ABSTRACT
Fundamento: La preeclampsia es un estado de vasoconstricción generalizado asociado a la disfunción del epitelio vascular en vez de vasodilatación propia del embarazo, caracterizada por la hipertensión proteinuria a partir de la semana 20, acompañada a veces de edemas; asimismo constituye un peligro de salud para la madre y el feto. El tratamiento clínico tradicional utiliza fármacos antihipertensivos por vía oral, entre los que se mencionan el labetalol y nifedipino de liberación prolongada. Objetivo: Analizar la efectividad del labetalol y del nifedipino como tratamiento antihipertensivo relacionado con preeclampsia. Metodología: Se recurrió a fuentes de consulta encontradas en Google Scholar, Science Direct, SciELO, Pubmed, Medes y Elsevier. De 211 fuentes se seleccionaron 31 de acuerdo con criterios de inclusión y exclusión. Conclusiones: Por consenso se ha determinado que en la mayor parte de fuentes de consulta el nifedipino por vía oral es más efectivo que el labetalol en el tratamiento de la preeclampsia.
Background: Pre-eclampsia is a generalized vasoconstriction state associated with vascular epithelial dysfunction rather than the vasodilation characteristic of pregnancy, characterized by proteinuric hypertension from the 20th week of pregnancy, sometimes associated with edema; it also causes health risks to the mother and fetus. Traditional clinical treatment uses oral antihypertensive drugs, among these labetalol and extended-release nifedipine are included. Objective: To analyze the efficacy of labetalol and nifedipine as an antihypertensive treatment in pre-eclampsia. Methodology: Reference sources found in Google Scholar, Science Direct, SciELO, Pubmed, Medes and Elsevier were used. Out of 211 sources, 31 were selected according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Conclusions: It has been determined by majority consensus that oral nifedipine is more effective than labetalol in pre-eclampsia treatment.
Subject(s)
Humans , Pre-Eclampsia , Nifedipine , Hypertension, Pregnancy-Induced , LabetalolABSTRACT
Hypertensive crises is still a major public health problem, causing end organ damage like myocardial infarction, stroke, and renal failure. Labetalol and nitroglycerine are among the two most commonly used medicine to control the blood pressure, but there is no head to head comparison between these two medicines. This was a prospective randomized non-blinded study which included 50 patients of hypertensive crises, out which 25 patients received intravenous labetalol and 25 patients received intravenous nitroglycerine. We found that labetalol controlled the blood pressure more rapidly in comparison to nitroglycerine, without causing any extra side effect
ABSTRACT
Eclampsia increases the risk for both mother and foetus. The treatment aims to quickly bring about smooth reduction in blood pressure to levels that are safe for both, but avoiding any sudden drops, that may in themselves cause dizziness or foetal distress. Hence, this study was conducted to compare the efficacy of anti-hypertensive drugs in eclampsia.METHODS80 eclampsia patients were randomized into two groups: one received oral nifedipine and other intra-venous labetalol. Nifedipine group orally received 10 mg initially with repeated doses of 20 mg every 20 minutes up to maximum of 5 doses or until the therapeutic goal was reached. The other group received intravenous labetalol 20 mg initially followed by escalating doses of 40, 80, 80, and then 80 mg every 20 minutes until therapeutic goal was achieved or for a maximum of 5 doses. Once the therapeutic goal was reached, blood pressure was measured every 20 minutes till delivery.RESULTSMean time required to reach therapeutic blood pressure goal in nifedipine, and labetalol group was 45 ± 22.98 and 59.5 ± 25.41 minutes respectively. Total dose requirement was 1.65 ± 0.57 and 2.17 ± 0.74 mg respectively. The differences between two groups were significant. There was difference in urine output between the two groups as well. In the initial two hours, there was increased urine output in nifedipine group though it was statistically not significant. After two hours till 48 hours, this increased urine output in the nifedipine group was significant (p value 0.001).CONCLUSIONSnifedipine achieved the therapeutic blood pressure goal more rapidly than labetalol.
