Suppr超能文献

在一家三级学术医疗中心对机械通气心脏手术患者进行右美托咪定与丙泊酚镇静治疗的评估。

Evaluation of dexmedetomidine versus propofol-based sedation therapy in mechanically ventilated cardiac surgery patients at a tertiary academic medical center.

作者信息

Anger Kevin E, Szumita Paul M, Baroletti Steven A, Labreche Matthew J, Fanikos John

机构信息

Department of Pharmacy, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.

出版信息

Crit Pathw Cardiol. 2010 Dec;9(4):221-6. doi: 10.1097/HPC.0b013e3181f4ec4a.

Abstract

Management of pain and sedation therapy is a vital component of optimizing patient outcomes; however, the ideal pharmacotherapy regimen has not been identified in the postoperative cardiac surgery population. We sought to evaluate efficacy and safety outcomes between postoperative mechanically ventilated cardiac surgery patients receiving dexmedetomidine versus propofol therapy upon arrival to the intensive care unit (ICU). We conducted a single center, descriptive study of clinical practice at a 20-bed cardiac surgery ICU in a tertiary academic medical center. Adult mechanically ventilated postcardiac surgery patients who received either dexmedetomidine or propofol for sedation therapy upon admission to the ICU between October 20, 2006 and December 15, 2006 were evaluated. A pharmacy database was used to identify patients receiving dexmedetomidine or propofol therapy for perioperative sedation during cardiac surgery. Patients were matched according to surgical procedure type. Fifty-six patients who received either dexmedetomidine (n = 28) or propofol (n = 28) were included in the analysis. No differences in the ICU length of stay (58.67 ± 32.61 vs. 61 ± 33.1 hours; P = 0.79) and duration of mechanical ventilation (16.21 ± 6.05 vs. 13.97 ± 4.62 hours; P = 0.13) were seen between the propofol and dexmedetomidine groups, respectively. Hypotension (17 [61%] vs. 9 [32%]; P = 0.04), morphine use (11 [39.3%] vs. 1 [3.6%]; P = 0.002), and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory use (7 [25%] vs. 1 [3.6%]; P = 0.05) occurred more during dexmedetomidine therapy versus propofol. Dexmedetomidine therapy resulted in a higher incidence of hypotension and analgesic consumption compared with propofol-based sedation therapy. Further evaluation is needed to assess differences in clinical outcomes of propofol and dexmedetomidine-based therapy in mechanically ventilated cardiac surgery patients.

摘要

疼痛与镇静治疗的管理是优化患者治疗效果的重要组成部分;然而,目前尚未确定术后心脏手术患者的理想药物治疗方案。我们试图评估入住重症监护病房(ICU)时接受右美托咪定与丙泊酚治疗的术后机械通气心脏手术患者的疗效和安全性结果。我们在一家拥有20张床位的心脏手术ICU的三级学术医疗中心进行了一项单中心临床实践描述性研究。对2006年10月20日至2006年12月15日期间入住ICU时接受右美托咪定或丙泊酚镇静治疗的成年机械通气心脏手术后患者进行了评估。利用药房数据库识别在心脏手术期间接受右美托咪定或丙泊酚围手术期镇静治疗的患者。根据手术类型对患者进行匹配。分析纳入了56例接受右美托咪定(n = 28)或丙泊酚(n = 28)治疗的患者。丙泊酚组和右美托咪定组在ICU住院时间(58.67±32.61 vs. 61±33.1小时;P = 0.79)和机械通气时间(16.21±6.05 vs. 13.97±4.62小时;P = 0.13)方面均未观察到差异。与丙泊酚相比,右美托咪定治疗期间低血压(17例[61%] vs. 9例[32%];P = 0.04)、吗啡使用(11例[39.3%] vs. 1例[3.6%];P = 0.002)和非甾体抗炎药使用(7例[25%] vs. 1例[3.6%];P = 0.05)更为常见。与丙泊酚镇静治疗相比,右美托咪定治疗导致低血压和镇痛药使用的发生率更高。需要进一步评估以评估丙泊酚和右美托咪定治疗对机械通气心脏手术患者临床结局的差异。

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