Suppr超能文献

在神经科学重症监护人群中,氯维地平与尼卡地平用于急性血压降低的比较。

Clevidipine Versus Nicardipine for Acute Blood Pressure Reduction in a Neuroscience Intensive Care Population.

作者信息

Finger Jacqueline R, Kurczewski Lisa M, Brophy Gretchen M

机构信息

Banner-University Medical Center, Tucson, AZ, USA.

Virginia Commonwealth University Health System, Richmond, VA, USA.

出版信息

Neurocrit Care. 2017 Apr;26(2):167-173. doi: 10.1007/s12028-016-0349-4.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Currently, a lack of published literature exists regarding the use of clevidipine in the neuroscience population. This agent may be preferred in some patients because of its short half-life, potentially leading to more narrow blood pressure (BP) control in comparison with other agents. The purpose of this study was to compare the difference in time to achieve target systolic blood pressure (SBP) goals with clevidipine versus nicardipine infusions in patients admitted to the neuroscience intensive care unit (NSICU) at our institution.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed on patients receiving clevidipine or nicardipine infusions while in the NSICU between July 1, 2011 and June 30, 2014. Patients were matched based on indication for BP lowering and target SBP. Primary endpoints included time to target SBP and percentage of time within target BP range.

RESULTS

Of the 57 patients included in the study, the median time to target SBP was 30 min in the clevidipine group and 46 min in the nicardipine group (p = 0.13). The percentage of time spent within target BP range was 79 versus 78% (p = 0.64). Clevidipine administration resulted in significantly less volume administered per patient versus nicardipine (530 vs. 1254 mL, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

There were no statistically significant differences in acute BP management between the two agents; however, there was a trend toward shorter time to target and significantly less volume administered in the clevidipine group. Either agent should be considered a viable option in a NSICU population.

摘要

背景

目前,关于在神经科学领域人群中使用左西孟旦的已发表文献较少。由于其半衰期短,在某些患者中该药物可能更受青睐,与其他药物相比,这可能导致血压(BP)控制更为精准。本研究的目的是比较在我院神经科学重症监护病房(NSICU)住院的患者中,使用左西孟旦与尼卡地平静脉输注达到目标收缩压(SBP)的时间差异。

方法

对2011年7月1日至2014年6月30日期间在NSICU接受左西孟旦或尼卡地平静脉输注的患者进行回顾性研究。根据降压指征和目标SBP对患者进行匹配。主要终点包括达到目标SBP的时间和处于目标BP范围内的时间百分比。

结果

在纳入研究的57例患者中,左西孟旦组达到目标SBP的中位时间为30分钟,尼卡地平组为46分钟(p = 0.13)。处于目标BP范围内的时间百分比分别为79%和78%(p = 0.64)。与尼卡地平相比,左西孟旦给药导致每位患者的给药量显著减少(530 vs. 1254 mL,p = 0.02)。

结论

两种药物在急性血压管理方面无统计学显著差异;然而,左西孟旦组有达到目标时间更短和给药量显著更少的趋势。在NSICU人群中,这两种药物都应被视为可行的选择。

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