国际麻醉学与复苏杂志   2024, Issue (9): 0-0
    
术前口服不同剂量碳水化合物溶液对腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者胰岛素抵抗的影响
王萧晗, 程建鑫, 盛婧祎, 郭珊珊, 王蕊, 王志萍1()
1.徐州医科大学附属医院
Effect of preoperative different oral doses of carbohydrate solution on insulin resistance in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy
 全文:
摘要:

目的 评价术前2~4 h口服不同剂量碳水化合物溶液(枢能)对腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)患者胰岛素抵抗(IR)的影响。 方法 选择全身麻醉下择期行LC手术的患者150例,年龄18~65岁,美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)分级Ⅰ、Ⅱ级,体重指数(BMI)18~30 kg/m2,采用随机数字表法将患者分为3组(每组50例):空腹对照组(C组)、口服200 ml枢能组(P1组)和口服400 ml枢能组(P2组)。3组患者均于术前1晚22点禁食、24点禁饮,P1组和P2组于术前2~4 h分别口服枢能200 ml和400 ml,C组不饮用任何液体。记录患者一般资料;于麻醉诱导前10 min(T1)和拔管后10 min(T2)测定空腹血糖(FG)和空腹胰岛素(FINS)浓度,通过稳态模型评估法计算胰岛素抵抗指数(HOMA‑IR)和胰岛素敏感性指数(HOMA‑ISI);于T1时通过床旁胃超声测量患者右侧卧位下胃窦横截面积(CSA),评估胃容量(GV)、胃容量体重比值(GV/W)、GV/W>1.5 ml/kg的发生情况和Perlas分级,观察反流误吸发生情况;记录T1、T2时患者饥饿、口渴和焦虑的视觉模拟评分法(VAS)评分;记录入室(t1)、麻醉诱导(t2)、切皮(t3)、气腹(t4)和撤腹腔镜(t5)时患者的平均动脉压(MAP)和心率变化。 结果 3组患者一般资料差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。T1时C组患者血糖水平低于P2组(P<0.05);与T1时比较,T2时C组患者血糖水平较高(P<0.05),3组患者胰岛素水平、HOMA‑IR及HOMA‑ISI均较低(均P<0.05);T1、T2时3组患者胰岛素水平、HOMA‑IR及HOMA‑ISI差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05),T2时3组患者血糖水平差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。P2组患者右侧卧位时CSA高于C组(P<0.05),Perlas分级1级发生率高于C组和P1组(均P<0.05);C组与P1组患者Perlas分级1级发生率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);3组患者GV、GV/W、GV/W>1.5 ml/kg的发生率差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05);3组患者均未发生Perlas分级2级和反流误吸。与C组比较,T1时P2组患者口渴和饥饿VAS评分较低(均P<0.05);T2时P1组患者饥饿评分较低(P<0.05),P2组患者口渴和饥饿评分较低(均P<0.05)。与P1组比较,T2时P2组患者口渴和饥饿VAS评分较低(均P<0.05)。3组患者T1和T2时焦虑评分差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05),t1~t5时MAP和心率差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。 结论 术前2~4 h口服200 ml或400 ml枢能虽然对LC患者术中IR无明显影响,但可减轻患者口渴感和饥饿感;但口服400 ml枢能有导致胃容量增加的风险。

关键词: 碳水化合物; 胰岛素抵抗; 腹腔镜胆囊切除术; 胃排空
Abstract:

Objective To evaluate the effect of different oral doses of carbohydrate solution (Shuneng) administered at postoperative 2‒4 h on insulin resistance (IR) in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Methods A total of 150 patients, aged 18‒65 years, with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grades Ⅰ or Ⅱ, and body mass index (BMI) of 18‒30 kg/m2 who underwent LC surgery under general anesthesia were selected. According to the random number table method, they were divided into three groups (n=50): a fasting control group (group C), an oral 200 ml Shuneng group (group P1), and an oral 400 ml Shuneng group (group P2). All three groups of patients were fasted at 22:00, without drinking at 24:00 one night before operation. Patients in group P1 and group P2 were orally taken Shuneng at 200 ml and 400 ml 2‒4 h before operation, respectively, while those in group C did not drink any liquid. Then, their general information were recorded. The concentrations of fasting glucose (FG) and fasting insulin (FINS) were measured 10 min before anesthesia induction (T1) and 10 min after extubation (T2). The homeostatic model assessment‑insulin resistance (HOMA‑IR) and homeostatic model assessment‑insulin sensitivity index (HOMA‑ISI) were calculated by the homeostatic model assessment method. The gastric sinus cross‑sectional area (CSA) was measured at T1 by bedside gastric ultrasound with the patient in right lateral recumbent position. The gastric volume (GV), gastric volume‑to‑weight ratio (GV/W), the incidence of GV/W>1.5 ml/kg and Perlas classification were assessed to observe the incidence of regurgitation and aspiration. Their Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores for hunger, thirst and anxiety were recorded at T1 and T2. The changes in mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate of patients at admission (t1), anesthesia induction (t2), skin incision (t3), pneumoperitoneum (t4) and withdrawal of the tube (t5) were recorded. Results There was no statistical difference in general information among the three groups (all P>0.05). Group C showed lower blood glucose than group P2 at T1 (P<0.05). Compared with those at T1, group C presented increased blood glucose at T2 (P<0.05), and decreased insulin level, HOMA‑IR and HOMA‑ISI were seen in the three groups (all P<0.05). There were no statistical differences in insulin level, HOMA‑IR and HOMA‑ISI among the three groups at T1 and T2 (all P>0.05). There was no significant difference in blood glucose level among 3 groups at T2 (all P>0.05). Furthermore, group P2 showed higher CSA than group C in right lateral recumbent position (P<0.05), with a higher incidence of Perlas classification grade 1 than group C and group P1 (all P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of Perlas classification grade 1 between group C and group P1 (P>0.05). There were no statistical differences in the incidences of GV, GV/W, and GV/W>1.5 ml/kg among the three groups (all P>0.05). No Perlas classification grade 2 or regurgitation aspiration occurred in the 3 groups. Compared with group C, the VAS scores for thirst and hunger decreased in group P2 at T1 (all P<0.05); hunger scores decreased in groups P1 at T2 (P<0.05), and thirst and hunger scores decreased in group P2 (all P<0.05). Group P2 presented lower VAS scores for thirst and hunger than group P1 at T2 (all P<0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in anxiety scores at T1 and T2 (all P>0.05), and no statistically significant differences in MAP and heart rate at t1 to t5 in the three groups (all P>0.05). Conclusions Oral administration of Shuneng at 200 ml or 400 ml 2‒4 h before surgery can relieve patients' thirst and hunger, without significant effect on intraoperative IR in LC patients. However, oral administration of 400 ml of Shuneng has the risk of increased gastric volume.

Key words: Oral carbohydrates; Insulin resistance; Laparoscopic cholecystectomy; Gastric emptying