ABSTRACT
Background: Worldwide hypertension during pregnancy is a common cause of maternal and fetal morbidity and mortality. Effective control of blood pressure is one of the important steps in management of preeclampsia. Few drugs like nifedipine, labetalol, methyldopa, and hydralazine have acceptable high safety profile during pregnancy.Methods: In this study 120 antenatal women with non-severe preeclampsia were compared by giving either nifedipine or labetalol as a single drug therapy for control of blood pressure. Various parameters like control of blood pressure, side effects of drugs, gestational age at the time of delivery, mode of delivery, any complication and perinatal outcome were assessed.Results: In this study authors found that in both group, adequate control of blood pressure was achieved. This study shows slightly higher rate of pre term delivery and LSCS with labetalol and minimal side effects with nifedipine but difference in each group is insignificant.Conclusions: Labetalol and nifedipine both the drugs are equally effective in reducing blood pressure and any of it can safely be used as a first choice of drug for management of hypertension in preeclampsia and it can be decided as per clinician’s experience and familiarity with drug.
ABSTRACT
Background: Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy are the common medical disorders in pregnancy. It has effects both on expectant mother and fetus. Pre-eclampsia is a pregnancy specific multisystem disorder of unknown etiology, and accounts for 12-18% of maternal mortality. There is general consensus that maternal risk is decreased by antihypertensive treatment that lowers very high blood pressure. Objective of this study was to study the efficacy of oral labetalol versus oral Nifedipine in the management of preeclampsia in the antepartum and intrapartum period.Methods: The present study was conducted in a tertiary care centre, Chennai from October 2013 to September 2014. It was a prospective observational study done in antenatal ward and labor ward. All antenatal women diagnosed to have pre-eclampsia, irrespective of gestation are included in this study.Results: Age distribution of PIH patients and the maximum number of patients were 20-25 years of age. maximum patients of severe preeclampsia were primigravida. Both systolic and diastolic BP in the two groups (oral labetalol and oral Nifedipine groups) were not statistically significant as the p value is >0.005.Conclusions: From this study, authors found that both oral labetalol and oral nifedipine are effective and well tolerated when used for rapid control of blood pressure in severe hypertension of pregnancy.
ABSTRACT
Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy are one of the most common obstetrical problems and affect 5-10% of all pregnancies. Severe preeclampsia is a multi-system disorder and causes many complications like intracranial haemorrhage, hypertensive encephalopathy, abruptio placentae, heart failure, pulmonary oedema and eclampsia. Intravenous hydralazine and labetalol are considered as first line antihypertensive agents for management of hypertensive crisis. The objective of this study was to compare efficacy of intravenous hydralazine and labetalol in lowering blood pressure in severe pregnancy induced hypertension, as well as to find out frequency of maternal adverse reactions and foetal impacts.METHODSThe study was conducted at Calcutta National Medical College and Hospital over a period of one year. 100 women with severe preeclampsia were included in the study and randomly divided into two groups of 50 each. One group received intravenous hydralazine while the other group was treated with intravenous labetalol. The time and number of doses taken to achieve target blood pressure were noted. Number of patients having persistent severe hypertension after receiving maximum drug dosage were also taken into account.RESULTSThe pre-treatment systolic blood pressure was 168.80 mmHg in hydralazine group and 173.64 mmHg in labetalol group whereas the diastolic blood pressure was 143.92 mmHg and 142.6 mmHg in hydralazine and labetalol group respectively. Mean time to achieve blood pressure control was 22.20 minutes in hydralazine group and 26.04 minutes in labetalol group. There were 3 cases of persistent severe hypertension in hydralazine group and 2 cases in labetalol group. No statistically significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of efficacy, maternal adverse effects and perinatal outcome. However, maternal tachycardia and headache was found to be significantly higher in patients treated with hydralazine.CONCLUSIONSThus, both hydralazine and labetalol are effective and safe antihypertensive drugs which can be used to treat pregnancy induced hypertensive crisis. No significant difference is found between these two agents.
