布地奈德雾化吸入治疗吸入性肺炎的效果

Effect of Budesonide atomization inhalation in the treatment of inhalation pneumonia

目的观察布地奈德混悬液雾化吸人治疗吸人性肺炎的效果。方法选择2012年1月～2013年6月杭州市萧山区第一人民医院收治的吸人性肺炎患者42例。按治疗方法不同分为治疗组23例及对照组19例。对照组给予常规氧疗、抗感染、营养支持治疗，治疗组在对照组基础上加用布地奈德混悬液雾化吸入。观察两组治疗效果及治疗前及治疗后3d、1周的动脉二氧化碳分压（PaCO2）、动脉氧分压（PaO2）、pH值、空腹血糖变化情况。结果①治疗组总有效共20例，无效或进展者3例，总有效率为86．96％；对照组总有效共15例，无效或进展者4例，总有效率为78．95％。两组总有效率比较，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。②治疗组与对照组治疗前PaCO2比较[（7．10±1．64）mmHg比（6．97±1．92）mmHg]（1mmHg=0．133kPa），差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）；治疗后3d，治疗组PaCO2水平[（5．76±1．06）mmHg]低于对照组[（6．78±1．55）mmHg]，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）；治疗后1周，两组PaCO2水平比较，差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。③治疗组与对照组治疗前PaO2比较[（8．10±1．52）mmHg比（8．21±1．23）mmH鲥，差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）；治疗后3d，治疗组PaO2水平[（9．51±1．63）mmHg]高于对照组[（8．32±1．31）mmHg]，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）；治疗后1周，两组PaO2水平比较，差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。④两组治疗前及治疗后3d、1周pH值比较，差异均无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。⑤治疗组与对照组治疗前空腹血糖值[（5．72±1．02）mmoUL比（5．63±1．34）mmol/L]比较，差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）；两组治疗后3d、1周空腹血糖值比较，差异均无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论布地奈德混悬液治疗吸人性肺炎安全、有效。

Objective To observe the efficacy of Budesonide atomization inhalation in the treatment of aspiration pneumonia. Methods 42 eases of patients with aspiration pneumonia in the First People＇s Hospital of Xiaoshan District in Hangzhou City from January 2012 to June 2013 were selected and divided into treatment group （23 cases） and con- trol group （19 cases） according to different treating methods. The control group was treated with routine therapies in- cluding oxygen therapy, anti-infection and nutrition support therapy; the treatment group was treated with Budesonide suspension aerosol inhalation on the basis of control group. The treatment efficacy between the two groups was ob- served; the PaCO2, PaO2, pH value, fasting blood-glucose between the two groups were compared. Results ①20 cases of total effective, 3 cases of nullity or progress were found in treatment group, the total effective rate was 86.96%; 15 cas- es of total effective, 4 cases of nullity or progress were found in control group, the total effective rate was ？8.95%. The difference of total effective rate between the two groups was statistically significant （P 〈 0.05）. ②The difference of Pa- CO2 before the treatment between treatment group and control group [（7.10±1.64） mm Hg vs （6.97±1.92） mm Hg] （1 mm Hg= 0.133 kPa） was not statistically significant （P 〉 0.05）; PaCO2 level in treatment group 3 days after the treatment [（5.76± 1.06） mm Hg] was lower than that in control group [（6.78±1.55） mm Hg], the difference was statistically significant （P 〈 0.05）; the difference of PaCO2 between the two groups 1 week after the treatment was not statistically significant （P 〉 0.05）.③ The difference of PaO2 before the treatment between the treatment group and control group [（8.10±1.52） mm Hg vs （8.21±1.23） mm Hg] was not statistically significant （P 〉 0.05）; PaO2 level in treatment group 3 days after the treatment [（9.51±1.63） mm Hg] was higher than that in control group [（8.32±1.31） mm Hg], the difference was statistically signifi- cant （P 〈 0.05）; the difference of PaO2 between the two groups 1 week after the treatment was not statistically signifi- cant （P 〉 0.05）. ④The difference of pH level between the two groups before the treatment and 3 days, 1 week after the treatment was not statistically significant （P 〉 0.05）. ⑤The difference of fasting blood-glucose between the treatmentgroup and control group [（5.72±1.02） mmol/L vs （5.63±34） mmol/L] before the treatment was not statistically significant （P〉 0.05）; the difference of fasting blood-glucose between the two groups 3 days and 1 week after the treatment was not statistically significant （P 〉 0.05）. Conclusion Budesonide in the treatment of aspiration pneumonia is safe and effective.