Suppr超能文献

雾化吸入与标准应用在中度镇静下纤维支气管镜检查时局部麻醉的比较:一项随机对照试验。

Nebulization versus standard application for topical anaesthesia during flexible bronchoscopy under moderate sedation - a randomized controlled trial.

机构信息

Department of Pneumology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstraße 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany.

出版信息

Respir Res. 2018 Nov 21;19(1):227. doi: 10.1186/s12931-018-0926-5.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Endobronchial administration of lidocaine is commonly used for cough suppression during diagnostic bronchoscopy. Recently, nebulization of lidocaine during bronchoscopies under deep sedation with fiberoptic intubation using a distinct spray catheter has been shown to have several advantages over conventional lidocaine administration via syringe. However, there are no data about this approach in bronchoscopies performed under moderate sedation. Therefore, this study compared the tolerability and safety of nebulized lidocaine with conventional lidocaine administration via syringe in patients undergoing bronchoscopy with moderate sedation.

METHODS

Patients requiring diagnostic bronchoscopy were randomly assigned to receive topical lidocaine either via syringe or via nebulizer. Endpoints were consumption of lidocaine and sedative drugs, as well as patient tolerance and safety.

RESULTS

Sixty patients were included in the study (n = 30 in each group). Patients required lower doses of endobronchial lidocaine when given via nebulizer versus syringe (164.7 ± 20.8 mg vs. 250.4 ± 42.38 mg; p < 0.0001) whereas no differences in the dosage of sedative drugs were observed between the two groups (all p > 0.05). Patients in the nebulizer group had higher mean oxygen saturation (96.19 ± 2.45% vs. 94.21 ± 3.02%; p = 0.0072) and a lower complication rate (0.3 ± 0.79 vs. 1.17 ± 1.62 per procedure; p = 0.0121) compared with those in the syringe group.

CONCLUSIONS

Endobronchial lidocaine administration via nebulizer was well-tolerated during bronchoscopies under moderate sedation and was associated with reduced lidocaine consumption, a lower complication rate and better oxygenation compared with lidocaine administration via syringe.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered with clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT02262442 ; 13 October 2014).

摘要

背景

在诊断性支气管镜检查期间,常使用支气管内给予利多卡因来抑制咳嗽。最近,在使用纤维光导插管进行深度镇静下,使用特殊喷雾导管对利多卡因进行雾化,已显示出优于通过注射器给予常规利多卡因的多种优势。然而,在中度镇静下进行支气管镜检查时,尚无关于这种方法的数据。因此,本研究比较了在中度镇静下进行支气管镜检查时,通过注射器给予和通过雾化器给予利多卡因的耐受性和安全性。

方法

需要进行诊断性支气管镜检查的患者被随机分配接受通过注射器或通过雾化器给予局部利多卡因。终点为利多卡因和镇静药物的消耗,以及患者的耐受性和安全性。

结果

共有 60 名患者纳入研究(每组 n=30)。与通过注射器相比,通过雾化器给予的支气管内利多卡因剂量较低(164.7±20.8 mg 与 250.4±42.38 mg;p<0.0001),而两组之间镇静药物的剂量无差异(所有 p>0.05)。与注射器组相比,雾化器组的患者具有更高的平均血氧饱和度(96.19±2.45% 与 94.21±3.02%;p=0.0072)和更低的并发症发生率(每例 0.3±0.79 与 1.17±1.62;p=0.0121)。

结论

在中度镇静下进行支气管镜检查时,通过雾化器给予支气管内利多卡因具有良好的耐受性,与通过注射器给予利多卡因相比,可减少利多卡因的消耗,降低并发症发生率,并改善氧合。

试验注册

该研究在 clinicaltrials.gov 上注册(NCT02262442;2014 年 10 月 13 日)。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7468/6249909/2c4cec77a3cd/12931_2018_926_Fig1_HTML.jpg

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