ABSTRACT
Background: Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy are among the most common medical complications of pregnancy and major cause of maternal, fetal and neonatal morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of intravenous hydralazine and labetalol for management of severe hypertensive disorders of pregnancy.Methods: This prospective study was conducted among 100 women admitted with SBP ≥ 160 or DBP ≥ 110 mmHg or both. Patients were divided into 2 groups randomly: labetalol and hydralazine group.Results: Majority of patients (38%) were in the age group of 21-25 years and primigravida (52%). There was more significant decrease in the systolic, diastolic and mean arterial blood pressure at the end of 15 and 30 minutes in labetalol group. Labetalol required fewer doses as compared to hydralazine to achieve the target blood pressure (average 1.95 versus 3.1). Total numbers of term deliveries were 19 (38%) in hydralazine group and 16 (32%) in labetalol group. Pre-term deliveries in hydralazine and labetalol group were 14 (28%) and 15 (30%) respectively. Headache was significantly more common in hydralazine treated patients than labetalol group.Conclusions: Both hydralazine and labetalol were effective and well-tolerated in the treatment of severe hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. Labetalol may be preferred because it was more effective in lowering the systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure and mean arterial pressure to achieve target levels with less number of doses.
ABSTRACT
Background: Hypertension is a common medical problem encountered during pregnancy and is associated with increased risk of adverse outcomes. Objective of this study was to compare efficacy and safety of Labetalol and Methyldopa in controlling blood pressure in patients with PIH and pre-eclampsia.Methods: A comparative, prospective observational, single centre study conducted from November 2015 to November 2017 in women with PIH at Indira Gandhi Government Medical College, Nagpur. Group A included 100 patients treated with Labetalol while Group B included 100 patients who were given Methyldopa. Response in lowering of BP was assessed over a period of 7 days.Results: Labetalol treated group of patients showed significant fall from 143.50±7.30mmHg/101.30±3.93 (sytolic/diastolic) on 1st day to 126.10±5.49 mmHg/87.40±5.62 mmHg (sytolic/diastolic) on day 7, while systolic/diastolic BP in methyldopa group on 1st day was 145.20±7.17 mmHg/101.60±4.20 mmHg which was reduced to 129.20±4.86 mmHg/90.50±3.30 mmHg on day 7. Author found that MAP in Labetalol group reduced from 115.226±4.17 mmHg to 100.17±4.43 mmHg on day 7 while in Methyldopa group had MAP on admission 115.99±4.38 mmHg and on day 7 it reduced to 103.27±2.99mmHg which is highly significant.Conclusions: Labetalol controls systolic and diastolic blood pressure more rapidly and effectively than Methyldopa. Safety profile and adverse effects of Labetalol and Methyldopa are similar to each other.
ABSTRACT
Background: In developed countries, 16 percent of maternal deaths were attributed to hypertensive disorders. Of hypertensive disorders, the preeclampsia syndrome, either alone or superimposed on chronic hypertension, is the most dangerous. The incidence of preeclampsia in nulliparous populations ranged from 3 to 10 percent.Methods: The present study was conducted at Government Raja Mirasudhar Hospital, Thanjavur Medical College, Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu, India from October 2017 to October 2018. The study consisted of 100 antenatal women with non-severe preeclampsia. The efficacy of labetalol verses nifedipine in its management was studied along with the fetomaternal outcome.Results: In this study, in the labetalol and in the nifedipine groups adequate control of blood pressure was achieved. However, labetalol was well tolerated by our women without much side effects.Conclusions: The present study indicates both labetalol and nifedipine are equally efficacious in the control of hypertension in non-severe preeclampsia. Pathology of the disease was not altered significantly in both the groups. There was no significant difference in the neonatal outcome between the two groups.
