中国口腔医学继续教育杂志 ›› 2025, Vol. 28 ›› Issue (1): 12-17.DOI: 10.12337/zgkqjxjyzz.2025.01.004

• 临床研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

瑞马唑仑联合瑞芬太尼对口腔颌面外科手术的影响

贾丽永*, 陈琼, 宋阳阳   

  1. 大连大学附属口腔医院(大连市口腔医院)麻醉手术科
  • 发布日期:2025-08-15
  • 通讯作者: *贾丽永,联系方式:0411-84651319,电子邮箱:ddjialiyong@126.com,通讯地址:辽宁省大连市沙河口区长江路935号,116021

Effects of Remazolam Combined with Remifentanil on Oral Surgery

Liyong Jia*, Qiong Chen, Yangyang Song   

  1. Department of Anesthesia Surgery, Stomatological Hospital of Dalian University Dalian Stomatological Hospital, Dalian, Liaoning Province, P.R. China
  • Published:2025-08-15
  • Contact: Liyong Jia. Tel: 0411-84651319. Email: ddjialiyong@126.com. Address: No. 935 Changjiang Road, Shahekou District, Dalian 116021, Liaoning Province, P.R. China.

摘要: 目的:探究瑞马唑仑联合瑞芬太尼对口腔颌面外科手术的影响效果。方法:选取大连市口腔医院94名行口腔外科手术治疗的患者为研究对象,按照随机数字表法分为试验组和对照组,各47例。对照组采用瑞芬太尼、丙泊酚靶控泵注诱导麻醉,试验组采用瑞芬太尼靶控泵注、苯磺酸瑞马唑仑静脉注射诱导麻醉,比较两组入室后(T0)、麻醉诱导完成后(T1)、开始手术时(T2)、操作结束时(T3)的血流动力学指标[心率(heart rate,HR)和平均动脉压(mean arterial pressure,MAP)]、围手术期镇痛镇静效果、术中及术后不良反应发生情况。结果:试验组T2~T3时HR、MAP更低(P<0.05);试验组术后2h、6h、24h时VAS评分更低(P<0.05);试验组T0~T3时Ramsay评分更低(P<0.05);两组术中、术后不良事件发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:瑞马唑仑联合瑞芬太尼用于口腔颌面外科手术,可有效降低患者术中血流动力学波动,发挥良好镇痛镇静效果,不良反应相对较少,可为临床应用提供参考。

关键词: 口腔外科手术, 瑞马唑仑, 瑞芬太尼, 镇痛, 镇静

Abstract: Objective: To explore the effects of remimazolam combined with remifentanil on oral surgery. Methods: A total of 94 patients who underwent oral surgery at Dalian Stomatological Hospital were selected as the research subjects and divided into the experimental group and the control group according to a random number table method, with 47 cases in each group. The control group was induced anesthesia by target-controlled pump injection of remifentanil and propofol, while the experimental group was induced anesthesia by target-controlled pump injection of remifentanil and intravenous injection of remimazolam besylate. The hemodynamic indicators heart rate (HR) and mean arterial pressure (MAP), perioperative analgesic and sedative effects, and the occurrence of adverse reactions during and after the operation were compared between the two groups after entering the room (T0), after the completion of anesthesia induction (T1), at the beginning of the operation (T2), and at the end of the operation (T3). Results: HR and MAP in both groups showed a trend of first decreasing and then increasing (P<0.05), and HR and MAP of the experimental group were lower from T2 to T3 (P<0.05). The visual analogue scale (VAS) of the two groups showed a trend of first decreasing and then increasing (P<0.05), and the VAS score of the experimental group was lower at 2 hours, 6 hours, 24 hours after the operation (P<0.05). The Ramsay scores of the two groups showed a trend of increasing first and then decreasing (P<0.05), and the Ramsay score of the experimental group was lower from T0 to T3 (P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of intraoperative and postoperative adverse events between the two groups (P>0.05). Conclusions: Remimazolam combined with remifentanil in oral surgery can effectively reduce intraoperative hemodynamic fluctuations in patients, exert good analgesic and sedative effects, and have relatively few adverse reactions, which can provide a reference for clinical application.

Key words: oral surgery, remazolam, remifentanil, analgesia, sedation