气管枝气管内膜结核

气管枝气管内膜结核是指气管枝气管的粘膜及粘膜下层有结核性病变而言,它为肺结核并发症之一,在发病、治疗及转归上二者间有密切关系。国内近年来由于枝气管镜检查术在临床上的开展使用,故有关文献报告已屡有所见,今就本院之213例肺结核患者的枝气管镜检查结果,作一初步分析,以供同道参考。     

气管切开后气管内肉芽致气管狭窄的护理

气管切开后气管内肉芽是临床上最常见的术后并发症之一,气管内肉芽致气管狭窄是影响拔管的一种重要原因。气管内肉芽形成的原因与长期置管导致粘膜水肿坏死、气管切开后护理吸痰的操作不规范,动作粗暴有关。我科收治6例气管切开术后气管内肉芽形成引起气管狭窄拔管困难的患者,纤维喉镜下采用掺钕钇铝石榴石激光汽化气管内肉芽,均拔管成功。     

气管蛔虫

例1 马×,住院号28667,男,3岁,1967年1月14日因支气管肺炎合并急性喉梗阻入我院小儿科。检查:体温39.4℃,呈混合性呼吸困难Ⅲ至Ⅳ度;剧烈呛咳,唇、甲、颜面均发绀,急行气管切开。切开气管环后,从切口内咯出一条蛔虫,长18厘米粗0.3厘米。气管内有多量粘稠分泌物,用吸引器吸出     

气管插管与气管黏膜损伤进展

临床工作中,许多疾病及手术围术期需气管插管人工维持呼吸。气囊压力及压迫时间不当可致气管黏膜缺血损伤、术后声嘶、咽喉痛等并发症[1],严重者发生气道狭窄,危及患者生命。多年来,人们试图解决这一难题,但迄今为上,还没有找到更好的解决办法。     

气管插管发现胃管置入气管1例

1病例介绍患者男 ,40岁 ,体重60kg ,身高168cm。因反复右上腹疼痛1年 ,诊断“胃溃疡 ,胃癌”拟行剖腹探查 ,胃癌根治术。患者术前饮食欠佳、营养中等、精神状态良好。术晨给患者安置胃管时感气紧、咳嗽。操作者在置管过程中有阻力感 ,未抽出胃液 ,注入0 9 %氯化钠20ml仍有阻力     

危重恶性气管狭窄的气管支架治疗

目的：探讨气管支架抢救治疗危重恶性气管狭窄患者的方法和应用价值。方法：对8例恶性肿瘤所致重度气管狭窄的危重患者，置入气管支架治疗。使用Gianturco Z形支架5个，网状支架2个，Ultraflex支架1个。结果：全部患者均1次置入成功，呼吸困难立刻得到缓解。随访，1例患者术后3个月，现生存仍在观察中。7例死亡，生存时间52－213天，平均112天。结论：气管支架能快速、有效地开通气道，是抢救治疗恶性肿瘤所致危重气管狭窄的有效方法。熟练，合理地操作是支架置入成功的安全保障。     

气管插管或气管切开患者的护理

气管切开适应证：适应于需长期使用机械通气或头部外伤,上呼吸道狭窄或阻塞,解剖死腔占潮气量比例较大而需使用机械通气者。缺点为：①创伤较大,可发生切口出血或感染;②操作复杂,不适用于紧急抢救;③对护理要求较高,且痊愈后颈部留有瘢痕,可能造成气管狭窄等。     

气管切开术致气管食管瘘1例

气管切开术致气管食管瘘１例武夷山市立医院李爱英，范建明一、临床资料患者，男，３８岁。口服乐果２００ｍｌ１小时伴不省人事于５月１日急诊入院。体检：Ｔ３６．５℃，Ｐ４６次／分，Ｒ１８次／分，ＢＰ１６．０／１３．８ｋＰａ。昏迷，消瘦，重病容。点头呼吸，口角...     

脑外伤气管切开术后气管导管的护理

通过对32例脑外伤行气管切开患者的护理,总结了对气管导管的护理方法,提出了护理要点。认为加强气管导管的护理,对减少术后并发症,提高脑外伤患者的生存率极为重要。现报告如下。     

气管内支架置入治疗气管软化症一例

1 病例报告 患者女,49岁.因咳嗽、咯痰、气短4个月于2003年2月11日入院.入院前1个月曾在当地医院行纤维支气管镜检示气管、双侧主支气管黏膜肥厚,气管软骨环消失,段以下支气管黏膜正常,活检病理示气管黏膜轻度慢性炎症.     

The pharmacokinetics of mecillinam and pivmecillinam in pregnant and non-pregnant women.

