实用肝脏病杂志 ›› 2022, Vol. 25 ›› Issue (3): 415-418.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-5069.2022.03.028

• 肝癌 • 上一篇    下一篇

腹腔镜肝切除术治疗原发性肝癌患者应用氢吗啡酮联合纳布啡静脉自控镇痛控制疼痛作用研究*

孙浩, 曹丽, 曹林, 龙云   

  1. 210002 南京市 东部战区总医院秦淮医疗区麻醉科(孙浩,曹丽,曹林);南京医科大学附属江宁医院麻醉科(龙云)
  • 收稿日期:2021-07-23 出版日期:2022-05-10 发布日期:2022-05-17
  • 通讯作者: 龙云,E-mail:longyun2001@hotmail.com
  • 作者简介:孙浩,男,35岁,大学本科,主治医师。E-mail:sunhao20111230@163.com
  • 基金资助:
    *中华国际医学交流基金会基金资助(编号:Z-2018-35-1903)

hydromorphone and nalbuphine combination for patient-controlled intravenous analgesia in patients with primary liver cancer undergoing laparoscopic hepatectomy

Sun Hao, Cao Li, Cao Lin, et al   

  1. Department of Anesthesiology, Qinhuai Medical Branch, General Hospital, Eastern Theatre Command, Nanjing 210002, Jiangsu Province, China
  • Received:2021-07-23 Online:2022-05-10 Published:2022-05-17

摘要: 目的 探讨腹腔镜肝切除术(LH)治疗原发性肝癌(PLC)患者应用氢吗啡酮联合纳布啡静脉自控镇痛(PCIA)控制疼痛的效果。方法 2018年1月~2021年1月我院收治的PLC患者104例,随机分为对照组52例和观察组52例,两组患者均接受LH手术,在对照组,给予舒芬太尼联合纳布啡用于术后PCIA,而在观察组给予氢吗啡酮联合纳布啡用于术后PICA。采用疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)评价术后疼痛程度,使用流式细胞仪检测外周血T细胞亚群CD3+细胞、CD4+细胞、CD8+细胞和NK细胞百分比。结果 在术后24 h,观察组静态VAS和动态VAS分别为(2.5±0.8)分和(3.7±1.2)分,显著低于对照组【分别为(4.3±1.2)分和(5.8±1.7),P<0.05】,在术后72 h,静态VAS和动态VAS分别为(1.1±0.4)分和(3.2±0.9)分,显著低于对照组【分别为(2.6±0.7)分和(5.1±1.3),P<0.05】;术后,两组肝功能指标变化无显著性差异(P>0.05);在术后7 d,观察组外周血CD3+细胞、CD4+细胞、CD8+细胞和NK细胞百分比分别为(76.3±7.5)%、(36.8±4.9)%、(32.5±3.2)%和(16.3±2.9)%,与对照组【分别为(75.2±7.4)%、(37.6±4.4)%、(31.2±3.4)%和(17.4±2.6)%】比,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 氢吗啡酮联合纳布啡用于LH后PCIA能够有效减轻患者疼痛程度。

关键词: 原发性肝癌, 腹腔镜肝癌切除术, 静脉自控镇痛, 氢吗啡酮, 纳布啡

Abstract: Objective The aim of this study was to investigate pain control by hydromorphone and nalbuphine combination for patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) in patients with primary liver cancer (PLC) undergoing laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH). Methods 104 patients with PLC were encountered in our hospital between January 2018 and January 2021, and they were randomly divided into control (n=52) and observation group (n=52). All patients with PLC underwent LH, and the sufentanil and nalbuphine in patients in the control, while the hydromorphone and nalbuphine in patients in the observation for postoperative PCIA were applied. The T cell subsets, such as CD3+ cells, CD4+ cells, CD8+ cells and NK cells, were detected by flow cytometry. The postoperative pain was assessed by visual analogue scale (VAS). Results At 24 h after surgery, the static and dynamic VAS scores in observation group were (2.5±0.8) points and (3.7±1.2) points, significantly lower than [(4.3±1.2) points and (5.8±1.7) points, P<0.05] in the control; at 72 h after surgery, the static and dynamic VAS scores in the observation group were (1.1±0.4) points and (3.2±0.9) points, significantly lower than [(2.6±0.7) points and (5.1±1.3) points, P<0.05] in the control; after surgery, there were no significant differences as respect to common liver function tests (P>0.05); at 7 d after surgery, the percentages of CD3+ cells, CD4+ cells, CD8+ cells and NK cells in the observation group were (76.3±7.5)%,(36.8±4.9)%,(32.5±3.2)% and(16.3±2.9)%, all not significantly different as compared to [(75.2±7.4)%,(37.6±4.4)%,(31.2±3.4)% and (17.4±2.6)%] in the control (P>0.05). Conclusion The application of hydromorphone and nalbuphine combination in patients with PLC for PCIA after LH could effectively alleviate pain.

Key words: Hepatoma, Laparoscopic hepatectomy, Patient-controlled intravenous analgesia, Hydromorphone, Nalbuphine