ABSTRACT
Background: To compare intravenous labetalol with oral nifedipine in terms of rapidity at which they control blood pressure in acute hypertensive emergencies of pregnancy.Methods: A randomized controlled study. Pregnant women with severe gestational hypertension with BP ≥160/110 mmHg after ≥20 weeks of gestation were randomized with computer generated numbers, either to receive IV labetalol with an escalating dose of 20, 40, 80, 80 and 80 mg or nifedipine capsule orally in a dose of 10 mg every 15 minutes (upto 5 doses) until a BP of ≤150/100 mmHg is achieved. Crossover treatment was to be effected if initial treatment regimen was unsuccessful. Primary outcome was time taken and number of doses required to achieve the target BP of ≤150/100 mmHg. Secondary outcomes were volume of urine output, maternal heart rate changes, fetal heart rate abnormality, perinatal and maternal outcome and side effects.Results: Oral nifedipine achieved the target BP (≤150/100 mmHg) more rapidly in (26.25±12.60) minutes in comparison to (32.62±12.19) minutes with IV labetalol (p= 0.024). Nifedipine group also took less number of doses to achieve the target BP of (≤150/100 mmHg) mmHg than IV labetalol (1.75±0.840 vs. 2.18±0.83), p= 0.024. Volume of urine output was also significantly more in nifedipine group (94.90±1.84 ml) at 1 hour and thereafter till 24 hour of treatment in comparison to IV labetalol (41.28±2.14 ml), p= 0.000. Side effects are few and not serious. No patient required crossover treatment.Conclusions: Both the drugs are equally effective in controlling acute hypertensive emergencies of pregnancy, however oral nifedipine is more rapid in controlling severe hypertension and also it is associated with significantly increased urine output.
ABSTRACT
Background: Authors sought to compare the effectively of intravenous hydralazine and intravenous labetalol in controlling acute rise in blood pressure in patients with severe preeclampsia.Methods: In this double-blind randomized controlled trial, all pregnant women with sustained increase in blood pressure (BP) of 160 mmHg systolic or 110 mmHg diastolic or higher were randomized to receive intravenous (IV) hydralazine 5 mg (max. 4 doses) or IV labetalol in escalating doses of 20mg, 40mg, 80mg, 80mg to achieve target blood pressure of 150 mmHg systolic and 100 mmHg diastolic or lower. The primary objective of the study was to assess the time taken to control blood pressure. Secondary agendas were the number of repeat doses required and other side effect profile.Results: In the study duration of September 2015 to September 2017, authors enrolled 60 participants for our trial. The median time taken to achieve the target blood pressure was 22.4 minutes in both the groups. Close to half of the participants did not require repeat doses (46.66% with labetalol and 50% with hydralazine). No serious maternal or foetal side effects were noted during the study. Statistical tests were performed using SPSS for Windows version 22.Conclusions: As operated in the study, the efficacy of hydralazine and labetalol to control the acute rise in blood pressure is similar.
ABSTRACT
Background: The aim of treatment of severe pre-eclampsia and eclampsia is to quickly bring about a smooth reduction in blood pressure to levels that are safe for both mother and baby but avoiding any sudden drops. There are not many studies comparing nifedipine and labetalol for this purpose. Authors conducted this study with the aim of comparing their efficacy in reducing maternal blood pressure.Methods: It was a cross over trial with 30 patients in each group conducted at a tertiary care hospital. 60 pregnant women were randomized to receive nifedipine (20mg loading dose followed by 10 mg tablet, orally, up to maximum of five doses) or intravenous labetalol (in an escalating dose regimen of 20, 40, 80, 80 and 80 mg) every 20 minutes until the target blood pressure of 150/100 mmHg was achieved. Crossover treatment was affected if the initial treatment regimen was unsuccessful after 20 min of the last dose of the drug in the respective groups.Results: The mean time to achieve the target blood pressure was 32.0 ±18.64 minutes (mean ± SD) in nifedipine group as compared with 37.04 ± 16.36 minutes in those receiving labetalol (P = .002). In the nifedipine group 63.3% required only one dose compared to 36.6% in the labetalol group. Only two women in the nifedipine group required maximum number of doses that is five doses. Cross over treatment was required by 10% of patients in the labetalol group and none in the nifedipine group.Conclusions: This study shows that oral nifedipine is more effective than intravenous labetalol in rapid control of hypertension in severe pre-eclampsia and eclampsia.
