Lago Paola, Bettiol Tiziana, Salvadori Sabrina, Pitassi Isabella, Vianello Andrea, Chiandetti Lino, Saia Onofrio S
Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, Department of Paediatrics, University of Padova, Italy.
Eur J Pediatr. 2002 Apr;161(4):202-7. doi: 10.1007/s00431-002-0915-y.
Indomethacin (INDO) and, more recently, ibuprofen (IBU) have been used to treat haemodynamically significant patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) in preterm infants. Both are cyclo-oxygenase blockers, but seem to have a different influence on regional circulation. In a prospective, randomised, controlled study, we compared INDO and IBU with regard to efficacy and safety for the early non-invasive treatment of PDA. Doppler echocardiography was used to study 232 preterm infants (gestational age 23-34 weeks) with respiratory distress syndrome of whom 175 had persistent, haemodynamically significant PDA at 48-72 h of life. They were randomised to receive three intravenous doses of either INDO (0.2 mg/kg, at 12 h intervals) or IBU (a first 10 mg/kg dose followed by two doses of 5 mg/kg at 24 h intervals), recording rate of ductal closure, need for additional treatment, side-effects and clinical course. The efficacy of the pharmacological treatment was similar in the two groups (56/81, 69% INDO; 69/94, 73% IBU). Patients treated with INDO showed a significant increase in serum creatinine (89 +/- 24 versus 82 +/- 20 mmol/l, P = 0.03) and a near-significant tendency for a lower fractional excretion of sodium (3 +/- 3 versus 4 +/- 2%, P = 0.08); moreover, 12/81 (15%) INDO patients versus 1/94 (1%) IBU patients became oliguric (< 1 ml/kg per h) during treatment (P = 0.017).
Our findings confirm that, by comparison with indomethacin, ibuprofen has fewer effects on renal function in terms of urine output and fluid retention, with much the same efficacy and safety in closing patent ductus arteriosus in preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome. In particular, no increased incidence of intracranial haemorrhage was observed after ibuprofen treatment.
吲哚美辛(INDO)以及最近的布洛芬(IBU)已被用于治疗早产儿血流动力学显著的动脉导管未闭(PDA)。两者均为环氧化酶阻滞剂,但似乎对局部循环有不同影响。在一项前瞻性、随机、对照研究中,我们比较了吲哚美辛和布洛芬对PDA早期非侵入性治疗的疗效和安全性。使用多普勒超声心动图研究了232例患有呼吸窘迫综合征的早产儿(胎龄23 - 34周),其中175例在出生后48 - 72小时存在持续的、血流动力学显著的PDA。他们被随机分为接受三次静脉注射剂量的吲哚美辛(0.2mg/kg,间隔12小时)或布洛芬(首剂10mg/kg,随后两剂各5mg/kg,间隔24小时),记录导管闭合率、额外治疗需求、副作用和临床病程。两组药物治疗的疗效相似(吲哚美辛组56/81,69%;布洛芬组69/94,73%)。接受吲哚美辛治疗的患者血清肌酐显著升高(89±24对82±20mmol/l,P = 0.03),钠分数排泄有接近显著的降低趋势(3±3对4±2%,P = 0.08);此外,12/81(15%)的吲哚美辛治疗患者与1/94(1%)的布洛芬治疗患者在治疗期间出现少尿(<1ml/kg每小时)(P = 0.017)。
我们的研究结果证实,与吲哚美辛相比,布洛芬对尿量和液体潴留方面的肾功能影响较小,在闭合患有呼吸窘迫综合征的早产儿动脉导管未闭方面具有大致相同的疗效和安全性。特别是,布洛芬治疗后未观察到颅内出血发生率增加。