Suppr超能文献

持续气道正压通气治疗心源性肺水肿的随机研究。

Continuous positive airway pressure for cardiogenic pulmonary edema: a randomized study.

机构信息

SAMU 31, Pôle de médecine d'urgences, Hôpitaux Universitaires, 31059 Toulouse cedex 9, France.

出版信息

Am J Emerg Med. 2011 Sep;29(7):775-81. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2010.03.007. Epub 2010 May 1.

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this randomized controlled trial was to determine the immediate and delayed effects of noninvasive ventilation for patients in acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema (ACPE) in addition to aggressive usual care in a medical prehospital setting.

METHODS

Out-of-hospital patients in severe ACPE were eligible for the study. Patients were randomized to receive either usual care, including conventional optimal treatment with furosemide, oxygen, and high-dose boluses of isosorbide dinitrate plus oxygen, or conventional medications plus out-of-hospital continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). The primary outcome was the treatment success defined as all of respiratory rate less than 25 breaths per minute and oxygen saturation of greater than 90% at the end of 1-hour study. Secondary end points included death during 30 days after inclusion. Lengths of intensive care unit and hospital stays were also recorded.

RESULTS

In total, 124 patients were enrolled into the study. The 2 groups had similar baseline characteristics. For the primary outcome analysis, 22 (35.5%) of 62 patients were considered as experiencing a treatment success in the usual care group vs 19 (31.7%) of 60 in the CPAP group (P = .65). Seven patients died within 30 days in the usual care group vs 6 in the CPAP group (P = .52). There were no statistically significant differences between the treatment groups for length of stay either in hospital or in the intensive care unit.

CONCLUSION

In the prehospital setting, in spite of its potential advantages for patients in ACPE, CPAP may not be preferred to a strict optimal intravenous treatment.

摘要

研究目的

本随机对照试验的目的是确定在医疗院前环境中,除了积极的常规治疗外,无创通气对急性心源性肺水肿(ACPE)患者的即刻和延迟影响。

方法

符合严重 ACPE 条件的院外患者有资格参加研究。患者被随机分配接受常规治疗,包括常规最佳治疗,包括呋塞米、氧气和高剂量二硝酸异山梨酯加氧气,或常规药物加院外持续气道正压通气(CPAP)。主要结局是治疗成功,定义为 1 小时研究结束时呼吸频率均小于 25 次/分钟,氧饱和度大于 90%。次要终点包括纳入后 30 天内死亡。还记录了重症监护病房和住院的时间。

结果

共有 124 名患者入组研究。两组基线特征相似。对于主要结局分析,62 例患者中有 22 例(35.5%)被认为在常规治疗组治疗成功,60 例 CPAP 组中有 19 例(31.7%)(P =.65)。常规治疗组有 7 例患者在 30 天内死亡,CPAP 组有 6 例(P =.52)。两组在住院或重症监护病房的住院时间均无统计学差异。

结论

在院前环境中,尽管 CPAP 对 ACPE 患者有潜在优势,但与严格的最佳静脉治疗相比,CPAP 可能不是首选。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验