1. The pharmacokinetics of parenteral mecillinam (n = 27) and oral pivmecillinam (n = 12) were studied in pregnant (n = 27) and non-pregnant (n = 12) subjects. 2. In early pregnancy (9-14 weeks of gestation) the mean peak plasma drug concentration (Cmax = 19 +/- 9 micrograms ml-1) after an intravenous injection of 200 mg mecillinam was significantly lower (P less than 0.05) and the volume of distribution (V = 49 +/- 20.1) significantly larger (P less than 0.05) than in non-pregnant subjects (Cmax = 35 +/- 18 micrograms ml-1, V = 29 +/- 12.1). In late pregnancy (39-40 weeks of gestation) the plasma mean peak concentration (Cmax = (29 +/- 14 micrograms ml-1) after parenteral administration of 200 mg mecillinam was slightly lower and the volume of distribution (V = 65 +/- 29.1, V = 0.9 +/- 0.4 l kg-1) significantly larger than that in non-pregnant subjects (V = 0.4 +/- 0.3 l kg-1). Also after oral administration of 200 mg pivmecillinam, equimolar to 136.5 mg mecillinam, the mean peak plasma concentration in pregnant subjects (Cmax = 1.8 +/- 1.2 micrograms ml-1) was slightly lower than that in non-pregnant subjects (Cmax = 1.7 +/- 1.2 micrograms ml-1). 3. The mean half-life of elimination after parenteral administration of mecillinam was significantly longer during both early (t1/2,Z = 133 +/- 38 min, P less than 0.05) and late pregnancy (t1/2,Z = 107 +/- 41 min, P less than 0.05) as compared with the non-pregnant state (t1/2,Z = 75 +/- 21 min).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

The effect of combined therapy on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of verapamil and propranolol in patients with angina pectoris.

1. The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of oral verapamil and propranolol were studied in patients with stable angina pectoris during chronic mono- and dual therapy. 2. The peak plasma concentrations (Cmax) and areas under the plasma concentration-time curves (AUC) of verapamil were similar during combined treatment with propranolol (mean +/- s.d.: Cmax = 491 +/- 397 ng ml-1; AUC = 2075 +/- 1524 ng ml-1 h) or atenolol (mean +/- s.d.: Cmax = 372 +/- 320 ng ml-1; AUC = 1985 +/- 1660 ng ml-1 h). 3. No differences in Cmax and AUC were observed during verapamil monotherapy (mean +/- s.d.: Cmax = 287 +/- 105 ng ml-1; AUC = 1375 +/- 455 ng ml-1 h) vs combined treatment with propranolol (mean +/- s.d.: Cmax = 312 +/- 55 ng ml-1; AUC = 1566 +/- 486 ng ml-1 h). 4. Treatment with verapamil increased the Cmax (mean +/- s.d.: 227 +/- 117 vs 116 +/- 62 ng ml-1, P less than 0.05) and AUC (1389 +/- 617 vs 837 +/- 316 ng ml-1 h, P = 0.0625) of propranolol in all subjects. 5. Transient atrioventricular dissociation occurred in two patients 2 h after dosing with verapamil and propranolol or atenolol. 6. Close observation of patients is essential when beta-adrenoceptor antagonists and verapamil are used together.     

The effect of age on the pharmacokinetics of levodopa administered alone and in the presence of carbidopa.

1. The effect of age on the pharmacokinetics of levodopa administered alone and in the presence of carbidopa was investigated in young and elderly healthy volunteers. 2. The plasma clearance of levodopa following intravenous administration of 50 mg was 14.2 +/- 2.8 (s.d.) ml min-1 kg-1 in the elderly compared with 23.4 +/- 4.1 ml min-1 kg-1 in the young (P less than 0.01) which resulted in a 49% greater area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) in the older subjects (P less than 0.01). The volume of distribution (Vss) was lower in the elderly (1.01 +/- 0.29 l kg-1) than in the young (1.65 +/- 0.39 l kg-1) (P less than 0.002). 3. Following oral administration of 250 mg of levodopa the AUC was 2512 +/- 588 ng ml-1h in the elderly compared with 1056 +/- 282 ng ml-1h in the young (P less than 0.002). Cmax was also significantly greater in the elderly (P less than 0.05). The bioavailability of levodopa was significantly greater in the elderly (0.63 +/- 0.12 compared with 0.41 +/- 0.16, P less than 0.01). 4. In the presence of carbidopa, the plasma clearance of intravenous levodopa (50 mg) was reduced in both age groups but remained lower in the elderly (5.8 +/- 0.9 ml min-1 kg-1 compared with 9.3 +/- 1.0 ml min-1 kg-1; P less than 0.01). This resulted in a 54% greater AUC in the older subjects (P less than 0.01).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Fosinopril/hydrochlorothiazide: single dose and steady-state pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics

