| Literature DB >> 36203486 |
Zhenhua Wu1, Qiaoling Lu1, Hao Cheng1, Chengwei Wu1.
Abstract
The effects of Rimazolam on oxidative stress level, sedation score, and recovery time of patients under different doses in hip replacement are investigated. A total of 100 patients who underwent hip arthroplasty in our hospital from September 2020 to May 2022 are selected as the study subjects. According to the random number table method, they are divided into observation group and control group. The observation group is given 0.3 mg/kg Rimazolam, and the control group is given 0.4 mg/kg Rimazolam. Oxidative stress level, hemodynamic indexes at different time after anesthesia, sedation score and sedation depth, Visual Analogue Scale/Score (VAS) score and incidence of adverse reactions are observed in 2 groups. The correlation of sedation score with oxidative stress index and pain degree is analyzed. The experimental results show that Rimazolam has a good anesthesia induction effect in hip replacement, but the low dose (0.3 mg/kg) can reduce the level of oxidative stress in patients, has a better sedation effect and can maintain the stability of patients' hemodynamic indicators, and has a positive effect on relieving postoperative pain in patients. [Clinical Trial Registration Number- ChiCTR2000038548].Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36203486 PMCID: PMC9532119 DOI: 10.1155/2022/6414722
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.246
Comparison of oxidative stress levels ().
| Group | The number of cases | NO ( | ACTH (pg/mL) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 d before surgery | 2 d after the operation | 1 d before surgery | 2 d after the operation | ||
| Observation group | 54 | 439.13 ± 89.60 | 199.11 ± 22.58∗ | 30.68 ± 2.60 | 36.76 ± 8.22∗ |
| The control group | 46 | 440.48 ± 79.83 | 254.50 ± 31.07∗ | 30.18 ± 3.05 | 43.68 ± 7.59∗ |
|
| 0.079 | 10.295 | 0.885 | 4.345 | |
|
| 0.937 | <0.01 | 0.378 | <0.01 | |
Comparison of hemodynamic indexes at different times after anesthesia of patients ().
| Group | The number of cases | SaO2 (%) | HR (min) | MAP (mmHg) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T0 | T30 min | T0 | T30 min | T0 | T30 min | ||
| Observation group | 54 | 97.69 ± 1.91 | 100.35 ± 3.00∗ | 68.09 ± 5.34 | 70.31 ± 3.09∗ | 95.03 ± 5.30 | 88.28 ± 4.66∗ |
| The control group | 46 | 97.38 ± 1.91 | 87.29 ± 2.63∗ | 67.96 ± 5.10 | 74.93 ± 4.82∗ | 95.33 ± 5.65 | 82.54 ± 5.02∗ |
|
| — | 0.809 | 22.951 | 0.124 | 5.787 | 0.274 | 5.925 |
|
| — | 0.421 | <0.01 | 0.902 | <0.01 | 0.785 | <0.01 |
Comparison of sedation scores of patients ().
| Group | The number of cases | RSS (score) |
|---|---|---|
| Observation group | 54 | 1.56 ± 0.50 |
| The control group | 46 | 3.15 ± 0.82 |
|
| 11.893 | |
|
| <0.01 |
Comparison of the depth of sedation of patients ().
| Group | The number of cases | Wake up of time (min) | The BIS when they wake up | Extubation time (min) | PACU residence time (min) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Observation group | 54 | 6.67 ± 1.61 | 90.56 ± 2.37 | 12.83 ± 1.71 | 35.63 ± 5.63 |
| The control group | 46 | 13.37 ± 2.63 | 90.30 ± 2.62 | 23.83 ± 3.23 | 54.21 ± 6.90 |
|
| 15.607 | 0.521 | 21.719 | 14.827 | |
|
| <0.01 | 0.604 | <0.01 | <0.01 |
Comparison of the VAS scores of patients at different times ().
| Group | Point in time | VAS (score) |
|---|---|---|
| Observation group( | 3 h | 2.69 ± 1.15 |
| 6 h | 2.11 ± 0.79 | |
| 8 h | 1.52 ± 0.50 | |
|
| ||
| The control group( | 3 h | 3.37 ± 1.08 |
| 6 h | 2.56 ± 0.50 | |
| 8 h | 2.09 ± 0.69 | |
|
| ||
|
| 124.32 | |
|
| <0.001 | |
|
| 131.87 | |
|
| <0.001 | |
Figure 1VAS scores of patients at different times.
Comparison of the incidence of adverse reactions (n, %).
| Group | The number of cases | Nausea and vomiting | Low blood pressure | Hypoxemia | The total incidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Observation group | 54 | 1 (1.85) | 3 (5.56) | 2 (3.70) | 6 (11.11) |
| The control group | 46 | 3 (6.52) | 5 (10.87) | 4 (8.70) | 12 (26.09) |
|
| 5.443 | 5.024 | 6.535 | 7.824 | |
|
| <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 |
Figure 2Correlation between RSS score and NO.
Figure 3Correlation between RSS score and ACTH.
Figure 4Correlation between RSS score and VAS score.