咪达唑仑滴鼻治疗热性惊厥的疗效观察

CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS OF INTRANASAL MIDAZOLAM ADMINISTRATION FOR TREATING FEBRILE SEIZURES IN INFANT

目的探讨咪达唑仑滴鼻治疗婴幼儿热性惊厥的临床疗效和安全性。方法将2010年8月—2011年3月苍南县第二人民医院急诊治疗的60例婴幼儿热性惊厥随机分为咪达唑仑组(31例)和安定组(29例)。咪达唑仑组给予咪达唑仑(0.2mg/kg)滴鼻治疗,安定组予静脉注射安定(0.3 mg/kg)。观察疗效和不良反应。结果咪达唑仑组有效26例,有效率83.87%;安定组有效27例,有效率93.1%。2组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。咪达唑仑组惊厥控制时间为1～8min,平均(3.2±2.0)min;安定组惊厥控制时间为1～6min,平均(2.5±1.9)min,2组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。2组在惊厥控制总用时比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。咪达唑仑组未发现明显不良反应,安定组1例患儿在用药后出现呼吸抑制。结论咪达唑仑滴鼻治疗可有效控制婴幼儿热性惊厥,与静脉注射安定疗效相当,且更安全便捷。

Objective To study the effect and security of intranasal midazolam administration for treating febrile seizures in infant. Methods A total of 60 cases were randomly divided into two groups,midazolam group of 31cases and diazepam group of 29 cases. In midazoiam group,0.2mg/kg midazolam was applied in nasal drip. In diazepam group,0.3mg/kg diazepam was injected intravenously. Results It was effective in 26 cases in midazolam group and the efficacy rate was 83.87% ,while it was effective in 27 cases in diazepam and the efficacy rate was 93.1%. There was no significant difference between two group （ P 〉 0.05 ）. In midazolam and diazepam group, the controlling time for convulsion was 1 - 8 （ 3.2±2.0 ） min and 1 - 6 （ 2.5±1.9 ） min later respectively. There was no significant difference between the two groups （ P 〉 0. 05 ）. There was no side effect in midazolam group, one child had respiratory depression in diazepam group. Conclusion The curative effect of intranasal midazolam and intravenous diazepam was equivalent in febrile seizures control. Intranasal midazolam is more convenient and safer.