...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Hepatology: The Journal of the European Association for the Study of the Liver >Sub-clinical hepatic encephalopathy in cirrhotic patients is not aggravated by sedation with propofol compared to midazolam: a randomized controlled study.
【24h】

Sub-clinical hepatic encephalopathy in cirrhotic patients is not aggravated by sedation with propofol compared to midazolam: a randomized controlled study.

机译:与咪达唑仑相比,丙泊酚镇静不会使肝硬化患者的亚临床肝性脑病恶化:一项随机对照研究。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The risk of exacerbating sub-clinical hepatic encephalopathy (HE) by propofol has not been established. The aim of this study is to determine whether the use of propofol, for upper endoscopy in patients with cirrhosis, precipitates sub-clinical HE. METHODS: Sixty-one patients with compensated HCV and HBV cirrhosis (CP score 5-6) were randomly selected and divided into two groups (intent-to-treat population) matched for age, gender, and BMI. The first group received a single propofol sedation (N = 31, age 57 +/- 12, dose range 70-100 mg/procedure) and the second group (N = 30, age 56 +/- 12, dose 3-6 mg/procedure) received a single midazolam sedation, all done by an anesthesiologist. All patients completed number connection test (NCT), cognitive function score, time to recovery, time to discharge sheets, and hemodynamic parameters before sedation, and at discharge from the endoscopy unit, 1h post-procedure. Thirty control subjects without cirrhosis were matched to the cirrhotic patients who received sedation with regard to age, gender, BMI, and education level. RESULTS: A total of 58/61 cirrhotic patients (95%) had sub-clinical encephalopathy before the endoscopy (mean NCT 84.7 +/- 77 s, normal < 30 s). No patient developed overt HE after sedation. There were no differences between groups in the incidence of adverse effects, cognitive function, MELD score, CP score, oxygen saturation, or respiratory and heart rates before and after sedation. Propofol did not exacerbate minimal HE when compared to midazolam (NCT changed from 87.5 +/- 62 s prior to sedation to 74.2 +/- 58 s after sedation in the propofol group versus 72.8 +/- 62 s before to 85.6 +/- 72 s after sedation in the midazolam group; p < 0.01). Time to recovery (4.1 +/- 1.9 min vs. 11.5 +/- 5.0 min, p < 0.001), and time to discharge (38.0 +/- 9 min vs. 110 +/- 42 min, p < 0.001) were significantly shorter with propofol than midazolam. Pre- and post-procedure NCT (from 25 +/- 20 s to 24 +/- 20 s), cognitive function score (from 25 to 26), time to recovery (3.5 +/- 1.0 min), and time to discharge (35 +/- 10 min) did not change in the healthy controls. CONCLUSIONS: Sedation with propofol has a shorter time recovery and a shorter time to discharge than midazolam and does not exacerbate sub-clinical hepatic encephalopathy in patients with compensated liver cirrhosis.
机译:背景与目的:尚未确定丙泊酚加重亚临床肝性脑病(HE)的风险。这项研究的目的是确定在肝硬化患者的上内镜检查中使用异丙酚是否会引起亚临床HE。方法:随机选择了HCV和HBV肝硬化代偿的61例患者(CP评分5-6),并按年龄,性别和BMI分为两组(意向性治疗人群)。第一组接受单次异丙酚镇静(N = 31,年龄57 +/- 12,剂量范围70-100 mg /过程),第二组(N = 30,年龄56 +/- 12,剂量3-6 mg /程序)接受一次咪达唑仑镇静剂,全部由麻醉师完成。所有患者均在镇静前和手术后1小时内镜检查出院时完成数字连接测试(NCT),认知功能评分,恢复时间,出纸时间和血液动力学参数。在年龄,性别,BMI和教育水平方面,对30名无肝硬化的对照受试者与接受镇静的肝硬化患者进行配对。结果:共有58/61位肝硬化患者(95%)在内镜检查前患有亚临床脑病(平均NCT 84.7 +/- 77 s,正常<30 s)。镇静后没有患者出现明显的HE。镇静前后,不良反应,认知功能,MELD评分,CP评分,血氧饱和度或呼吸频率和心率的发生率在两组之间没有差异。与咪达唑仑相比,丙泊酚不会加重最低限度的HE(NCT从镇静前的87.5 +/- 62 s改变为镇静后的74.2 +/- 58 s,而镇静后的72.8 +/- 62 s变为85.6 +/- 72 s咪达唑仑组镇静后s; p <0.01)。恢复时间(4.1 +/- 1.9分钟vs. 11.5 +/- 5.0分钟,p <0.001)和放电时间(38.0 +/- 9 min vs. 110 +/- 42 min,p <0.001)显着丙泊酚比咪达唑仑短。术前和术后NCT(从25 +/- 20 s到24 +/- 20 s),认知功能评分(从25到26),恢复时间(3.5 +/- 1.0分钟)和出院时间(35 +/- 10分钟)在健康对照中没有变化。结论:丙泊酚镇静比咪达唑仑具有更短的恢复时间和更短的出院时间,并且不会加重代偿性肝硬化患者的亚临床肝性脑病。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号