AIMS: Fosinoprilat, the active product of fosinopril, is eliminated by an hepatic pathway in addition to the renal pathway shared by other angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs). This study aimed to determine whether impaired renal function affects the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of a combination of fosinopril and hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ). METHODS: The study had a parallel-group design comparing patients with renal impairment and body-mass-index-matched normal controls. The study was done in a University clinic in 13 patients with renal impairment (mean creatinine clearance 55.7+/-15.6 ml min-1 1.73 m-2 ) and 13 age-, sex-, and body-mass-index-matched normal controls (mean creatinine clearance 102.4+/-8.9 ml min-1 1.73 m-2 ). All patients and normal controls received fosinopril sodium 20 mg and HCTZ 12.5 mg as a daily oral administration on days 1-5. Non-compartmental pharmacokinetic parameters of fosinoprilat and HCTZ were determined from blood and urine samples obtained over 48 h starting on Day 1 (single dose) and Day 5 (steady state): maximum serum concentration (Cmax ), time to maximum serum concentration (tmax ), area under the serum concentration-time curve during the dosing interval (AUC), cumulative urinary excretion (CUE) and the accumulation index (AI; ratio of AUC-day 5/AUC-day 1). Pharmacodynamic parameters were also measured over 24 h on day 1 and over 48 h on day 5: serum ACE activity and arterial blood pressure. RESULTS: Fosinoprilat pharmacokinetic parameters on day 1 in renally impaired vs normal patients: Cmax=387+/-0.19 vs 324+/-0.25 ng ml-1 (P=0.07); tmax=3.5 vs 3.0 h (P=0.58); AUC=3510+/-0.29 vs 2701+/-0.35 ng ml-1 h (P=0. 072); CUE=5.08+/-2.70 vs 7.40+/-2.56% (P=0.009). Fosinoprilat parameters on day 5: Cmax=517+/-0.40 vs 357+/-0.19 ng ml-1 (P=0. 007); tmax=3.0 vs 3.0 h (P >0.99); AUC=4098+/-0.43 vs 2872+/-0.30 ng ml-1 h (P=0.027); CUE=6.81+/-3.53 vs 8.10+/-2.80% (P=0.068). AI=1. 17+/-0.33 vs 1.06+/-0.23 (P=0.29). In both groups ACE inhibition and blood pressure response were similar over 24 h and slightly greater 48 h after last dosing. CONCLUSIONS: In renally impaired subjects fosinopril and HCTZ can be coadministered without undue increases in fosinoprilat concentrations or any clinically significant pharmacodynamic effects. This is probably due to the dual excretory pathways for fosinoprilat.     

Grapefruit juice-felodipine interaction: reproducibility and characterization with the extended release drug formulation.

1. Felodipine 10 mg extended release was administered with 250 ml regular-strength grapefruit juice or water in a randomized crossover manner followed by a second grapefruit juice treatment in 12 healthy men. The pharmacokinetics of felodipine and primary oxidative metabolite, dehydrofelodipine, were evaluated. 2. Initial grapefruit juice treatment increased felodipine AUC (mean +/- s.d.; 56.6 +/- 21.9 vs 28.1 +/- 11.5 ng ml-1 h; P < 0.001) and Cmax (8.1 +/- 2.5 vs 3.3 +/- 1.2 ng ml-1; P < 0.001) compared with water. Felodipine tmax (median; 2.8 vs 3.0 h) and t1/2 (7.3 +/- 3.7 vs 6.9 +/- 3.6 h) were not altered. 3. Readministration of felodipine with grapefruit juice produced mean felodipine AUC (61.5 +/- 32.2 ng ml-1 h) and Cmax (8.4 +/- 4.8 ng ml-1) which were similar to the initial grapefruit juice treatment 1-3 weeks previously. Felodipine AUC (r = 0.73, P < 0.01) and Cmax (r = 0.69, P < 0.02) correlated between grapefruit juice treatments among individuals. 4. The % increase in felodipine AUC with the initial grapefruit juice treatment compared with water correlated with the % increase in felodipine Cmax among individuals (r = 0.80, P < 0.01). Dehydrofelodipine AUC (74.7 +/- 28.7 vs 48.5 +/- 16.3 ng ml-1 h; P < 0.01) and Cmax (12.1 +/- 2.9 vs 7.9 +/- 2.6 ng ml-1; P < 0.01) were augmented with grapefruit juice compared with water.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Use of pseudoracemic nitrendipine to elucidate the metabolic steps responsible for stereoselective disposition of nitrendipine enantiomers.

