pain score in group D was significantly lower than that in group M with statistical significance (P<0.001) during the operation and resuscitation, while there was no significant difference in Ramsay sedation score between the two groups during the operation and resuscitation (P>0.05). In terms of adverse reactions to anesthesia, the incidence of spontaneous movement and oxycodone utilization in group D were significantly lower than those in group M (P<0.05). The anesthesia effect scores of surgeons and patients in group D were significantly higher than those in group M (all P<0.001). Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine has better analgesic effect and less adverse reactions than midazolam in vitreoretinal surgery.