成人硝普钠相关氰化物中毒——事实还是虚构?对证据和临床相关性的批判性回顾

IF 1.4 Q4 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL Open Access Journal of Clinical Trials Pub Date : 2010-09-02 DOI:10.2147/OAJCT.S7573
P. Abraham
{"title":"成人硝普钠相关氰化物中毒——事实还是虚构?对证据和临床相关性的批判性回顾","authors":"P. Abraham","doi":"10.2147/OAJCT.S7573","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Correspondence: Prasad Abraham Department of Pharmacy and Drug information, Box 2061, Grady Health System, 80 Jesse Hill Jr Dr Se, Atlanta, GA 30303, USA Tel +1 404-616-3246 Fax +1 404-616-2228 email pabraham@gmh.edu Abstract: Since its US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval in 1974, sodium nitroprusside (SNP) has been fraught with controversy in regards to its safety. Over the years, a growing concern related to SNPs propensity to cause cyanide (CN) toxicity culminated into a series of case reports that led the FDA to develop a black-box warning with dose limitations of ,2 μg/kg/min. These recommendations stemmed also from the reality of the difficulty of obtaining CN levels in a timely manner, as well as the presumed poor correlation of metabolic markers (lactate levels and pH) as it related to the severity of CN toxicity. All these issues have driven practitioners to the use of alternative agents. In this paper, we critically review the cases and the data that led to the development of these restrictive dosing recommendations and reveal several limitations of the data and assumptions that led to these recommendations. We conclude that SNP is still a reasonable agent to use in the management of patients with hypertension today and can safely be used beyond doses of 2 μg/kg/min. Furthermore, in lieu of CN levels, monitoring of lactic acid levels is also a reasonable measure to ensure safety.","PeriodicalId":19500,"journal":{"name":"Open Access Journal of Clinical Trials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2010-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2147/OAJCT.S7573","citationCount":"21","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sodium nitroprusside-associated cyanide toxicity in adult patients – fact or fiction? A critical review of the evidence and clinical relevance\",\"authors\":\"P. Abraham\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/OAJCT.S7573\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Correspondence: Prasad Abraham Department of Pharmacy and Drug information, Box 2061, Grady Health System, 80 Jesse Hill Jr Dr Se, Atlanta, GA 30303, USA Tel +1 404-616-3246 Fax +1 404-616-2228 email pabraham@gmh.edu Abstract: Since its US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval in 1974, sodium nitroprusside (SNP) has been fraught with controversy in regards to its safety. Over the years, a growing concern related to SNPs propensity to cause cyanide (CN) toxicity culminated into a series of case reports that led the FDA to develop a black-box warning with dose limitations of ,2 μg/kg/min. These recommendations stemmed also from the reality of the difficulty of obtaining CN levels in a timely manner, as well as the presumed poor correlation of metabolic markers (lactate levels and pH) as it related to the severity of CN toxicity. All these issues have driven practitioners to the use of alternative agents. In this paper, we critically review the cases and the data that led to the development of these restrictive dosing recommendations and reveal several limitations of the data and assumptions that led to these recommendations. We conclude that SNP is still a reasonable agent to use in the management of patients with hypertension today and can safely be used beyond doses of 2 μg/kg/min. Furthermore, in lieu of CN levels, monitoring of lactic acid levels is also a reasonable measure to ensure safety.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19500,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Open Access Journal of Clinical Trials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2147/OAJCT.S7573\",\"citationCount\":\"21\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Open Access Journal of Clinical Trials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/OAJCT.S7573\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Access Journal of Clinical Trials","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/OAJCT.S7573","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 21

摘要

通讯:Prasad Abraham Pharmacy and Drug information Department, Box 2061, Grady Health System, 80 Jesse Hill Jr Dr Se, Atlanta, GA 30303, USA Tel +1 404-616-3246 Fax +1 404-616-2228 email pabraham@gmh.edu摘要:自1974年美国食品和药物管理局(FDA)批准硝普钠(SNP)以来,其安全性一直充满争议。多年来,人们对snp引起氰化物(CN)毒性的倾向日益关注,最终形成了一系列病例报告,导致FDA制定了剂量限制为2 μg/kg/min的黑框警告。这些建议还源于难以及时获得CN水平的现实,以及代谢标志物(乳酸水平和pH)与CN毒性严重程度的推定相关性较差。所有这些问题都促使从业者使用替代药物。在本文中,我们批判性地回顾了导致这些限制性剂量建议发展的病例和数据,并揭示了导致这些建议的数据和假设的一些局限性。我们得出的结论是,SNP仍然是一种合理的用于高血压患者管理的药物,并且可以安全地使用超过2 μg/kg/min的剂量。此外,监测乳酸水平代替CN水平也是确保安全的合理措施。
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
Sodium nitroprusside-associated cyanide toxicity in adult patients – fact or fiction? A critical review of the evidence and clinical relevance
Correspondence: Prasad Abraham Department of Pharmacy and Drug information, Box 2061, Grady Health System, 80 Jesse Hill Jr Dr Se, Atlanta, GA 30303, USA Tel +1 404-616-3246 Fax +1 404-616-2228 email pabraham@gmh.edu Abstract: Since its US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval in 1974, sodium nitroprusside (SNP) has been fraught with controversy in regards to its safety. Over the years, a growing concern related to SNPs propensity to cause cyanide (CN) toxicity culminated into a series of case reports that led the FDA to develop a black-box warning with dose limitations of ,2 μg/kg/min. These recommendations stemmed also from the reality of the difficulty of obtaining CN levels in a timely manner, as well as the presumed poor correlation of metabolic markers (lactate levels and pH) as it related to the severity of CN toxicity. All these issues have driven practitioners to the use of alternative agents. In this paper, we critically review the cases and the data that led to the development of these restrictive dosing recommendations and reveal several limitations of the data and assumptions that led to these recommendations. We conclude that SNP is still a reasonable agent to use in the management of patients with hypertension today and can safely be used beyond doses of 2 μg/kg/min. Furthermore, in lieu of CN levels, monitoring of lactic acid levels is also a reasonable measure to ensure safety.
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
Open Access Journal of Clinical Trials
Open Access Journal of Clinical Trials MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Evaluation of a Newly Developed Transdiagnostic Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Group to Promote Healthy Aging Among Older People with HIV: Study Protocol for a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial Center with or Without a Coordinator? The Coordinator as an Integral Part of a Research Team A Multidomain Intervention Program for Older People with Dementia: A Pilot Study Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Insulin Fast Dissolving Films versus Control Group for Anosmic Patients for Improving Their Health and Social Qualities of Life Treatment of Oropharyngeal Symptoms: A Prospective, Single-Dose, Placebo-Controlled, Randomized Clinical Trial
×
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