ABSTRACT
Background: Hypertensive disorders are major cause of the perinatal and maternal mortality and morbidity worldwide. Aim of study was to evaluate current trend of antihypertensive drugs and to assess frequency and distribution of antihypertensive drugs in pregnancy.Methods: A retrospective observational study was conducted in a tertiary care hospital for period of six months in collaboration with department of obstetrics and gynaecology. Patients data recorded in case report form and analysed to study prescription pattern and related information.Results: Total of 104 cases were enrolled in this study. Prescribed antihypertensive drugs in pregnancy were Labetalol, Nifedipine, MgSO4 and furosemide. Most commonly prescribed drug was labetalol. In this study, Gestational hypertension was most common diagnosis in hypertensive disorder. Majority of drug prescribed from category C and A. In present study, Single drug therapy was most commonly prescribed for hypertension in pregnancy was 64.42% whereas multiple drug therapy was 35.57%. Most common maternal complication was anaemia i.e. 54.05% followed by placental abruption in 24.3%. Neonatal outcome was low birth weight i.e.36% followed by preterm birth i.e.24%.Conclusions: Labetalol found to be most common prescribed drug. Single drug therapy prescription was high as compared to multiple drug therapy prescription in hypertensive disorders in pregnancy. Gestational hypertension was most common cause of hypertensive disorder. Anaemia was found to be most common maternal complication encountered in hypertensive disorders in pregnancy. Most common adverse neonatal outcome was low birth weight.
ABSTRACT
Objetivo. Comparar la eficacia del labetalol oral con alfa-metildopa oral en el tratamiento de la hipertensión severa en preeclámpticas. Diseño. Estudio de casos y controles. Institución. Hospital Central "Dr. Urquinaona", Maracaibo, Venezuela. Participantes. 200 preeclámpticas que fueron asignadas al azar para ser tratadas con labetalol oral (grupo A) o con alfa-metildopa oral (grupo B). Principales medidas de resultado. Eficacia del tratamiento de la hipertensión, tasa de persistencia de la hipertensión y efectos adversos relacionados con el uso de los fármacos. Resultados. No se encontraron diferencias entre los grupos con relación a edad materna, edad gestacional al momento de la inclusión en el estudio e índice de masa corporal (p = ns). Tampoco se observaron diferencias estadísticamente significativas en los valores de presión arterial sistólica, diastólica y media entre los grupos (p = ns). Se observó que las pacientes tratadas con labetalol oral presentaron valores significativamente más bajos de presión arterial sistólica, diastólica y media comparadas con las pacientes tratadas con alfa-metildopa oral (p < 0,0001). Ninguna paciente en el grupo A presentó persistencia de la hipertensión comparado con 17 pacientes en el grupo B (p < 0,0001). El síntoma más común en el grupo A fue la cefalea y en el grupo B, las náuseas, que mostraron ser significativamente más frecuentes (p = 0,006). Conclusión. El labetalol oral fue más efectivo que la alfa-metildopa en el tratamiento de la hipertensión severa en preeclámpticas.
