Suppr超能文献

急性心肌梗死并发心室颤动:反对常规使用利多卡因的理由。

Ventricular fibrillation complicating acute myocardial infarction: reasons against the routine use of lidocaine.

作者信息

Carruth J E, Silverman M E

出版信息

Am Heart J. 1982 Sep;104(3):545-50. doi: 10.1016/0002-8703(82)90225-3.

Abstract

Because of recent recommendations that lidocaine be used prophylactically in all coronary care unit (CCU) patients with suspected myocardial infarction (MI), an approach not used in our CCU, we analysed our experience with ventricular fibrillation (VF) occurring in the setting of an acute MI. The frequency of VF in all patients was 3.2%. In MI patients 5.7%, of primary ventricular fibrillation (PVF) 2.8%, and of complicating ventricular fibrillation (CVF) 6.8%. All patients with PVF were resuscitated immediately. There was an increased in-hospital mortality for patients with VF compared to patients without VF; however, the increased mortality did not seem to result directly from VF. The long-term survival of PVF patients who survived to discharge was excellent (80% at 58 months). The routine use of prophylactic lidocaine would have been of no potential benefit in 96.8% of our patients, subjecting them to extra expense and possible toxicity. Since we have found no compelling evidence that the prophylactic administration of lidocaine can reduce mortality, we do not recommend this therapy for acute MI patients in our CCU.

摘要

由于最近有建议提出,应对所有疑似心肌梗死(MI)的冠心病监护病房(CCU)患者预防性使用利多卡因,而我们的CCU并未采用这种方法,因此我们分析了急性心肌梗死情况下发生心室颤动(VF)的经验。所有患者中心室颤动的发生率为3.2%。心肌梗死患者中为5.7%,原发性心室颤动(PVF)患者中为2.8%,复杂性心室颤动(CVF)患者中为6.8%。所有原发性心室颤动患者均立即进行了复苏。与无心室颤动的患者相比,心室颤动患者的院内死亡率有所增加;然而,死亡率增加似乎并非直接由心室颤动导致。存活至出院的原发性心室颤动患者的长期生存率极佳(58个月时为80%)。在我们96.8%的患者中,常规预防性使用利多卡因没有潜在益处,反而会让他们承受额外费用和可能的毒性。由于我们没有发现令人信服的证据表明预防性使用利多卡因可降低死亡率,因此我们不建议对我们CCU中的急性心肌梗死患者采用这种治疗方法。

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