Suppr超能文献

右美托咪定与丙泊酚用于术后机械通气患者的短期镇静

Dexmedetomidine vs. propofol for short-term sedation of postoperative mechanically ventilated patients.

作者信息

Elbaradie Samia, El Mahalawy Faten H, Solyman Amira H

机构信息

The Department of Anaesthesia, ICU & Pain Relief, National Cancer Institute, Cairo University.

出版信息

J Egypt Natl Canc Inst. 2004 Sep;16(3):153-8.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Propofol is often used for sedation in the intensive care unit. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and endocrine response of propofol vs. the new alpha2-agonist dexmedetomidine for sedation in surgical intensive care patients who need postoperative short-term ventilation.

METHODS

Our work is a randomized clinical study conducted on sixty adult patients who required postoperative short term ventilation and sedation. The patients were allocated randomly, to receive IV infusion of either dexmedetomidine 0.2-0.5 microg/kg/h or propofol 0.5-1 mg/kg/h. Hemodynamic parameters, Ramsay sedation score, extubation time and serum cortisol and interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels were measured.

RESULTS

Ramsay sedation score was 4.1+/-1 and 4+/-0.9 for propofol and dexmedetomidine, respectively, (p=0.59.) Total fentanyl dose in the propofol group was 75+/-15 microg compared to 15+/-10.5 microg in the dexmedetomidine group, (p=0.0045). Patients who received dexmedetomidine infusion had significantly lower heart rates compared to patients who received propofol infusion, (p=0.041). Pre-infusion serum concentrations of IL-6 were comparable in both groups, while the 24 h post-infusion levels were insignificantly decreased in both groups compared to pre-infusion level, (p=0.36). There were no intergroup differences in serum cortisol concentrations (p=0.231).

CONCLUSIONS

Dexmedetomidine and propofol are safe sedative drugs for postoperative mechanichally ventilated patients. Patients were easily aroused to co-operate without showing signs of irritations with less fentanyl analgesia in the dexmedetomidine group. Dexmedetomidine and propofol do not inhibit adrenal function, but they may influence the inflammatory response.

摘要

背景

丙泊酚常用于重症监护病房的镇静。本研究旨在比较丙泊酚与新型α2受体激动剂右美托咪定对需要术后短期通气的外科重症监护患者镇静的疗效及内分泌反应。

方法

我们的研究是一项针对60例需要术后短期通气和镇静的成年患者进行的随机临床研究。患者被随机分配,接受静脉输注右美托咪定0.2 - 0.5微克/千克/小时或丙泊酚0.5 - 1毫克/千克/小时。测量血流动力学参数、 Ramsay镇静评分、拔管时间以及血清皮质醇和白细胞介素-6(IL-6)水平。

结果

丙泊酚组和右美托咪定组的Ramsay镇静评分分别为4.1±1和4±0.9,(p = 0.59)。丙泊酚组的芬太尼总剂量为75±15微克,而右美托咪定组为15±10.5微克,(p = 0.0045)。与接受丙泊酚输注的患者相比,接受右美托咪定输注的患者心率显著更低,(p = 0.041)。两组输注前血清IL-6浓度相当,而输注后24小时水平与输注前水平相比两组均无显著降低,(p = 0.36)。血清皮质醇浓度组间无差异(p = 0.231)。

结论

右美托咪定和丙泊酚对于术后机械通气患者是安全的镇静药物。右美托咪定组患者在较少芬太尼镇痛的情况下易于唤醒并配合,且未表现出激惹迹象。右美托咪定和丙泊酚不抑制肾上腺功能,但可能影响炎症反应。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验