甲芬特明和昂丹司琼预防脊髓后低血压的比较:一项前瞻性随机试验

IF 0.1 Q4 ANESTHESIOLOGY Acta anaesthesiologica Belgica Pub Date : 2021-09-01 DOI:10.56126/72.3.5
K. Shah, P. Dubey, A. Bharti, S. Singh
{"title":"甲芬特明和昂丹司琼预防脊髓后低血压的比较:一项前瞻性随机试验","authors":"K. Shah, P. Dubey, A. Bharti, S. Singh","doi":"10.56126/72.3.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background and Aims: Spinal anesthesia is a technique often associated with side effects like hypotension and bradycardia. Recent studies have shown that the use of ondansetron leads to a decreased incidence of hypotension induced by spinal anesthesia. This prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blind study was done to compare the efficacy of the prophylactic use of intravenous (IV) ondansetron and mephentermine on post-spinal hypotension.\n\nMethods: A total of 130 patients were randomly allocated to one of two groups: Group O received 4 mg IV ondansetron and Group M received 6 mg of IV mephentermine. All patients received spinal anesthesia using 3 mL of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine. Assessment of blood pressure and heart rate (HR) was done for 30 minutes after spinal anesthesia was performed. Quantitative data were analyzed using ANOVA tests and qualitative data were analyzed using the Chi-square tests.\n\nResults: Both groups were comparable regarding demographic data. Mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) in Group O was lower than Group M at 5 to 25 minutes and difference of MAP between the two groups was > 20% of baseline values (p < 0.05). HR was comparable between groups. No statistically significant differences were seen in side effects between the two groups.\n\nConclusion: Our study shows that the preemptive use of both ondansetron and mephentermine significantly decreases the incidence of post-spinal hypotension.","PeriodicalId":7024,"journal":{"name":"Acta anaesthesiologica Belgica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison between mephentermine and ondansetron for the prevention of post spinal hypotension: a prospective randomized trial\",\"authors\":\"K. Shah, P. Dubey, A. Bharti, S. Singh\",\"doi\":\"10.56126/72.3.5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background and Aims: Spinal anesthesia is a technique often associated with side effects like hypotension and bradycardia. Recent studies have shown that the use of ondansetron leads to a decreased incidence of hypotension induced by spinal anesthesia. This prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blind study was done to compare the efficacy of the prophylactic use of intravenous (IV) ondansetron and mephentermine on post-spinal hypotension.\\n\\nMethods: A total of 130 patients were randomly allocated to one of two groups: Group O received 4 mg IV ondansetron and Group M received 6 mg of IV mephentermine. All patients received spinal anesthesia using 3 mL of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine. Assessment of blood pressure and heart rate (HR) was done for 30 minutes after spinal anesthesia was performed. Quantitative data were analyzed using ANOVA tests and qualitative data were analyzed using the Chi-square tests.\\n\\nResults: Both groups were comparable regarding demographic data. Mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) in Group O was lower than Group M at 5 to 25 minutes and difference of MAP between the two groups was > 20% of baseline values (p < 0.05). HR was comparable between groups. No statistically significant differences were seen in side effects between the two groups.\\n\\nConclusion: Our study shows that the preemptive use of both ondansetron and mephentermine significantly decreases the incidence of post-spinal hypotension.\",\"PeriodicalId\":7024,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta anaesthesiologica Belgica\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta anaesthesiologica Belgica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.56126/72.3.5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta anaesthesiologica Belgica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56126/72.3.5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:脊髓麻醉是一种常伴有低血压和心动过缓等副作用的技术。最近的研究表明,使用昂丹司琼可降低由脊髓麻醉引起的低血压的发生率。这项前瞻性、随机、对照、双盲研究的目的是比较预防性静脉注射昂丹司琼和甲芬特明治疗脊柱后低血压的疗效。方法:将130例患者随机分为两组:O组给予静脉注射昂丹司琼4 mg, M组给予静脉注射甲非明6 mg。所有患者均使用3ml 0.5%高压布比卡因进行脊髓麻醉。脊髓麻醉后30分钟测量血压和心率(HR)。定量资料采用方差分析,定性资料采用卡方检验。结果:两组人口统计数据具有可比性。5 ~ 25 min时,O组平均动脉血压(MAP)低于M组,两组间MAP差异为基线值的20% (p < 0.05)。两组间人力资源具有可比性。两组的副作用无统计学差异。结论:我们的研究表明,优先使用昂丹司琼和甲非明可显著降低脊髓后低血压的发生率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison between mephentermine and ondansetron for the prevention of post spinal hypotension: a prospective randomized trial
Background and Aims: Spinal anesthesia is a technique often associated with side effects like hypotension and bradycardia. Recent studies have shown that the use of ondansetron leads to a decreased incidence of hypotension induced by spinal anesthesia. This prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blind study was done to compare the efficacy of the prophylactic use of intravenous (IV) ondansetron and mephentermine on post-spinal hypotension. Methods: A total of 130 patients were randomly allocated to one of two groups: Group O received 4 mg IV ondansetron and Group M received 6 mg of IV mephentermine. All patients received spinal anesthesia using 3 mL of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine. Assessment of blood pressure and heart rate (HR) was done for 30 minutes after spinal anesthesia was performed. Quantitative data were analyzed using ANOVA tests and qualitative data were analyzed using the Chi-square tests. Results: Both groups were comparable regarding demographic data. Mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) in Group O was lower than Group M at 5 to 25 minutes and difference of MAP between the two groups was > 20% of baseline values (p < 0.05). HR was comparable between groups. No statistically significant differences were seen in side effects between the two groups. Conclusion: Our study shows that the preemptive use of both ondansetron and mephentermine significantly decreases the incidence of post-spinal hypotension.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
期刊介绍: L’Acta Anaesthesiologica Belgica est le journal de la SBAR, publié 4 fois par an. L’Acta a été publié pour la première fois en 1950. Depuis 1973 l’Acta est publié dans la langue Anglaise, ce qui a été résulté à un rayonnement plus internationaux. Depuis lors l’Acta est devenu un journal à ne pas manquer dans le domaine d’Anesthésie Belge, offrant e.a. les textes du congrès annuel, les Research Meetings, … Vous en trouvez aussi les dates des Research Meetings, du congrès annuel et des autres réunions.
期刊最新文献
Long-term cognitive dysfunction after COVID ARDS Trends in female authorship in Acta Anaesthesiologica Belgica from 2005 to 2021 General anesthesia for maternal surgery during pregnancy: dogmas, myths and evidence, a narrative review Clinical relevance of nocebo effects in anesthesia practice: a narrative review Gender equality and equity in anaesthesia research: Why are we still talking about numbers?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1