Suppr超能文献

右美托咪定镇静在机械通气危重症儿童中的应用:一项先导随机对照试验。

Dexmedetomidine Sedation in Mechanically Ventilated Critically Ill Children: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.

机构信息

Paediatric Critical Care, Perth Children's Hospital, Perth, WA, Australia.

Paediatric Intensive Care Unit, Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.

出版信息

Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2020 Sep;21(9):e731-e739. doi: 10.1097/PCC.0000000000002483.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To assess the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of a sedation protocol using dexmedetomidine as the primary sedative in mechanically ventilated critically ill children.

DESIGN

Open-label, pilot, prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. The primary outcome was the proportion of sedation scores in the target sedation range in the first 48 hours. Safety outcomes included device removal, adverse events, and vasopressor use. Feasibility outcomes included time to randomization and protocol fidelity.

SETTING

Six tertiary PICUs in Australia and New Zealand.

PATIENTS

Critically ill children, younger than 16 years old, requiring intubation and mechanical ventilation and expected to be mechanically ventilated for at least 24 hours.

INTERVENTIONS

Children randomized to dexmedetomidine received a dexmedetomidine-based algorithm targeted to light sedation (State Behavioral Scale -1 to +1). Children randomized to usual care received sedation as determined by the treating clinician (but not dexmedetomidine), also targeted to light sedation.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Sedation with dexmedetomidine as the primary sedative resulted in a greater proportion of sedation measurements in the light sedation range (State Behavioral Scale -1 to +1) over the first 48 hours (229/325 [71%] vs 181/331 [58%]; p = 0.04) and the first 24 hours (66/103 [64%] vs 48/116 [41%]; p < 0.001) compared with usual care. Cumulative midazolam dosage was significantly reduced in the dexmedetomidine arm compared with usual care (p = 0.002).There were more episodes of hypotension and bradycardia with dexmedetomidine (including one serious adverse event) but no difference in vasopressor requirements. Median time to randomization after intubation was 6.0 hours (interquartile range, 2.0-9.0 hr) in the dexmedetomidine arm compared with 3.0 hours (interquartile range, 1.0-7.0 hr) in the usual care arm (p = 0.24).

CONCLUSIONS

A sedation protocol using dexmedetomidine as the primary sedative was feasible, appeared safe, achieved early, light sedation, and reduced midazolam requirements. The findings of this pilot study justify further studies of sedative agents in critically ill children.

摘要

目的

评估在机械通气的危重病儿童中使用右美托咪定为主要镇静剂的镇静方案的可行性、安全性和疗效。

设计

开放标签、试点、前瞻性、多中心、随机、对照试验。主要结局是前 48 小时内镇静评分处于目标镇静范围内的比例。安全性结局包括器械移除、不良事件和血管加压药的使用。可行性结局包括随机化时间和方案一致性。

地点

澳大利亚和新西兰的 6 个三级 PICUs。

患者

年龄小于 16 岁,需要插管和机械通气,并预计需要机械通气至少 24 小时的危重病儿童。

干预措施

随机分配至右美托咪定组的患儿接受右美托咪定为基础的算法,以实现轻度镇静(行为状态量表 -1 到 +1)。随机分配至常规治疗组的患儿接受治疗医师决定的镇静治疗(但不使用右美托咪定),同样以轻度镇静为目标。

测量和主要结果

以右美托咪定为主要镇静剂的镇静治疗,在前 48 小时(229/325 [71%] 与 181/331 [58%];p = 0.04)和前 24 小时(66/103 [64%] 与 48/116 [41%];p < 0.001)内,镇静评分更倾向于处于轻度镇静范围。与常规治疗相比,右美托咪定组累积咪达唑仑剂量明显减少(p = 0.002)。右美托咪定组出现更多低血压和心动过缓事件(包括 1 例严重不良事件),但血管加压药需求无差异。右美托咪定组气管插管后随机化的中位时间为 6.0 小时(四分位距,2.0-9.0 小时),而常规治疗组为 3.0 小时(四分位距,1.0-7.0 小时)(p = 0.24)。

结论

使用右美托咪定为主要镇静剂的镇静方案是可行的,似乎是安全的,可实现早期轻度镇静,并减少咪达唑仑的需求。这项初步研究的结果证明了在危重病儿童中使用镇静剂的进一步研究是合理的。

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