王 璐,姚 蘭,鄒捍東,陳 偉,周青山
(武漢大學(xué)人民醫(yī)院,湖北 武漢 430060)
右美托咪定用于ICU酒精戒斷綜合征患者的研究
王 璐,姚 蘭,鄒捍東,陳 偉,周青山
(武漢大學(xué)人民醫(yī)院,湖北 武漢 430060)

目的觀察右美托咪定治療ICU酒精戒斷綜合征患者的臨床療效及安全性。方法采用隨機(jī)數(shù)字表法將出現(xiàn)震顫(抽搐)、焦慮、激惹等表現(xiàn)的96例ICU酒精戒斷綜合征患者分為3組,A組給予右美托咪定靜脈泵注,負(fù)荷量為0.5~1.0μg/kg,10min后減量至維持量0.2~0.6μg/(kg·h);B組給予異丙酚靜脈泵注,負(fù)荷量為0.5~2.0mg/kg,10min后減量至維持量1~3mg/(kg·h);C組給予地西泮肌肉注射鎮(zhèn)靜。觀察3組鎮(zhèn)靜效果;記錄用藥前后患者的平均動(dòng)脈壓、心率、呼吸頻率、脈搏血氧飽和度、動(dòng)脈血氧分壓、CIWA-Ar評(píng)分、APACHEⅡ評(píng)分,統(tǒng)計(jì)患者住ICU時(shí)間、不良反應(yīng)發(fā)生情況及病死率。結(jié)果A、B組鎮(zhèn)靜達(dá)標(biāo)率明顯高于C組(P均<0.05),A組與B組比較差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05)。B組鎮(zhèn)靜起效時(shí)間最短,地西泮用量最少,3組間比較差異均有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P均<0.05)。A組用藥后1h的平均動(dòng)脈壓、心率明顯低于B、C組(P均<0.05),3組用藥前后呼吸頻率、脈搏血氧飽和度、動(dòng)脈血氧分壓均無明顯變化(P均>0.05)。3組用藥后24hCIWA-Ar評(píng)分及APACHEⅡ評(píng)分均較用藥前明顯下降(P均<0.05),A組評(píng)分明顯低于B、C組(P均<0.05)。A組住ICU時(shí)間明顯短于C組(P<0.05)。結(jié)論右美托咪定可顯著緩解酒精戒斷綜合征患者的躁動(dòng)、譫妄等癥狀,改善預(yù)后,且不良反應(yīng)少,可作為酒精戒斷綜合征患者鎮(zhèn)靜的臨床推薦藥物。
酒精戒斷綜合征;右美托咪定;異丙酚;地西泮
近年來我國(guó)酒精濫用與依賴者日益增多,此類人群常會(huì)因外傷、重癥感染、胰腺炎等就診,其中20%~33%的患者需進(jìn)入ICU治療[1],而在此期間極可能出現(xiàn)酒精戒斷綜合征(alcohol withdrawal syndrome, AWS),表現(xiàn)為神經(jīng)系統(tǒng)癥狀(癲癇發(fā)作及自主神經(jīng)功能紊亂)、精神癥狀(震顫、譫妄、幻覺)、心血管系統(tǒng)癥狀、發(fā)熱等,因此酒精戒斷綜合征成為臨床醫(yī)生需要重視的問題。目前臨床上常應(yīng)用苯二氮類、巴比妥類、異丙酚等藥物治療,但因肝功能損傷、呼吸抑制等不良反應(yīng),臨床使用受限。新型α2腎上腺素受體激動(dòng)劑右美托咪定具有鎮(zhèn)靜、鎮(zhèn)痛、抑制交感活動(dòng)的效應(yīng),且呼吸抑制作用很弱,近年來用于ICU酒精戒斷綜合征患者的治療。2009年1月—2014年6月,本院應(yīng)用右美托咪定治療酒精戒斷綜合征患者32例,療效較好,現(xiàn)報(bào)道如下。
1.1一般資料 選取上述時(shí)期本院收住ICU的酒精戒斷綜合征患者96例,均有長(zhǎng)期飲酒史并酒精依賴,有住院后突發(fā)的震顫、譫妄癥狀,均符合DSM-Ⅳ中使用酒精所致的精神和行為障礙中伴有譫妄的戒斷狀態(tài)診斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)[2-4],酒精戒斷狀態(tài)評(píng)分(CIWA-Ar)≥7分[3]。排除住院期間已使用鎮(zhèn)靜藥物者,代謝或外傷引起昏迷者,急性心肌梗死者,Ⅱ度或Ⅲ度房室傳導(dǎo)阻滯者,嚴(yán)重肝功能衰竭、妊娠、慢性疾病終末期者。本研究符合醫(yī)學(xué)倫理學(xué)要求,經(jīng)醫(yī)院倫理委員會(huì)批準(zhǔn),所有鎮(zhèn)靜鎮(zhèn)痛給藥方案及治療獲得患者家屬的知情同意。