目的探讨吸入β2-受体激动剂(舒喘灵)治疗新生儿暂时性呼吸急促(transient Tachypnea of the Newborn TTN)的疗效,并确定新生儿吸入舒喘灵的安全性.方法将2011年10月至2014年6月入住昆明市妇幼保健院的100例TTN患儿随机分为吸入舒喘灵组...目的探讨吸入β2-受体激动剂(舒喘灵)治疗新生儿暂时性呼吸急促(transient Tachypnea of the Newborn TTN)的疗效,并确定新生儿吸入舒喘灵的安全性.方法将2011年10月至2014年6月入住昆明市妇幼保健院的100例TTN患儿随机分为吸入舒喘灵组(治疗组)52人,未吸入组(对照组)48人,胎龄37周至40+3周.治疗组通过舒喘灵喷雾瓶、储雾罩在入院60 min、6 h分别给予0.4 mg舒喘灵气雾剂吸入;对照组按常规治疗.结果 (1)2组患儿在入院后7、12、24 h呼吸急促、呻吟、吸凹征严重程度比较,治疗组较对照组明显减轻和持续时间明显缩短,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);(2)治疗组用药前后心率无明显增加,2组心率统计学处理,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);(3)舒喘灵组需要常压给氧、n CPAP治疗时间较对照组缩短,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);(4)机械通气治疗:舒喘灵组1例(1.9%)、对照组6例(12.5%),差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);(5)2组入院后12 h监测平均p H值、氧分压、二氧化碳分压转归情况比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);(6)在研究过程中,心电监护无1例心律失常发生;52例治疗组患儿均未出现肌肉震颤症状.结论吸入舒喘灵对新生儿暂时性呼吸急促治疗有明显疗效.且临床和实验室检查均未发现不良反应.展开更多
Beef cattle producers in the North America have a variety of production and marketing options and must choose the best production system for their situation. This review describes considerations involved in choosing b...Beef cattle producers in the North America have a variety of production and marketing options and must choose the best production system for their situation. This review describes considerations involved in choosing between feeding cattle conventionally versus feeding them in programs that prohibit the use of certain technologies. Data from peer-reviewed journals, extension publications, nutritional consultants, governmental organizations, and feed companies were used to construct this review. Most cattle in North America are fed in conventional production systems. Conventional beef production systems typically use steroidal implants, ionophores, and beta-adrenergic agonists to improve animal productivity;as well as feed grade and injectable antimicrobials to control, treat or prevent disease and improve animal health. These technologies have been shown to lower the cost of production, allowing for beef to be competitive in the global protein market. Some consumers have expressed a preference for beef produced without these technologies. These “All-natural” (AN) cattle may bring a premium price in the market. The economic impact of differing productions systems can be described in relation to 1) cost of production, 2) operating costs of the feedlot, 3) price paid for feeder calves, and 4) price received for fed cattle. Conventional production provides the most favorable outcome for factors 1, 2, and 3, while AN production provides the most favorable outcome for item 4. There are also industry wide and societal aspects related to differing beef production systems related to health and safety of beef, land use, and cost of production allowing for a greater share of the global protein market. Technologies used in conventional production are critical tools to North American beef production. Differences in efficiencies between each type of non-conventional production systems must be re-captured in added premiums when cattle are marketed and sold. Premiums for AN cattle are enticing, but the true differences in the cost of production between the AN and conventional cattle must be evaluated in order for a producer to make the correct decision for their operation.展开更多
文摘Beef cattle producers in the North America have a variety of production and marketing options and must choose the best production system for their situation. This review describes considerations involved in choosing between feeding cattle conventionally versus feeding them in programs that prohibit the use of certain technologies. Data from peer-reviewed journals, extension publications, nutritional consultants, governmental organizations, and feed companies were used to construct this review. Most cattle in North America are fed in conventional production systems. Conventional beef production systems typically use steroidal implants, ionophores, and beta-adrenergic agonists to improve animal productivity;as well as feed grade and injectable antimicrobials to control, treat or prevent disease and improve animal health. These technologies have been shown to lower the cost of production, allowing for beef to be competitive in the global protein market. Some consumers have expressed a preference for beef produced without these technologies. These “All-natural” (AN) cattle may bring a premium price in the market. The economic impact of differing productions systems can be described in relation to 1) cost of production, 2) operating costs of the feedlot, 3) price paid for feeder calves, and 4) price received for fed cattle. Conventional production provides the most favorable outcome for factors 1, 2, and 3, while AN production provides the most favorable outcome for item 4. There are also industry wide and societal aspects related to differing beef production systems related to health and safety of beef, land use, and cost of production allowing for a greater share of the global protein market. Technologies used in conventional production are critical tools to North American beef production. Differences in efficiencies between each type of non-conventional production systems must be re-captured in added premiums when cattle are marketed and sold. Premiums for AN cattle are enticing, but the true differences in the cost of production between the AN and conventional cattle must be evaluated in order for a producer to make the correct decision for their operation.
