| 林 勇,孙晓玄,许 楠,赵 亮,骆京津.奥美拉唑不同给药方式治疗新生儿应激性溃疡的效果分析[J].现代生物医学进展英文版,2019,19(23):4483-4486. |
| 奥美拉唑不同给药方式治疗新生儿应激性溃疡的效果分析 |
| Analysis of the Effect of Omeprazole on the Stress Ulcer in Neonates |
| Received:June 06, 2019 Revised:June 29, 2019 |
| DOI：10.13241/j.cnki.pmb.2019.23.019 |
| 中文关键词: 奥美拉唑 不同给药方式 新生儿 应激性溃疡 效果 |
| 英文关键词: Omeprazole Different delivery methods Neonates Stress ulcer Effect |
| 基金项目:江苏大学科学技术项目(JLY20160167) |
| Author Name | Affiliation | E-mail | | LIN Yong | Department of pediatric, Zhongda hospital southeast university (Jiangbei), Nanjing, Jiangsu, 210044, China | linyong_197209@163.com | | SUN Xiao-xuan | Department of pediatric, Zhongda hospital southeast university (Jiangbei), Nanjing, Jiangsu, 210044, China | | | XU Nan | Department of pediatric, Zhongda hospital southeast university (Jiangbei), Nanjing, Jiangsu, 210044, China | | | ZHAO Liang | Department of pediatric, Zhongda hospital southeast university (Jiangbei), Nanjing, Jiangsu, 210044, China | | | LUO Jing-jin | Department of pediatric, Zhongda hospital southeast university (Jiangbei), Nanjing, Jiangsu, 210044, China | |
|
| Hits: 1030 |
| Download times: 582 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 摘要 目的：探讨奥美拉唑不同给药方式治疗新生儿应激性溃疡的临床效果及安全性。方法：选取2014年1月~2018年6月我院收治的应激性溃疡新生儿61例，根据随机数字表法分为两组，对照组患儿给予奥美拉唑0.6 mg/kg胃管注入治疗，观察组患儿给予奥美拉唑2 mg/kg持续24 h微泵静脉滴注。比较两组患儿的临床治疗效果、临床症状缓解时间、止血时间、胃肠喂养开始时间、pH值和不良反应的发生情况。结果：治疗后，两组患儿的临床总有效率比较无统计学差异(P＞0.05)；观察组患儿临床症状消失时间和止血时间均显著短于对照组(P＜0.05)，喂养开始时间≤24 h的患儿比例高于对照组，喂养开始时间≥72 h的患儿比例显著低于对照组(P＜0.05)，pH值显著高于对照组(P＜0.05)。两组患儿治疗期间均未发生恶心、呕吐、便秘、皮疹等不良反应，且肝肾功能未受明显影响。结论：2 mg/kg奥美拉唑持续24 h微泵静脉滴注与0.6 mg/kg胃管注入治疗的临床总有效率相当，但微泵静脉滴注可显著提高患儿的pH值，缩短临床症状恢复时间、止血时间和胃肠喂养开始时间，且安全性高。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| ABSTRACT Objective: To investigate the clinical effect and safety of omeprazole on stress ulcer in neonates. Methods: 61 cases of neonates with stress ulcer admitted to our hospital from January 2014 to June 2018 were selected and divided into two groups according to the random number table method. Neonates in the control group were given omeprazole 0.6 mg/kg gastric tube injection therapy, while neonates in the observation group were given omeprazole 2 mg/kg continuous micropump intravenous infusion for 24 h. The clinical treatment effect, clinical symptom remission time, hemostasis time, gastrointestinal feeding start time, pH value and adverse reactions were compared between the two groups. Results: After treatment, there was no statistically significant difference in the total clinical effective rate between the two groups (P>0.05). The clinical symptom remission time and hemostasis time in the observation group were significantly shorter than those in the control group (P<0.05). In the observation group, the proportion of children with feeding time ≤24 h was significantly higher than that of the control group, the proportion of children with feeding time ≥72 h was significantly lower than that of the control group (P<0.05), and the pH value was significantly higher than that of the control group (P<0.05). There were no adverse reactions such as nausea, vomiting, constipation and rash in the two groups of neonates during the treatment, and the liver and kidney function had not been significantly affected. Conclusion: The total effective rate of 2 mg/kg omeprazole for 24 h micropump intravenous infusion and 0.6 mg/kg gastric tube injection was similar, but micropump intravenous infusion significantly increased the pH value and shortened clinical symptom remission time, hemostasis time and gastrointestinal feeding start time, and its safety is higher. |
|
View Full Text
View/Add Comment Download reader |
| Close |
|
|
|
