Lamblin Veronique, Favory Raphael, Boulo Marie, Mathieu Daniel
Service d'Urgence Respiratoire et Réanimation Médicale et de Médecine Hyperbare, Hôpital Calmette, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire, Boulevard du Professeur Jules Leclercq, 59037 Lille Cedex, France.
Crit Care. 2006;10(6):R176. doi: 10.1186/cc5128.
Sedation is widely used in intensive care unit (ICU) patients to limit the risk of pulmonary barotrauma and to decrease oxygen needs. However, adverse effects of cc5128sedation have not been fully evaluated; in particular, effects of benzodiazepine and opiates on microcirculation have not been extensively studied. The aim of this study was to evaluate the microcirculatory effects of a sedation protocol commonly prescribed in the ICU.
Ten non-septic patients under controlled ventilation requiring sedation for therapeutic purposes were enrolled in a prospective observational study conducted in an ICU of a university hospital. Sedation was conducted in two successive steps: first, each patient received midazolam (0.1 mg/kg per hour after a bolus of 0.05 mg/kg, then adapted to reach a Ramsay score of between 3 and 5). Second, after one hour, sufentanil was added (0.1 microg/kg per hour after a bolus of 0.1 microg/kg). Arterial pressure, heart rate, cardiac output determined by transthoracic impedance, transcutaneous oxygen (tcPO2) and carbon dioxide (tcPCO2) pressures, and microcirculatory blood flow determined by laser Doppler flowmetry at rest and during a reactive hyperaemia challenge were measured before sedation (NS period), one hour after midazolam infusion (H period), and one hour after midazolam-sufentanil infusion (HS period).
Arterial pressure decreased in both sedation periods, but heart rate, cardiac output, tcPO2, and tcPCO2 remained unchanged. In both sedation periods, microcirculatory changes occurred with an increase in cutaneous blood flow at rest (H period: 207 +/- 25 perfusion units [PU] and HS period: 205 +/- 25 PU versus NS period: 150 +/- 22 PU, p < 0.05), decreased response to ischaemia (variation of blood flow to peak: H period: 97 +/- 16 PU and HS period: 73 +/- 9 PU versus NS period: 141 +/- 14 PU, p < 0.05), and attenuation of vasomotion.
Sedation with midazolam or a combination of midazolam and sufentanil induces a deterioration of vasomotion and microvascular response to ischaemia, raising the question of whether this effect may further alter tissue perfusion when already compromised, as in septic patients.
镇静在重症监护病房(ICU)患者中广泛使用,以降低肺气压伤风险并减少氧气需求。然而,镇静的不良反应尚未得到充分评估;特别是,苯二氮䓬类药物和阿片类药物对微循环的影响尚未得到广泛研究。本研究的目的是评估ICU中常用的一种镇静方案对微循环的影响。
在一家大学医院的ICU进行的一项前瞻性观察研究中,纳入了10名因治疗目的需要镇静且接受控制通气的非感染性患者。镇静分两个连续步骤进行:首先,每位患者接受咪达唑仑(先静脉推注0.05mg/kg,然后以0.1mg/kg每小时的速度给药,随后调整剂量以使Ramsay评分达到3至5分)。其次,1小时后,添加舒芬太尼(先静脉推注0.1μg/kg,然后以0.1μg/kg每小时 的速度给药)。在镇静前(NS期)、咪达唑仑输注1小时后(H期)以及咪达唑仑-舒芬太尼输注1小时后(HS期),测量动脉压、心率、经胸阻抗测定的心输出量、经皮氧(tcPO2)和二氧化碳(tcPCO2)压力,以及静息状态和反应性充血激发试验期间通过激光多普勒血流仪测定的微循环血流量。
在两个镇静期动脉压均下降,但心率、心输出量、tcPO2和tcPCO2保持不变。在两个镇静期,均出现微循环变化,静息时皮肤血流量增加(H期:207±25灌注单位[PU],HS期:205±25PU,而NS期:150±22PU,p<0.05),对缺血的反应降低(血流变化至峰值:H期:97±16PU,HS期:73±9PU,而NS期:141±14PU,p<0.05),以及血管运动减弱。
咪达唑仑或咪达唑仑与舒芬太尼联合镇静会导致血管运动和微血管对缺血的反应恶化,这就提出了一个问题,即当组织灌注已经受损时,如在感染性患者中,这种效应是否会进一步改变组织灌注。