Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48105, USA.
N Engl J Med. 2012 Feb 16;366(7):591-600. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1107494.
Early termination of prolonged seizures with intravenous administration of benzodiazepines improves outcomes. For faster and more reliable administration, paramedics increasingly use an intramuscular route.
This double-blind, randomized, noninferiority trial compared the efficacy of intramuscular midazolam with that of intravenous lorazepam for children and adults in status epilepticus treated by paramedics. Subjects whose convulsions had persisted for more than 5 minutes and who were still convulsing after paramedics arrived were given the study medication by either intramuscular autoinjector or intravenous infusion. The primary outcome was absence of seizures at the time of arrival in the emergency department without the need for rescue therapy. Secondary outcomes included endotracheal intubation, recurrent seizures, and timing of treatment relative to the cessation of convulsive seizures. This trial tested the hypothesis that intramuscular midazolam was noninferior to intravenous lorazepam by a margin of 10 percentage points.
At the time of arrival in the emergency department, seizures were absent without rescue therapy in 329 of 448 subjects (73.4%) in the intramuscular-midazolam group and in 282 of 445 (63.4%) in the intravenous-lorazepam group (absolute difference, 10 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 4.0 to 16.1; P<0.001 for both noninferiority and superiority). The two treatment groups were similar with respect to need for endotracheal intubation (14.1% of subjects with intramuscular midazolam and 14.4% with intravenous lorazepam) and recurrence of seizures (11.4% and 10.6%, respectively). Among subjects whose seizures ceased before arrival in the emergency department, the median times to active treatment were 1.2 minutes in the intramuscular-midazolam group and 4.8 minutes in the intravenous-lorazepam group, with corresponding median times from active treatment to cessation of convulsions of 3.3 minutes and 1.6 minutes. Adverse-event rates were similar in the two groups.
For subjects in status epilepticus, intramuscular midazolam is at least as safe and effective as intravenous lorazepam for prehospital seizure cessation. (Funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00809146.).
静脉给予苯二氮䓬类药物快速终止长时间癫痫发作可改善结局。为了更快、更可靠地给药,护理人员越来越多地使用肌肉注射途径。
本双盲、随机、非劣效性试验比较了肌肉注射咪达唑仑和静脉注射劳拉西泮治疗护理人员治疗的癫痫持续状态的儿童和成人的疗效。对于惊厥持续超过 5 分钟且护理人员到达后仍持续惊厥的患者,通过肌肉自动注射器或静脉输注给予研究药物。主要结局为无需要抢救治疗的急诊科到达时无癫痫发作。次要结局包括气管插管、再次发作以及相对于惊厥停止的治疗时间。该试验通过 10 个百分点的差值检验了这样一个假设,即肌肉注射咪达唑仑不劣于静脉注射劳拉西泮。
在急诊科到达时,肌肉注射咪达唑仑组 448 例患者中有 329 例(73.4%),静脉注射劳拉西泮组 445 例患者中有 282 例(63.4%)无需要抢救治疗的癫痫发作(绝对差异为 10 个百分点;95%置信区间为 4.0 至 16.1;两者均为非劣效性和优效性 P<0.001)。两组在需要气管插管(肌肉注射咪达唑仑组 14.1%,静脉注射劳拉西泮组 14.4%)和再次发作(分别为 11.4%和 10.6%)方面相似。在到达急诊科前癫痫发作停止的患者中,肌肉注射咪达唑仑组的中位积极治疗时间为 1.2 分钟,静脉注射劳拉西泮组为 4.8 分钟,相应的从积极治疗到惊厥停止的中位时间分别为 3.3 分钟和 1.6 分钟。两组的不良事件发生率相似。
对于癫痫持续状态的患者,肌肉注射咪达唑仑在院前癫痫发作停止方面与静脉注射劳拉西泮一样安全有效。(由美国国立神经病学与卒中研究所和其他机构资助;ClinicalTrials.gov 编号:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00809146。)