Suppr超能文献

用于催产素激惹试验的脉冲式与持续性催产素输注对比

Pulsatile versus continuous oxytocin infusion for the oxytocin challenge test.

作者信息

Perales A J, Diago V J, Monleón-Sancho J, Grifol R, Dominguez R, Minguez J A, Monleón J

机构信息

Servicio de Obstetricia, Hospital Maternal La Fe, Universitat de Valencia, Spain.

出版信息

Arch Gynecol Obstet. 1994;255(3):119-23. doi: 10.1007/BF02390938.

Abstract

In a prospective study, 140 patients had an oxytocin challenge test with either a continuous or a pulsed infusion (one minute of infusion in every five minutes). Both infusion regimens had similar success rates in terms of uterine contractions (97.1 vs 98.6%). The potency ratio (pulsed versus continuous infusion) was significant at 2.7 (1.27 to 5.2), which means that more uterine activity was induced with each mU of oxytocin with pulsatile than with continuous administration. The total amount of oxytocin required to obtain three good contractions in 10 minutes was about 40% less with pulsed administration than with continuous infusion, but the test took 40 minutes longer with the pulsed than with the continuous infusion (P < 0.01).

摘要

在一项前瞻性研究中,140例患者接受了缩宫素激惹试验,采用持续输注或脉冲式输注(每5分钟输注1分钟)。两种输注方案在子宫收缩方面的成功率相似(分别为97.1%和98.6%)。效价比(脉冲式输注与持续输注)为2.7(1.27至5.2),具有显著性差异,这意味着与持续给药相比,每毫单位缩宫素脉冲式给药诱导的子宫活动更多。脉冲式给药获得10分钟内3次良好宫缩所需的缩宫素总量比持续输注少约40%,但脉冲式输注试验比持续输注试验所需时间长40分钟(P<0.01)。

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