Cotter G, Metzkor E, Kaluski E, Faigenberg Z, Miller R, Simovitz A, Shaham O, Marghitay D, Koren M, Blatt A, Moshkovitz Y, Zaidenstein R, Golik A
Assaf Harofeh Medical Center, Zerifin, Israel.
Lancet. 1998 Feb 7;351(9100):389-93. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(97)08417-1.
Nitrates and furosemide, commonly administered in the treatment of pulmonary oedema, have not been compared in a prospective clinical trial. We compared the efficacy and safety of these drugs in a randomised trial of patients with severe pulmonary oedema and oxygen saturation below 90%.
Patients presenting to mobile emergency units with signs of congestive heart failure were treated with oxygen 10 L/min, intravenous furosemide 40 mg, and morphine 3 mg bolus. 110 patients were randomly assigned either to group A, who received isosorbide dinitrate (3 mg bolus administered intravenously every 5 min; n=56) or to group B, who received furosemide (80 mg bolus administered intravenously every 15 min, as well as isosorbide dinitrate 1 mg/h, increased every 10 min by 1 mg/h; n=54). Six patients were withdrawn on the basis of chest radiography results. Treatment was continued until oxygen saturation was above 96% or mean arterial blood pressure had decreased by 30% or to below 90 mm Hg. The main endpoints were death, need for mechanical ventilation, and myocardial infarction. The analyses were by intention to treat.
Mechanical ventilation was required in seven (13%) of 52 group-A patients and 21 (40%) of 52 group-B patients (p=0.0041). Myocardial infarction occurred in nine (17%) and 19 (37%) patients, respectively (p=0.047). One patient in group A and three in group B died (p=0.61). One or more of these endpoints occurred in 13 (25%) and 24 (46%) patients, respectively (p=0.041).
High-dose isosorbide dinitrate, given as repeated intravenous boluses after low-dose intravenous furosemide, is safe and effective in controlling severe pulmonary oedema. This treatment regimen is more effective than high-dose furosemide with low-dose isosorbide nitrate in terms of need for mechanical ventilation and frequency of myocardial infarction.
硝酸盐类药物和呋塞米常用于治疗肺水肿,但尚未在前瞻性临床试验中进行比较。我们在一项针对重度肺水肿且氧饱和度低于90%患者的随机试验中比较了这两种药物的疗效和安全性。
出现充血性心力衰竭体征并前往移动急救单元就诊的患者接受10L/min的氧气治疗、静脉注射40mg呋塞米和3mg吗啡推注。110例患者被随机分为A组(56例),接受静脉注射硝酸异山梨酯(每5分钟静脉推注3mg;n=56)或B组(54例),接受呋塞米(每15分钟静脉推注80mg,以及硝酸异山梨酯1mg/h,每10分钟增加1mg/h;n=54)。6例患者根据胸部X线检查结果退出研究。治疗持续至氧饱和度高于96%或平均动脉血压下降30%或降至90mmHg以下。主要终点为死亡、需要机械通气和心肌梗死。分析采用意向性治疗。
52例A组患者中有7例(13%)需要机械通气,52例B组患者中有21例(40%)需要机械通气(p=0.0041)。心肌梗死分别发生在9例(17%)和19例(37%)患者中(p=0.047)。A组1例患者和B组3例患者死亡(p=0.61)。这些终点中的一项或多项分别发生在13例(25%)和24例(46%)患者中(p=0.041)。
在小剂量静脉注射呋塞米后重复静脉推注大剂量硝酸异山梨酯,在控制重度肺水肿方面安全有效。就机械通气需求和心肌梗死发生率而言,该治疗方案比大剂量呋塞米联合小剂量硝酸异山梨酯更有效。