采用隨機(jī)數(shù)字表法將患者隨機(jī)分為3組:A組32例,男28例,女4例;年齡18~84(57.31±16.45)歲;體質(zhì)量(64.34±7.24)kg;飲酒年限5~50(33.1±14.02)年;日飲酒量(折合30~40度普通白酒)200~700(409.06±131.11)mL;多發(fā)傷12例,膿毒癥7例,重癥急性胰腺炎3例,開腹手術(shù)后4例,肺炎3例,肝硬化消化道出血2例,開胸術(shù)后1例;面罩及鼻導(dǎo)管給氧22例,呼吸機(jī)支持10例;CIWA-Ar評(píng)分(37.69±11.89)分,APACHEⅡ評(píng)分(16.88±6.18)分。B組32例,男28例,女4例;年齡18~85(55.94±18.83)歲;體質(zhì)量(64.44±8.02)kg;飲酒年限5~50(27.0±17.12)年;日飲酒量200~680(441.56±144.58)mL;多發(fā)傷12例,膿毒癥8例,重癥急性胰腺炎5例,開腹手術(shù)后3例,肺炎2例,肝硬化消化道出血1例,開胸術(shù)后1例;面罩及鼻導(dǎo)管給氧24例,呼吸機(jī)支持8例;CIWA-Ar評(píng)分(35.75±11.85)分,APACHEⅡ評(píng)分(16.22±5.66)分。C組32例,男27例,女5例;年齡18~85(59.63±16.73)歲;體質(zhì)量(65.75±8.60)kg;飲酒年限5~50(34.43±16.58)年;日飲酒量210~650(382.81±115.37)mL;多發(fā)傷11例,膿毒癥7例,重癥急性胰腺炎4例,開腹手術(shù)后4例,肺炎3例,肝硬化消化道出血2例,開胸術(shù)后1例;面罩及鼻導(dǎo)管給氧23例,呼吸機(jī)支持9例;CIWA-Ar評(píng)分(34.78±12.46)分,APACHEⅡ評(píng)分(18.22±7.36)分。3組年齡、體質(zhì)量、飲酒年限、日飲酒量、氣管插管數(shù)、CIWA-Ar評(píng)分及APACHEⅡ評(píng)分比較差異均無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P均>0.05),具有可比性。
1.2治療方法 A組給予右美托咪定注射劑(江蘇恒瑞醫(yī)藥股份有限公司產(chǎn)品,國(guó)藥準(zhǔn)字H20090248,規(guī)格:200 μg/支)靜脈泵注,負(fù)荷量為0.5~1.0 μg/kg,10 min后減量至維持量0.2~0.6 μg/(kg·h);B組給予異丙酚注射劑(Corden Pharma S.P.A產(chǎn)品,規(guī)格:1 g/瓶)靜脈泵注,負(fù)荷量為0.5~2.0 mg/kg,10 min后減量至維持量1~3 mg/(kg·h);C組發(fā)作時(shí)給予地西泮5~10 mg肌肉注射鎮(zhèn)靜。A組和B組中療效不佳者則給予地西泮1~5 mg靜脈注射。
1.3鎮(zhèn)靜療效評(píng)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn) 采用Ramsay評(píng)分評(píng)價(jià)鎮(zhèn)靜程度:1分,不安靜、煩躁;2分,安靜、合作;3分,嗜睡,能聽從指令;4分,睡眠狀態(tài),可喚醒;5分,呼喚反應(yīng)遲鈍;6分,深睡狀態(tài),呼喚不醒。Ramsay評(píng)分3~4分為達(dá)標(biāo)。
1.4監(jiān)測(cè)指標(biāo) 觀察鎮(zhèn)靜療效;記錄用藥前及用藥后1 h、2 h、6 h、12 h、24 h平均動(dòng)脈壓(MAP)、心率(HR),用藥前及用藥后6 h、12 h、24 h呼吸頻率(R)、脈搏血氧飽和度[Sp(O2)]、動(dòng)脈血氧分壓[p(O2)],用藥前及用藥后24 h CIWA-Ar評(píng)分、APACHEⅡ評(píng)分;統(tǒng)計(jì)患者住ICU時(shí)間、病死率及不良反應(yīng)發(fā)生情況。

2.13組鎮(zhèn)靜療效 A組鎮(zhèn)靜達(dá)標(biāo)者28例(88%),其中8例需要加用地西泮;B組鎮(zhèn)靜達(dá)標(biāo)者30例(94%),其中5例需要加用地西泮;C組鎮(zhèn)靜達(dá)標(biāo)者17例(53%)。A組與B組比較差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05),但與C組比較差異均有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P均<0.05)。
