多巴胺及去甲肾上腺素对脓毒性休克患者微循环的影响

中国临床药理学与治疗学 ›› 2013, Vol. 18 ›› Issue (5): 565-569.

多巴胺及去甲肾上腺素对脓毒性休克患者微循环的影响

颜默磊, 严静, 虞意华, 陈进, 蔡国龙

浙江医院重症医学科,杭州310013,浙江

收稿日期:2013-03-18 修回日期:2013-04-18 出版日期:2013-05-26 发布日期:2013-05-22
通讯作者: 严静,男,硕士,主任医师,博士生导师,研究方向:重症医学。
作者简介:颜默磊,女,硕士,主治医师,研究方向:重症医学。Tel: 13867440549 E-mail: moleiy1980@163.com
基金资助:
卫生行业科研专项项目(201202011);浙江省医药卫生科技计划项目(2010KYA026);浙江省重点科技创新团队(2011R50018)

Impact of dopamine and norepinephrine on sublingual microcirculation of the septic shock

YAN Mo-lei, YAN Jing, YU Yi-hua, CHEN Jin, CAI Guo-long

Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Zhejiang Hospital,Zhejiang Province,Hangzhou 310013,Zhejiang,China

Received:2013-03-18 Revised:2013-04-18 Online:2013-05-26 Published:2013-05-22

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的: 研究多巴胺及去甲肾上腺素对老年脓毒性休克患者微循环的影响。方法: 将34例脓毒性休克患者随机分为多巴胺组(DA组,n=17)及去甲肾上腺素组(NE组,n=17),在液体复苏的基础上,分别应用多巴胺和去甲肾上腺素使平均动脉压(MAP)稳定至65～75 mm Hg 并维持 1 h,然后继续加量多巴胺或去甲肾上腺素,使MAP稳定至75～85 mm Hg。应用旁流暗视野技术(Sidestream dark field,SDF)于入组时及MAP在不同水平时测定患者的舌下微血管(≤25 μm)的灌注血管密度(PVD)、灌注血管比例(PPV)及微血管流动指数(MFI)。测定血乳酸(Lac)、中心静脉血氧饱和度(ScvO₂),观察新发心律失常发生率及 28 d 死亡率。结果: 入组时,两组患者的一般资料及PVD、PPV、MFI差异无统计学意义。两组患者的 28 d 死亡率、新发心律失常差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两组MAP在65～75 mm Hg 较入组时,PVD增加有统计学差异(P<0.05),PPV、MFI、Lac、ScvO₂差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。与65～75 mm Hg 比较,MAP在75～85 mm Hg 时Lac、ScvO₂、PVD、PPV、MFI差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论: 多巴胺及去甲肾上腺素均可增加脓毒性休克患者的MAP,在一定程度上改善脓毒性休克微循环障碍,且与剂量增加无明显相关性。

关键词: 脓毒性休克, 多巴胺, 去甲肾上腺素, 微循环

Abstract: AIM: To investigate the impact of dopamine and norepinephrine on sublingual microcirculation of the septic shock.METHODS: Thirty-four patients with septic shock,were randomly divided into two groups. One group accepted dopamine (the dopamine group, DA)and the other accepted norepinephrine(the norepinephrine group, NE) to maintain mean blood pressure between 65 mm Hg to 75 mm Hg in one hour, and then the medicine dose of both groups was added to maintain mean blood pressure between 75 mm Hg to 85 mm Hg.Sublingual microcirculation was evaluated by sidestream dark field (SDF) imaging before and after the therapy. The 28-day mortality and the number of new arrhythmia was recorded.RESULTS: The 28 days mortality of the DA group and NE group was 47.06% and 52.94%, which had no significant difference (P>0.05). The new arrhythmia of the two groups had no significant difference(P>0.05). Compared with the base line, PVD after dopamine or norepinephrine therapy was higher both in DA group and NE group(P＜0.05),but the Lac,ScvO₂,PPV,MFI had no difference(P>0.05). The Lac,ScvO₂,PVD,PPV,MFI of the two different MAP levels had no significant difference in both groups(P>0.05).CONCLUSION: Both dopamine and norepinephrine can improve the MAP and the sublingual microcirculatory dysfunction in septic shock, and these impacts do not change with the dose of dopamine and norepinephrine or the level of MAP.

Key words: Septic shock, Dopamine, Norepinephrine, Microcirculation

中图分类号:

R541.6⁺

颜默磊, 严静, 虞意华, 陈进, 蔡国龙. 多巴胺及去甲肾上腺素对脓毒性休克患者微循环的影响[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2013, 18(5): 565-569.

YAN Mo-lei, YAN Jing, YU Yi-hua, CHEN Jin, CAI Guo-long. Impact of dopamine and norepinephrine on sublingual microcirculation of the septic shock[J]. Chinese Journal of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 2013, 18(5): 565-569.