Objective: To compare the efficacy of oral labetalol with oral alpha-methyldopa in the treatment of severe hypertension in preeclamptic patients. Design: Case-control study. Institution: Hospital Central "Dr. Urquinaona", Maracaibo, Venezuela. Participants: 200 preeclamptic patients who were randomly assigned to be treated with oral labetalol (group A) or with oral alpha-methyldopa (group B). Main outcome measures: Hypertension treatment efficacy, rate of persistence of hypertension and adverse effects related to drug use. Results: There were no differences between groups regarding maternal age, gestational age at the time of inclusion, and body mass index (p = ns). There were also no statistically significant differences in systolic, diastolic and mean arterial pressure between groups (p = ns). We observed that patients treated with oral labetalol had significantly lower values of systolic, diastolic and mean arterial pressure compared to patients treated with oral alphamethyldopa (p < 0.0001). No patient in group A had persistent hypertension, while 17 patients in group B did present it (p < 0.0001). The most common symptom in group A was headaches; in group B, nausea was significantly more frequent (p = 0.006). Conclusion: Oral labetalol is more effective than alpha-methyldopa in the treatment of severe hypertension in preeclamptic patients.
ABSTRACT
Objective To explore the associations of the genetic polymorphisms of cytochrome P450, family 2, subfamily D, polypeptide 6 (CYP2D6) and cytochrome P450, family 2, subfamily C, polypeptide 9 (CYP2C9) with early-onset severe pre-eclampsia and the efficacy of labetalol therapy. Methods Totally 105 gravidas diagnosed with early-onset severe pre-eclampsia (experimental group) and 103 healthy gravidas (control group) were recruited from Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital between August 2013 and July 2016. Labetalol was given to control blood pressures in gravidas with early-onset severe pre-eclampsia. If labetalol administration alone did not exceed the mean dose (100 mg, one dose per eight hours) and effectively controlled the blood pressures, it would be considered to be valid (n=75), otherwise it would be viewed as an invalid treatment. Genotype and allele frequencies of CYP2C9 gene (rs1057910 and rs4918758) and CYP2D6 gene (rs1065852, rs28371725, rs35742686 and rs3892097) in the gravidas were analyzed by TaqMan probe polymerase chain reaction. Differences in the genotype and allele frequencies were compared between the experimental and control groups, and the valid and invalid labetalol treatment groups. Chi-square test, analysis of variance and LSD test were used as statistical methods. Results The gravidas in both experimental and control groups were AA genotype in CYP2C9 gene rs1057910, TT genotype in CYP2D6 gene rs35742686 and CC genotype in CYP2D6 gene rs3892097. Frequencies of CC and CT genotypes in CYP2D6 gene rs28371725 in the experimental group were higher than those in the control group [18.1% (19/105) vs 14.6% (15/103);56.2% (59/105) vs 42.7% (44/103); χ2=6.707], and higher C allele frequency in CYP2D6 gene rs28371725 was also observed in the experimental group [46.2% (97/210) vs 35.9% (74/206), χ2=4.529] (all P0.05). Compared with the gravidas with CT or TT genotype of CYP2D6 gene rs28371725, those with CC genotype had longer gestational age [(32.5±2.1) vs (29.5±1.8) and (29.8±2.2) weeks] and higher plasma albumin [(27.2±9.3) vs (20.3±10.4) and (22.5±7.4) g/L], but lower systolic pressure and 24 hours urine protein (LSD test, all P<0.05). The G allele frequency in CYP2D6 gene rs1065852 in invalid labetalol treatment group was higher than that in valid labetalol treatment group [93.3% (56/60) vs 76.0% (114/150), χ2=8.351, P=0.004]. Conclusions The polymorphism of CYP2D6 gene rs28371725 may be associated with early-onset severe pre-eclampsia, and the allele of G in CYP2D6 gene rs1065852 may be associated with the efficacy of labetalol in treatment of early-onset severe pre-eclampsia.
