Bloomfield P, Carmichael J, Petrie G R, Jewell N P, Crompton G K
Br Med J. 1979 Mar 31;1(6167):848-50. doi: 10.1136/bmj.1.6167.848.
A double-blind crossover trial was carried out during 22 episodes of life-threatening asthma in 19 patients to compare salbutamol given as a 500 microgram intravenous injection and as a 0 . 5% solution administered by intermittent positive-pressure breathing (IPPB) for three minutes. Relief of pulsus paradoxus was significantly better after IPPB than the intravenous treatment. Both treatments significantly improved the peak expiratory flow rate. Salbutamol given intravenously produced a mean increase in heart rate of over 20 beats/min five minutes after treatment compared with the relief of tachycardia that occurred after administration by IPPB. Four patients had noticeable cardiovascular side effects after salbutamol given intravenously, but no such effects were noticed after administration by IPPB. Two patients withdrawn shortly after entry into the trial because of a worsening clinical condition had received intravenous salbutamol. It is concluded that salbutamol given by IPPB is better than that given by slow intravenous injection in severe acute asthma.
对19名患者的22次危及生命的哮喘发作进行了一项双盲交叉试验,以比较500微克静脉注射沙丁胺醇与通过间歇性正压通气(IPPB)给予0.5%溶液3分钟的效果。IPPB后奇脉缓解明显优于静脉治疗。两种治疗均显著改善了呼气峰值流速。与IPPB给药后出现的心动过速缓解相比,静脉注射沙丁胺醇治疗后5分钟心率平均增加超过20次/分钟。静脉注射沙丁胺醇后4名患者出现明显的心血管副作用,但IPPB给药后未发现此类影响。两名在进入试验后不久因临床状况恶化而退出的患者接受了静脉注射沙丁胺醇。得出的结论是,在严重急性哮喘中,IPPB给予沙丁胺醇比缓慢静脉注射更好。