参考文献

[1] Hodgin KE, Moss M. The epidemiology of sepsis[J]. Curr Pharm Des, 2008,14(19):1833-1839.
[2] Edul VK, Ferrara G, Dubin A. Microcirculatory dysfunction in sepsis [J]. Endocr Metab Immune Disord Drug Targets,2010,10(3):235-246.
[3] Nacul FE, Guia IL, Lessa MA, et al. The effects of vasoactive drugs on intestinal functional capillary density in endotoxemic rats: intravital video-microscopy analysis [J]. Anesth Analg, 2010,110(2):547-554.
[4] Thooft A, Favory R, Salgado DR, et al. Effects of changes in arterial pressure on organ perfusion during septic shock[J]. Crit Care, 2011,15(5):R222.
[5] Dubin A, Pozo MO, Casabella CA, et al. Increasing arterial blood pressure with norepinephrine does not improve microcirculatory bloodflow: a prospective study[J]. Crit Care, 2009,13(3):R92.
[6] Levy MM, Fink MP, Marshall JC, et al. 2001 SCCM/ ESICM/ ACCP/ ATS/ SIS international sepsis definitions conference[J]. Crit Care Med, 2003, 31(4):1250-1256.
[7] Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Carlet JM, et al. Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock : 2008[J].Crit Care Med,2008,36(1):296-327.
[8] Bezemer R, Bartels SA, Bakker J, et al. Clinical review: Clinical imaging of the sublingual microcirculation in the critically ill - where do we stand[J] ? Crit Care,2012,16(3):224.
[9] De Backer D, Biston P, Devriendt J,et al.Comparison of dopamine and norepinephrine in the treatment of shock[J].N Ensl J Med,2010,362(9):779-789.
[10] Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Rhodes A, et al. Surviving sepsis campaign: International guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2012[J]. Crit Care Med, 2013,41(2):580-637.
[11] Patel GP,Grahe JS,Sperry M,et al.Efficacy and safety of dopamine versus norepinephrine in the management of septic shock[J].Shock,2010,33(4):375-380.
[12] Vasu TS, Cavallazzi R, Hirani A, et al. Norepinephrine or dopamine for septic shock: systematic review of randomized clinical trials[J]. J Intensive Care Med, 2012,27(3):172-178.
[13] Vincent JL,Biston P,Devriendt J,et al.Dopamine versus norepinephrine:is one better[J] ? Minerva Anestesiol,2009,75(5):333-337.
[14] 吕安庆,陈忠华. 高渗氯化钠羟乙基淀粉40注射液对感染性休克患者血浆中细胞因子水平的影响[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学,2012,17(3):331-334.

[1]	王娟, 刘维英, 叶育才, 付文丽, 张莎, 李乐萍. 去甲肾上腺素再摄取抑制剂联合抗毒蕈碱剂治疗阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停的研究进展[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2023, 28(6): 714-720.
[2]	闫盼, 施剑飞, 李静, 王晟东, 王姝琪, 汪程鹏, 宋明芬. DRD2和5-HTR2A基因多态性及其交互作用对奥氮平治疗精神分裂症疗效的影响[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2020, 25(10): 1131-1138.
[3]	陈连洲，李松华，蒲犇. 阿立哌唑联合草酸艾司西酞普兰对重度抑郁患者多巴胺、5-羟色胺和皮质醇的影响研究[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2019, 24(4): 446-450.
[4]	陈少忠，林梅瑟，程黎民，朱乐乐. 红景天苷注射液对脂多糖诱导脓毒性休克肺损伤大鼠肺血管通透性的影响[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2019, 24(11): 1256-1262.
[5]	林海，王子敬，王世彪，郭晓峰，郭仁铭，翁斌. 不同剂量甲泼尼龙治疗脓毒性休克失代偿期患儿的临床疗效及对下丘脑-垂体-肾上腺轴的影响[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2019, 24(1): 77-82.
[6]	周荣，李玮，胡万华. 颐脑解郁方治疗肾虚肝郁型帕金森病抑郁的临床疗效评价及对血清DA、5-HT、NE的影响[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2018, 23(4): 434-439.
[7]	葛波波，屈洪党，陈育华，胡彩彩，李理，姜牧君，许娟娟. 脂多糖诱导的慢性帕金森病小鼠模型α-突触核蛋白的出现和转移变化[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2017, 22(3): 241-248.
[8]	蒙国懿，何繁漪，隋念含，赵林波，洪仕君，邢豫明，赵永娜. RGS4和D2受体信号通路相关分子在甲基苯丙胺依赖CPP大鼠纹状体的表达变化[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2017, 22(12): 1377-1381.
[9]	陈曹杰，徐驰. 艾司洛尔对脓毒性休克患者血流动力学及炎症反应的影响[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2017, 22(11): 1274-1277.
[10]	易声华，李玉红，郑晓铸，安满丽，丁倩男，茹国美，张林. 血管活性药物对脓毒症羊乳酸林格氏液体动力学的影响[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2017, 22(10): 1081-1089.
[11]	彭娟，黎翠林，刘剑秋，李智. 多巴胺D₁受体Ala229Thr多态性对受体信号转导功能的影响[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2017, 22(10): 1106-1111.
[12]	高贵珍，吴超，薛宏宇，王超. 硫酸化茯苓多糖对MPTP诱导的小鼠多巴胺能神经元损伤的保护作用[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2017, 22(1): 37-42.
[13]	顾钧, 徐泽民, 符丹, 周文华, 杨国栋. 东莨菪碱对吗啡诱导大鼠伏核多巴胺释放的调节作用[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2015, 20(10): 1087-1091.
[14]	龙晓莉, 张遥衡, 卢卫琴, 凌泽毅. 去甲肾上腺素对人肺癌细胞株H460增殖、迁移和侵袭能力的影响[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2014, 19(11): 1217-1221.
[15]	汪丽佳, 秦丽娟, 刘丹, 刘任, 周岐新. 大鼠抑郁行为的性别差异与单胺转运体及单胺氧化酶B关系的实验研究[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2013, 18(9): 993-998.