Suppr超能文献

非诺多泮与硝普钠治疗急性重症高血压的随机前瞻性试验。非诺多泮研究组。

Randomized, prospective trial of fenoldopam vs sodium nitroprusside in the treatment of acute severe hypertension. Fenoldopam Study Group.

作者信息

Panacek E A, Bednarczyk E M, Dunbar L M, Foulke G E, Holcslaw T L

机构信息

University Hospitals of Cleveland, OH, USA.

出版信息

Acad Emerg Med. 1995 Nov;2(11):959-65. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.1995.tb03122.x.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the safeties and efficacies of IV fenoldopam (FNP) vs sodium nitroprusside (NTP) in severe acute hypertension.

METHODS

A prospective, randomized, open-label, multicenter international trial, at 24 academic medical centers, was conducted. The participants were adult patients (21-80 years of age) who had supine diastolic blood pressures (DBPs) > or = 120 mm Hg, were capable of written informed consent, and did not have selected exclusion criteria. The subjects were randomized to either FNP or NTP therapy; DBP was titrated to 95-110 mm Hg, or a maximum reduction of 40 mm Hg for very high pressures. Infusions were maintained for at least six hours, then the patients were weaned off the IV therapy and oral medication was started. Measurements included BP, heart rate, and duration of study drug infusion and frequency of side effects or complications.

RESULTS

A total of 183 patients (90 FNP, 93 NTP) were enrolled. Fifteen patients from each arm were excluded from efficacy analysis due to protocol violation. There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics. The two antihypertensive agents were equivalent in controlling and maintaining DBP. Systolic blood pressure (SBP) was reduced to a slightly greater degree for the NTP-treated patients during the initial (0.5-1-hr) study period, and both SBP and DBP were reduced more for the FNP-treated patients in the subset receiving infusions during the 12-24-hour period. The adverse effect profiles of the drugs were similar, as were the times to achieve target pressure, with no clinically relevant difference.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients who had acute severe hypertension, FNP and NTP were equivalent in terms of efficacy and acute adverse events. Because of a unique mechanism of action, FNP may have advantages in selected subsets of patients. Further studies may be indicated in patient populations with pure "hypertensive emergencies."

摘要

目的

比较静脉注射非诺多泮(FNP)与硝普钠(NTP)治疗重度急性高血压的安全性和有效性。

方法

在24个学术医学中心进行了一项前瞻性、随机、开放标签、多中心国际试验。参与者为成年患者(21 - 80岁),仰卧位舒张压(DBP)≥120 mmHg,能够书面知情同意,且无特定排除标准。受试者随机接受FNP或NTP治疗;将DBP滴定至95 - 110 mmHg,或对于极高血压最大降低40 mmHg。输液维持至少6小时,然后使患者停用静脉治疗并开始口服药物治疗。测量指标包括血压、心率、研究药物输注持续时间以及副作用或并发症的发生频率。

结果

共纳入183例患者(90例FNP,93例NTP)。由于违反方案,每组各有15例患者被排除在疗效分析之外。基线特征无显著差异。两种抗高血压药物在控制和维持DBP方面相当。在初始(0.5 - 1小时)研究期间,NTP治疗的患者收缩压(SBP)降低程度稍大,而在12 - 24小时期间接受输液的亚组中,FNP治疗的患者SBP和DBP降低幅度更大。药物的不良反应情况相似,达到目标血压的时间也相似,无临床相关差异。

结论

对于急性重度高血压患者,FNP和NTP在疗效和急性不良事件方面相当。由于其独特的作用机制,FNP可能在特定患者亚组中具有优势。对于单纯“高血压急症”患者群体,可能需要进一步研究。

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