Suppr超能文献

早期右美托咪定用于急性呼吸衰竭患者无创通气的疗效和安全性:一项随机、双盲、安慰剂对照的初步研究。

Efficacy and safety of early dexmedetomidine during noninvasive ventilation for patients with acute respiratory failure: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study.

作者信息

Devlin John W, Al-Qadheeb Nada S, Chi Amy, Roberts Russel J, Qawi Imrana, Garpestad Erik, Hill Nicholas S

机构信息

School of Pharmacy, Northeastern University; Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine.

School of Pharmacy, Northeastern University.

出版信息

Chest. 2014 Jun;145(6):1204-1212. doi: 10.1378/chest.13-1448.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Successful application of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) for acute respiratory failure (ARF) requires patient cooperation and comfort. The efficacy and safety of early IV dexmedetomidine when added to protocolized, as-needed IV midazolam and fentanyl remain unclear.

METHODS

Adults with ARF and within 8 h of starting NIV were randomized to receive IV dexmedetomidine (0.2 μg/kg/h titrated every 30 min to 0.7 μg/kg/h to maintain a Sedation-Agitation Scale [SAS] score of 3 to 4) or placebo in a double-blind fashion up to 72 h, until NIV was stopped for ≥ 2 h, or until intubation. Patients with agitation (SAS ≥ 5) or pain (visual analog scale ≥ 5 of 10 cm) 15 min after each dexmedetomidine and placebo increase could receive IV midazolam 0.5 to 1.0 mg or IV fentanyl 25 to 50 μg, respectively, at a minimum interval of every 3 h.

RESULTS

The dexmedetomidine (n = 16) and placebo (n = 17) groups were similar at baseline. Use of early dexmedetomidine did not improve NIV tolerance (score, 1 of 4; OR, 1.44; 95% CI, 0.44-4.70; P = .54) nor, vs. placebo, led to a greater median (interquartile range) percent time either tolerating NIV (99% [61%-100%] vs. 67% [40%-100%], P = .56) or remaining at the desired sedation level (SAS score = 3 or 4, 100% [86%-100%] vs. 100% [100%-100%], P = .28], or fewer intubations (P = .79). Although use of dexmedetomidine was associated with a greater duration of NIV vs placebo (37 [16-72] vs. 12 [4-22] h, P = .03), the total ventilation duration (NIV + invasive) was similar (3.3 [2-4] days vs. 3.8 [2-5] days, P = .52). More patients receiving dexmedetomidine had one or more episodes of deep sedation vs placebo (SAS ≤ 2, 25% vs. 0%, P = .04). Use of midazolam (P = .40) and episodes of either severe bradycardia (heart rate ≤ 50 beats/min, P = .18) or hypotension (systolic BP ≤ 90 mm Hg, P = .64) were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Initiating dexmedetomidine soon after NIV initiation in patients with ARF neither improves NIV tolerance nor helps to maintain sedation at a desired goal. Randomized, multicenter trials targeting patients with initial intolerance are needed to further elucidate the role for dexmedetomidine in this population.

摘要

背景

无创通气(NIV)成功应用于急性呼吸衰竭(ARF)需要患者的配合与舒适感。在按方案按需静脉注射咪达唑仑和芬太尼的基础上,早期静脉注射右美托咪定的疗效和安全性尚不清楚。

方法

成年ARF患者在开始NIV的8小时内被随机双盲分为两组,分别接受静脉注射右美托咪定(0.2μg/kg/h,每30分钟滴定至0.7μg/kg/h,以维持镇静-躁动评分[SAS]为3至4分)或安慰剂,持续72小时,直至NIV停止≥2小时或直至插管。每次增加右美托咪定和安慰剂15分钟后出现躁动(SAS≥5)或疼痛(视觉模拟评分≥10cm中的5分)的患者,可分别接受静脉注射咪达唑仑0.5至1.0mg或静脉注射芬太尼25至50μg,最小间隔时间为每3小时一次。

结果

右美托咪定组(n = 16)和安慰剂组(n = 17)在基线时相似。早期使用右美托咪定并未改善NIV耐受性(评分,4分中的1分;OR,1.44;95%CI,0.44 - 4.70;P = 0.54),与安慰剂相比,也未导致耐受NIV的中位(四分位间距)时间百分比更高(99%[61% - 100%]对67%[40% - 100%],P = 0.56)或维持在所需镇静水平(SAS评分 = 3或4)的时间百分比更高(100%[86% - 100%]对100%[100% - 100%]),P = 0.28),插管次数也未减少(P = 0.79)。虽然与安慰剂相比,使用右美托咪定与NIV持续时间更长有关(37[16 - 72]对12[4 - 22]小时,P = 0.03),但总通气时间(NIV + 有创通气)相似(3.3[2 - 4]天对3.8[2 - 5]天,P = 0.52)。与安慰剂相比,接受右美托咪定的患者有更多人出现一次或多次深度镇静(SAS≤2,25%对0%,P = 0.04)。咪达唑仑的使用(P = 0.40)以及严重心动过缓(心率≤50次/分钟,P = 0.18)或低血压(收缩压≤90mmHg,P = 0.64)的发作情况相似。

结论

在ARF患者开始NIV后不久开始使用右美托咪定既不能提高NIV耐受性,也无助于维持所需的镇静目标。需要针对初始不耐受患者进行随机、多中心试验,以进一步阐明右美托咪定在该人群中的作用。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验