2.23組鎮(zhèn)靜起效時(shí)間及地西泮用量 A組鎮(zhèn)靜起效時(shí)間為15~20(17.0±1.61)min,B組為6~10(8.1±6.06)min,C組為8~12(10.1±5.32)min。B組鎮(zhèn)靜起效時(shí)間最短,各組間比較差異均有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P均<0.05);A組24 h地西泮用量為(8.1±6.06)mg,B組為(3.9±3.75)mg,C組為(15.2±4.83)mg, B組地西泮用量最少,3組間比較差異均有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P均<0.05)。
2.33組用藥前后MAP、HR、R、Sp(O2)、p(O2)比較 用藥后A組MAP及HR有所降低,其中MAP于用藥后1h即明顯低于B、C組(P均<0.05)。B、C組MAP及HR改變不明顯,未發(fā)生明顯的呼吸抑制。3組R、Sp(O2)、p(O2)均無明顯變化(P均>0.05)。見表1及表2。
2.43組用藥前后CIWA-Ar評(píng)分、APACHEⅡ評(píng)分比較 3組用藥后CIWA-Ar評(píng)分、APACHEⅡ評(píng)分均較用藥前明顯降低(P均<0.05),且A組評(píng)分明顯低于B組和C組(P均<0.05)。見表3。
2.53組臨床結(jié)局指標(biāo)比較 A組住ICU時(shí)間明顯短于C組(P<0.05),3組病死率比較差異均無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P均>0.05)。見表4。

表1 3組用藥前后MAP、HR比較
注:①與B組比較,P<0.05;②與C組比較,P<0.05;1 mmHg=0.133 kPa。

表2 3組用藥前后R、Sp(O2)、p(O2)比較

表3 3組用藥前后CIWA-Ar評(píng)分、APACHEⅡ評(píng)分比較
注:①與用藥前比較,P<0.05;②與A組比較,P<0.05。

表4 3組臨床結(jié)局指標(biāo)比較
注:①與C組比較,P<0.05。
2.63組不良反應(yīng)發(fā)生情況 C組呼吸抑制發(fā)生率明顯高于A組(P<0.05)。見表5。

表5 3組不良反應(yīng)發(fā)生情況比較 例(%)
注:①與A組比較,P<0.05。
酒精戒斷綜合征患者因長(zhǎng)期酗酒,α2腎上腺素受體敏感性降低,在突然撤酒后神經(jīng)興奮性降低,腎上腺素水平升高,會(huì)出現(xiàn)震顫、譫妄等表現(xiàn)。其發(fā)病機(jī)制與腦內(nèi)γ-氨基丁酸(GABA)和N-甲基-D-天冬氨酸(NMDA)受體有關(guān)[4],酒精刺激突然解除造成腦內(nèi)GABA抑制效應(yīng)明顯下降,同時(shí)腎上腺素神經(jīng)傳導(dǎo)系統(tǒng)或交感神經(jīng)系統(tǒng)被突然激活,α2-腎上腺素受體增敏可能也在酒精戒斷綜合征的發(fā)生中起作用[5]。其治療主要是應(yīng)用苯二氮類藥物改善患者癲癇癥狀,結(jié)合營(yíng)養(yǎng)支持、維持電解質(zhì)平衡、糾正酸堿平衡紊亂等,但常由于對(duì)本病系統(tǒng)認(rèn)識(shí)及系統(tǒng)治療有限,易誤診為肝性腦病、低血糖、癲癇、胃腸炎等,導(dǎo)致患者癥狀無法有效緩解。
右美托咪定為α2腎上腺素受體激動(dòng)劑,可通過減少異常神經(jīng)放電、調(diào)節(jié)腎上腺素水平達(dá)到鎮(zhèn)靜效果。研究表明,右美托咪定可以有效緩解酒精戒斷綜合征大鼠強(qiáng)直、震顫、易激惹等癥狀[7];可以緩解酒精戒斷綜合征患者癲癇樣癥狀,減少苯二氮類藥物用量,改善患者血流動(dòng)力學(xué)指標(biāo),如改善心率增快、血壓上升等癥狀[8]。且右美托咪定通過激動(dòng)α2腎上腺素受體,作用于相應(yīng)神經(jīng)元,減少兒茶酚胺的過量釋放,從而起到神經(jīng)保護(hù)作用,減少藍(lán)斑區(qū)神經(jīng)元損失,有效緩解酒精戒斷綜合征癥狀[9-10]。其還可以抑制交感神經(jīng)興奮性,增強(qiáng)迷走神經(jīng)興奮性,使血壓下降,心率減慢,心肌氧耗降低,減少心肌缺血再灌注損傷[11]。另外右美托咪定對(duì)GABA受體及鴉片受體無作用,不會(huì)發(fā)生苯二氮類、異丙酚常見的呼吸抑制不良反應(yīng)。
本研究結(jié)果顯示,右美托咪定可以有效緩解酒精戒斷綜合征神經(jīng)興奮癥狀,減少苯二氮類藥物用量,降低CIWA-Ar評(píng)分和APACHEⅡ評(píng)分,縮短患者住ICU時(shí)間,且對(duì)循環(huán)、呼吸無明顯影響,值得推廣應(yīng)用。
