儿茶酚胺对创伤性脑损伤患者脑血管的影响。

D Pfister, S P Strebel, L A Steiner
{"title":"儿茶酚胺对创伤性脑损伤患者脑血管的影响。","authors":"D Pfister,&nbsp;S P Strebel,&nbsp;L A Steiner","doi":"10.1017/S0265021507003407","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Data on the cerebrovascular effects of catecholamines after head injury are difficult both to interpret and to compare. Diverse parameters with regard to brain trauma animal models, methods of determining the effects on the cerebral blood flow and metabolism and choice of end-points have been used. Many studies investigate the cerebrovascular effects of catecholamines over a range of cerebral perfusion pressures above the range recommended by current guidelines. The relationship between patient outcome and the use of a specific substance to improve cerebral perfusion has not been investigated. Dopamine, norepinephrine and phenylephrine all seem to increase cerebral blood flow in various animal models and in patients. The data suggest that norepinephrine may be the most predictable. It is associated with an improved restoration of global and regional oxygenation when compared to dopamine. Dopamine has been associated with an increase in brain oedema. There is further evidence that dopamine has many disadvantages in critically ill patients due to its ability to suppress circulating concentrations of most anterior pituitary-dependent hormones. Both aspects would further discourage its use. Data on phenylephrine are scarce. It has been associated with increased intracranial pressure and a failure to improve cerebral oxygenation despite markedly improved cerebral perfusion pressure. For all other catecholamines and related substances there are insufficient data on the cerebrovascular effects after head injury. This suggests that norepinephrine may be the catecholamine that is the most suitable substance to maintain or restore adequate cerebral perfusion. The data, however, are insufficient to formulate a guideline.</p>","PeriodicalId":11873,"journal":{"name":"European journal of anaesthesiology. Supplement","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0265021507003407","citationCount":"39","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effects of catecholamines on cerebral blood vessels in patients with traumatic brain injury.\",\"authors\":\"D Pfister,&nbsp;S P Strebel,&nbsp;L A Steiner\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0265021507003407\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Data on the cerebrovascular effects of catecholamines after head injury are difficult both to interpret and to compare. Diverse parameters with regard to brain trauma animal models, methods of determining the effects on the cerebral blood flow and metabolism and choice of end-points have been used. Many studies investigate the cerebrovascular effects of catecholamines over a range of cerebral perfusion pressures above the range recommended by current guidelines. The relationship between patient outcome and the use of a specific substance to improve cerebral perfusion has not been investigated. Dopamine, norepinephrine and phenylephrine all seem to increase cerebral blood flow in various animal models and in patients. The data suggest that norepinephrine may be the most predictable. It is associated with an improved restoration of global and regional oxygenation when compared to dopamine. Dopamine has been associated with an increase in brain oedema. There is further evidence that dopamine has many disadvantages in critically ill patients due to its ability to suppress circulating concentrations of most anterior pituitary-dependent hormones. Both aspects would further discourage its use. Data on phenylephrine are scarce. It has been associated with increased intracranial pressure and a failure to improve cerebral oxygenation despite markedly improved cerebral perfusion pressure. For all other catecholamines and related substances there are insufficient data on the cerebrovascular effects after head injury. This suggests that norepinephrine may be the catecholamine that is the most suitable substance to maintain or restore adequate cerebral perfusion. The data, however, are insufficient to formulate a guideline.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11873,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European journal of anaesthesiology. Supplement\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0265021507003407\",\"citationCount\":\"39\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European journal of anaesthesiology. Supplement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265021507003407\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of anaesthesiology. Supplement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265021507003407","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 39

摘要

脑损伤后儿茶酚胺对脑血管的影响数据很难解释和比较。关于脑外伤动物模型的不同参数,确定对脑血流量和代谢的影响以及终点选择的方法已被使用。许多研究调查了儿茶酚胺在超过当前指南推荐范围的脑灌注压范围内对脑血管的影响。患者预后与使用特定物质改善脑灌注之间的关系尚未研究。多巴胺、去甲肾上腺素和苯肾上腺素似乎都能增加各种动物模型和患者的脑血流量。数据表明去甲肾上腺素可能是最可预测的。与多巴胺相比,它与整体和局部氧合的改善恢复有关。多巴胺与脑水肿的增加有关。有进一步的证据表明,由于多巴胺能够抑制大多数垂体前叶依赖性激素的循环浓度,它在危重患者中有许多缺点。这两方面都将进一步阻碍它的使用。关于苯肾上腺素的数据很少。它与颅内压升高和脑氧合改善失败有关,尽管脑灌注压明显改善。对于所有其他儿茶酚胺和相关物质,关于头部损伤后脑血管影响的数据不足。这表明去甲肾上腺素可能是儿茶酚胺最适合维持或恢复足够的脑灌注。然而,这些数据不足以制定指导方针。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effects of catecholamines on cerebral blood vessels in patients with traumatic brain injury.

Data on the cerebrovascular effects of catecholamines after head injury are difficult both to interpret and to compare. Diverse parameters with regard to brain trauma animal models, methods of determining the effects on the cerebral blood flow and metabolism and choice of end-points have been used. Many studies investigate the cerebrovascular effects of catecholamines over a range of cerebral perfusion pressures above the range recommended by current guidelines. The relationship between patient outcome and the use of a specific substance to improve cerebral perfusion has not been investigated. Dopamine, norepinephrine and phenylephrine all seem to increase cerebral blood flow in various animal models and in patients. The data suggest that norepinephrine may be the most predictable. It is associated with an improved restoration of global and regional oxygenation when compared to dopamine. Dopamine has been associated with an increase in brain oedema. There is further evidence that dopamine has many disadvantages in critically ill patients due to its ability to suppress circulating concentrations of most anterior pituitary-dependent hormones. Both aspects would further discourage its use. Data on phenylephrine are scarce. It has been associated with increased intracranial pressure and a failure to improve cerebral oxygenation despite markedly improved cerebral perfusion pressure. For all other catecholamines and related substances there are insufficient data on the cerebrovascular effects after head injury. This suggests that norepinephrine may be the catecholamine that is the most suitable substance to maintain or restore adequate cerebral perfusion. The data, however, are insufficient to formulate a guideline.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信