Cormio Manuela, Citerio Giuseppe
Neurorianimazione, Dipartimento di Medicina Perioperatoria e Terapie Intensive, Ospedale San Gerardo, Via Pergolesi 33, 20052, Monza, MI, Italy.
Neurocrit Care. 2007;6(2):82-9. doi: 10.1007/s12028-007-0002-3.
Aim of this randomized prospective clinical trial is to compare two methods of antipyretics and evaluate their efficacy in controlling fever during the acute phase of brain damage.
Twenty-two febrile comatose patients: 12 severe traumatic brain injury and 10 subarachnoid hemorrhage divided in 2 groups: Diclofenac low-dose infusion (10 patients) and extemporaneous boluses of NSAIDs (CTRL, 12 patients). The primary outcome measure was length of time with temperature>38 degrees C. Secondary outcome measures were: 1) to assess the effects of each antipyretic strategy on intracranial pressure (ICP), cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP), mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate; 2) to monitor adverse effects of each antipyretic strategy. The baseline characteristics in the two treatment groups were similar.
Primary findings: percentage of time per patient with temperature>38 degrees C was significantly lower (P<0.0001) in the DCF group, 4% (0-22%), vs. 34% (8-56%) in CTRL group. In addition, mean T degrees , max T degrees were lower in DCF than in CTRL (P<0.05). Secondary findings: CPP and MAP were significantly higher in DCF group (P<0.05) while ICP was not different (NS). However, if ICP pre randomization was <25 mmHg, CTRL suffered a worst ICP (24+/-11 vs. 16+/-7 P=0.01), MAP (89+/-10 vs. 104+/-10 P=0.01) and CPP (75+/-10 vs. 94+/-17 P=0.01) compared to DCF. No differences between the two treatment were recorded when ICP>or=25 mmHg before randomization. There was no gastrointestinal or intracranial bleeding.
Low dose DCF infusion is a potential useful strategy for a successful control temperature better than intermittent NSAIDs dosing, minimizing potentially brain-damaging effects of fever.
本随机前瞻性临床试验的目的是比较两种退热方法,并评估它们在脑损伤急性期控制发热的疗效。
22名发热昏迷患者,其中12名重度创伤性脑损伤患者和10名蛛网膜下腔出血患者被分为两组:双氯芬酸低剂量输注组(10名患者)和非甾体抗炎药临时推注组(对照组,12名患者)。主要结局指标是体温>38摄氏度的持续时间。次要结局指标为:1)评估每种退热策略对颅内压(ICP)、脑灌注压(CPP)、平均动脉压(MAP)和心率的影响;2)监测每种退热策略的不良反应。两个治疗组的基线特征相似。
主要发现:双氯芬酸组患者体温>38摄氏度的时间百分比显著更低(P<0.0001),为4%(0 - 22%),而对照组为34%(8 - 56%)。此外,双氯芬酸组的平均体温、最高体温均低于对照组(P<0.05)。次要发现:双氯芬酸组的CPP和MAP显著更高(P<0.05),而ICP无差异(无显著性)。然而,如果随机分组前ICP<25 mmHg,与双氯芬酸组相比,对照组的ICP更差(24±11 vs. 16±7,P = 0.01),MAP(89±10 vs. 104±10,P = 0.01)和CPP(75±10 vs. 94±17,P = 0.01)。随机分组前ICP≥25 mmHg时,两个治疗组之间未记录到差异。未发生胃肠道或颅内出血。
低剂量双氯芬酸输注是一种潜在有用的策略,与间歇性非甾体抗炎药给药相比,能更成功地控制体温,将发热对大脑的潜在损害降至最低。