[1] De Wit M,Jones DG,Sessler CN,et al. Alcohol-use disorders in the critically ill patient[J]. Chest,2010,138(4):994-1003
[2] 范肖東,汪向東,于欣,等. ICD-10精神與行為障礙分類:臨床描述與診斷要點(diǎn)[M]. 北京:人民衛(wèi)生出版社,1993:66
[3] 禚傳君,黃悅勤,李繼濤,等. 臨床酒精戒斷狀態(tài)評(píng)定量表中文版的信效度[J]. 中國(guó)心理衛(wèi)生雜志,2010,24(5):347-374
[4] 王維治. 神經(jīng)病學(xué)[M]. 北京:人民衛(wèi)生出版社,2013:1936
[5] Borg S,Kvande H,Sedvall G. Central norepinephrine metabolism d-uring alcohol intoxication in addicts and health volunteers[J]. Science,1981,213(4512):1135-1137
[6] Lucyk S,Hoffman RS,Nelson LS. Dexmedetomidine in addition to benzodiazepine-based sedation in patients with alcohol withdrawal delirium[J]. Eur J Emerg Med,2014,21(5):389-390
[7] Riihioja P,Jaatinen P,Oksanen H,et al. Dexmedetomidine alleviates ethanol withdrawal symptoms in the rat[J]. Alcohol,1997,14(6):537-544
[8] Wong A,Smithburger PL,Kane-Gill SL. Review of adjunctive d-exmedetomidine in the management of severe acute alcohol withdrawal syndrome[J]. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse,2015,41(5):382-391
[9] Muzyk AJ,Revollo JY,Rivelli SK. The use of dexmedetomidine in alcohol withdrawal[J]. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci,2012,24(3):10045-10046
[10] Riihioja P,Jaatinen P,Haapalinna A,et al. Effects of dexmedetomidine on rat locus coeruleus and ethanol withdrawal symptoms during intermittentethanol exposure[J]. Alcohol Clin Exp Res,1999,23(3):432-438
[11] Guler L,Bozkirli F,Bedirli N,et al. Comparison of the Effects of Dexmedetomidine vs. Ketamine in Cardiac Ischemia/Reperfusion Injury in Rats-Preliminary Study[J]. Adv Clin Exp Med,2014,23(5):683-689
Clinical study of dexmedetomidine in alcohol withdrawal syndrome patients in ICU
WANG Lu,YAO Lan,ZOU Handong,CHEN Wei,ZHOU Qingshan
(Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan 430060, Hubei, China)
