目的 观察和分析环泊酚在烧伤切痂植皮手术全身麻醉诱导的有效性及安全性。方法 选取2021年3月—2023年6月南开大学附属医院（天津市第四医院）烧伤外科收治的符合纳入标准的烧伤切痂植皮手术成年患者216例，男139例，女77例，年龄18～59岁，身体质量指数（BMI）19.6～29.2 kg·m^-2，随机数字表法分为观察组（111例）和对照组（105例），麻醉诱导：观察组采用环泊酚0.4 mg·kg^-1，对照组采用丙泊酚2.0 mg·kg^-1，其余麻醉诱导药物保持一致。观察和比较两组患者入手术室（T0）、环泊酚/丙泊酚注射完毕时（T1）、插管完成即刻（T2）、插管后10 min（T3）、切痂时（T4）各时间点的平均动脉压（MAP）、心率（HR）和脑电双频指数（BIS），T0和T1的呼吸频率（RR），镇静成功时间、睫毛反射消失时间，以及注射痛、低血压、心动过缓等不良反应的发生情况。结果 两组间患者基线数据的差异无统计学意义；相较于对照组，观察组T1、T2时MAP、HR更高、BIS更低（P＜0.05）；观察组T1的RR更高（P＜0.05）；观察组镇静成功时间、睫毛反射消失时间更短（P＜0.05）；观察组注射痛发生率更低（P＜0.05）。结论 环泊酚具有良好的镇静效果，相较于丙泊酚，环泊酚在烧伤切痂植皮手术全身麻醉诱导后血流动力学更加平稳，注射痛等不良反应更少，值得临床推广应用。

Objective To observe and analyze the effectiveness and safety of Ciprofol in general anesthesia induction during burn debridement and skin grafting surgery. Method From March 2021 to June 2023, 216 adult patients (139 males and 77 females, aged 18—59, with a BMI of 19.6—29.2 kg·m^-2) who underwent burn scab excision and skin grafting surgery and met the inclusion criteria were selected from the Burn Surgery Department of Nankai University Affiliated Hospital (Tianjin Fourth Hospital). They were randomly divided into an observation group (111 cases) and a control group (105 cases) using a random number table method. Anesthesia induction: the observation group received 0.4 mg·kg^-1 of Ciprofol, while the control group received 2.0 mg·kg^-1 of Propofol, The remaining inducing drugs remain consistent. Observe and compare the mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), bispectral index (BIS), respiratory rate (RR), sedation success time, disappearance time of eyelash reflex, injection pain, hypotension, bradycardia, and other adverse reactions between two groups of patients at various time points upon admission to the operating room (T0), completion of propofol/propofol injection (T1), intubation completion (T2), 10 minutes after intubation (T3), and scab removal (T4). Results The difference in baseline data between the two groups was not statistically significant. Compared with the control group, the observation group had higher MAP and HR, and lower BIS at T1 and T2 (P < 0.05); The RR of observation group T1 was higher (P < 0.05); The observation group had a shorter time for successful sedation and disappearance of eyelash reflex (P < 0.05); The incidence of injection pain was lower in the observation group (P < 0.05). Conclusion Ciprofol has good sedative effect. Compared with Propofol, Ciprofol is more stable after general anesthesia induction in burn debridement and skin grafting surgery, with fewer adverse reactions such as injection pain, which is worthy of clinical application.

R982

医学科研发展基金项目临床与基础研究专项（S049）资助