Suppr超能文献

[两种静脉注射西苯唑啉给药方式在减少近期自发性房性心律失常方面的疗效和耐受性比较研究]

[Comparative study of the efficacy and tolerability of 2 modalities of intravenous cibenzoline administration in the reduction of recent spontaneous atrial arrhythmia].

作者信息

Hermida J S, Mabo P, Rouesnel P, Scheck F, Canler A, Barthélémy M, Wanszelbaum H

机构信息

CHR, Médecine C, Amiens.

出版信息

Ann Cardiol Angeiol (Paris). 1995 Jan;44(1):49-55.

PMID:7702357
Abstract

This multicentre, single blind, parallel group study compared the efficacy and clinical and electrocardiographic tolerance of a 2 minute intravenous administration of cibenzoline at a dose of 1.2 mg.kg-1 with that of a 10 minute 1.75 mg.kg-1 infusion in patients presenting with spontaneous atrial fibrillation (AF) for less than 6 weeks. Sixty-two patients (40 men and 22 women) with an average age of 62 years and presenting with sustained AF for at least 30 minutes with a ventricular rate greater than or equal to 80 bpm were randomly assigned to groups and received via the intravenous route either one of the two treatments. Efficacy (return to sinus rhythm) was assessed by an ECG recording every 5 minutes and at 45 and 60 minutes thereafter. Sixty-one of the 62 randomised patients were assessed for efficacy. Cibenzoline, administered in the form of a bolus or infusion, proved effective within one hour in 4 patients in each group (13%) and arrhythmia persisted with ventricular rate of less than 80 bpm in 10 (33%) and 5 (16%) of the patients respectively. In patients in whom sinus rhythm was not restored, ventricular rate was significantly reduced by cibenzoline. The patients in whom normal rhythm was restored under one of these treatment regimens were significantly younger. Patients in whom rhythm returned to normal following the administration of the bolus had AF of significantly more recent onset than that of the patients in whom abnormal rhythm persisted, whilst the history of the AF did not differ significantly between these two types of response after the infusion.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

摘要

这项多中心、单盲、平行组研究比较了1.2毫克/千克剂量的西苯唑啉静脉注射2分钟与1.75毫克/千克剂量静脉输注10分钟,对出现自发性房颤(AF)少于6周患者的疗效、临床及心电图耐受性。62例患者(40例男性和22例女性),平均年龄62岁,出现持续性房颤至少30分钟且心室率大于或等于80次/分钟,被随机分组并通过静脉途径接受两种治疗中的一种。通过每5分钟及之后45分钟和60分钟时的心电图记录评估疗效。62例随机分组患者中有61例接受了疗效评估。以推注或输注形式给药的西苯唑啉,每组各有4例患者(13%)在1小时内显示有效,分别有10例(33%)和5例(16%)患者心律失常持续且心室率低于80次/分钟。在未恢复窦性心律的患者中,西苯唑啉使心室率显著降低。在这些治疗方案之一作用下恢复正常心律的患者明显更年轻。推注给药后恢复正常心律的患者房颤发作时间明显比心律失常持续的患者更近,而输注后这两种反应类型之间的房颤病史无显著差异。(摘要截断于250字)

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