1. The pharmacokinetics, protein binding, bioavailability and metabolism of (+)-R- and (-)-S-nitrendipine were studied in six healthy subjects following random oral administration of 20 mg (+)-R-, 20 mg (-)-S- and 20 mg R,S-nitrendipine (pseudoracemic mixture of 10 mg [13C4)-(+)-R- and 10 mg (-)-S-enantiomer). 2. After administration of the enantiomers pronounced differences in AUC (R: 29.9 +/- 20.1; S: 123.8 +/- 63.7 ng ml-1 h; P less than 0.05), bioavailability (R: 10.7 +/- 7.4%; S: 44.6 +/- 23.1%; P less than 0.05) and Cmax (R: 14.4 +/- 7.7; S: 72.5 +/- 40.5 ng ml-1; P less than 0.05) were observed between R- and S-nitrendipine. When racemic nitrendipine was given bioavailability and dose normalized AUC and Cmax values of the S-enantiomer were not different from the values after S-nitrendipine-administration. In contrast, bioavailability (R: 10.7% R,S: 22.1%) and dose normalized AUC (R: 15.0; R,S: 29.5 ng ml-1 h and Cmax (R: 7.2; R,S: 16.8 ng ml-1) of R-nitrendipine were doubled following R,S- as compared with R-nitrendipine administration. t1/2 (R: 9.8; S: 9.1 h) and tmax were not different between the enantiomers nor were the values different after administration of the enantiomers or racemate. The fraction unbound in serum of R-nitrendipine was 0.0098 +/- 0.0032 (s.d.) and that of S-nitrendipine was 0.0083 +/- 0.0015 (s.d.). 3. The AUC values of the major pyridine metabolite M1 were similar after administration of R- and S-nitrendipine (S: 114.7 +/- 48.5; R: 71.7 +/- 29.9 ng ml-1 h).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Pharmacokinetics and bioavailability of three dyphylline preparations

The pharmacokinetics and bioavailability of 3 oral dyphylline preparations, solution (S), regular (R) and sustained release (SR), were studied in 8 healthy subjects (mean age 25 years). A single dose of each preparation, 20 mg X kg-1, was given at one week intervals and multiple serum samples obtained over 24 h. Drug levels were measured by high performance liquid chromatography. No adverse effects were found. The dyphylline half-life for the solution was 2.16 +/- 0.18 h and for the tablet 2.59 +/- 0.56 h. The mean clearance rate for S was 13.6 +/- 1.7 h-1 and volume of distribution 43.0 +/- 3.91. Peak concentration (Cmax, micrograms X ml-1), time of peak (Tmax, h), area under the curve (AUC, micrograms X ml-1 X h) and relative bioavailability (RB, %), were determined for three preparations: Cmax S, 33.7 +/- 3.7; R, 27.7 +/- 4.2; SR, 10.4 +/- 1.5 Tmax: S, 0.33 +/- 0.0; R, 0.66 +/- 0.0; SR, 2.13 +/- 1.1 AUC: S, 108.4 +/- 12.1; R, 113.9 +/- 25.2; SR, 104.0 +/- 30.8 RB: Reference Product R, 105.00 +/- 16.00; SR, 100.00 +/- 25.00 The data confirm the short half-life of dyphylline, demonstrate a lack of toxicity for the 20 mg X kg-1 dose and establish bioequivalence for the products studied.     

Absorption of clonazepam after intranasal and buccal administration.

Serum concentrations of clonazepam after intranasal, buccal and intravenous administration were compared in a cross-over study in seven healthy male volunteers. Each subject received a 1.0 mg dose of clonazepam intranasally and buccally and 0.5 mg intravenously. A Cmax of 6.3 +/- 1.0 ng ml-1 (mean; +/- s.d.) was measured 17.5 min (median) (range 15-20 min) after intranasal administration. A second peak (4.6 +/- 1.3 ng ml-1) caused by oral absorption was seen after 1.7 h (range 0.7-3.0 h). After buccal administration a Cmax of 6.0 +/- 3.0 ng ml-1 was measured after 50 min (range 30-90 min) with a second peak of 6.5 +/- 2.5 ng ml-1 after 3.0 h (range 2.0-4.0 h). Two minutes after i.v. injection of 0.5 mg clonazepam the serum concentration was 27 +/- 18 ng ml-1. It is concluded that intranasal clonazepam is an alternative to buccal administration. However, the Cmax of clonazepam after intranasal administration is not high enough to recommend the intranasal route as an alternative to intravenous injection.