Objective It is to observe the clinical effect and adverse reaction of dexmedetomidine (DEX) in alcohol withdrawal syndrome patients (AWS) in ICU. Methods 96 AWS patients with nystagmus, anxiety, irritability symptoms were randomly divided into group A(n=32), group B(n=32) and group C(n=32) by random number table method. Group A were injected intravenously of dexmedetomidine load 0.5-1.0 μg/kg within 10 minutes and maintained at 0.2-0.6 μg/kg/h, Group B were injected intravenously of propofol load 0.5-2.0 mg/kg within 10 minutes and maintained 1-3 mg/kg/h, Group C were injected intramuscular of diazepam temporarily. The sedative effect, mean arterial pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, pulse oxygen saturation, arterial oxygen partial pressure, CIWA-Ar score, APACHEⅡ score before treatment and after treatment were compared in the three groups. The ICU hospitalized time and mortality were analyzed in the three groups. The incidence of adverse effects include bradycardia, hypotension and respiratory depression were observed. Results The sedation good control rates in group A and group B was higher than that in group C (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference between group A and group B (P>0.05). The onset time of sedation was the shortest and dosage of diazepam was the least in group B, the differences were significantly different among the three groups (Pall<0.05). Group A's MAP and heart rate at 1 hour after medication was lower than that of Group B and C(P<0.05). The changes of respiratory rate, pulse oxygen saturation and arterial oxygen partial pressure in three groups were not significant(P>0.05). CIWA-Ar score and APACHE Ⅱ score of three groups were decreased compared with than before treatment(P<0.05), the scores of Group A were significantly decreased especially. Group A's ICU hospitalization time was shorter than that of Group C(P<0.05). Conclusion Dexmedetomidine can effectively relieve AWS symptoms such as agitation or delirium with less adverse effects. It can be recommended in sedation treatment in AWS patients.
alcohol withdrawal syndrome;dexmedetomidine; propofol; diazepam
王璐,女,碩士,研究方向?yàn)橹匕Y患者的鎮(zhèn)靜鎮(zhèn)痛治療。
10.3969/j.issn.1008-8849.2015.34.006
R0971.2
A
1008-8849(2015)34-3782-04
2015-01-14