ABSTRACT
Objective To investigate the effects of labetalol, Magnesium Sulfate, psychological intervention combined with the clinical effect of treatment of gestational hypertension. Methods According to the different treatment and nursing intervention mode of 120 cases of hypertension patients in January 2015 to 2017 year in January in our hospital for diagnosis and treatment of pregnancy groups: control group with routine nursing intervention in the observation group, Magnesium Sulfate +, Magnesium Sulfate + + mode labetalol psychological nursing intervention; the detailed records of the two groups of patients with clinical curative effect, complications, etc. the situation, and the related data for comparative analysis of labetalol, Magnesium Sulfate, psychological intervention combined with the clinical effect of treatment of gestational hypertension. Results The psychological nursing mode of labetalol + Magnesium Sulfate (observation group) intervention effect in patients with hypertension during pregnancy is better than the Magnesium Sulfate + routine nursing (control group) the clinical intervention effect, clinical symptoms improved better than the control group, the complication rate was lower than the control group, nursing satisfaction was higher than the control group, the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). Conclusion Patients with gestational hypertension selection effect of labetalol + Magnesium Sulfate +psychological nursing intervention significantly, can effectively improve the clinical symptoms and reduce the incidence of complications.
ABSTRACT
Objective To investigate the analysis of Magnesium Sulfate labetalol in the treatment of early onset severe preeclampsia and intervention. Methods Randomly selected from 2015 to 2017 years with early onset of severe preeclampsia patients 40 cases as the object of this study, all patients were treated with labetalol and Magnesium Sulfate drug drug treatment, the treatment process of nursing the patients and the nursing results were summarized. Results The blood pressure of the patients were smoothly control, 40 patients were eclampsia, and did not appear the phenomenon of death. And 37 cases of neonatal had a higher Apgar score. Conclusion In Magnesium Sulfate labetalol on early onset severe preeclampsia were treated on the application of nursing intervention, can effectively control the blood pressure of patients, and effectively alleviate the condition.
ABSTRACT
Background: Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, including preeclampsia, complicate up to 10% of pregnancies worldwide, constituting one of the greatest causes of maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality worldwide. Aim: To compare intravenous Labetalol with oral Nifedipine in their rapidity to control hypertensive emergencies of pregnancy. Materials and methods: Pregnant woman with severe gestational hypertension ≥ 160/110 mm of Hg were randomized to receive intravenous Labetalol injection (in an escalating dose regimen of 20, 40, 80, 80 and 80 mg) or Nifedipine (10mg tab orally upto 5 doses ) until the target blood pressure of 150/90mm of Hg was achieved. Crossover treatment was effected if the initial treatment regimen was unsuccessful. Results: Mean time required 47 ± 14 mins in the Labetalol groups and 45 ± 15minutes in the Nifedipine group. This comparison showed no difference in the two groups with a „P‟ value of >0.05. The mean amount of drugs required to achieve BP 150/90mm of Hg were 96 ± 38in the Labetalol group and 23 ± 13mg in the Nifedipine group. And this comparison showed no difference statistically with a „P‟ value of >0.05. Most of the patients were controlled by 2 doses of each drug, 56% in the Labetalol group and 62% in the Nifedipine group. 12% and 14% in the Labetalol and Nifedipine group respectively were not controlled by 5 doses of either drug and required crossover drug therapy. Most of the patients were controlled by two doses of each drug, 50% in the Labetalol group and 60% in the Nifedipine group. 12.5% and 17.5% in the Labetalol & Nifedipine group respectively were not controlled by 5 doses of either drug andrequires crossover drug therapy.
ABSTRACT
Objective To investigate the effects of labetalol, combined with psychological intervention in patients with hypertension of pregnancy specific effects on pregnant women and fetus.Methods 98 patients with gestational hypertension in our hospital from December 2015 to June 2016 were selected,and randomly divided into study group and control group,49 cases in each groups.The control group were treated with labetalol, study group on the basis of conventional therapy plus labetalol, psychological intervention.The changes of diastolic blood pressure and systolic blood pressure and the incidence of adverse events of perinatal children were recorded before and after treatment in two groups of patients with gestational hypertension.Results Before treatment, SBP and DBP were compared had no statistical significance in the two groups.After treatment, the decrease of SBP and DBP in the study group was better than that in the control group (P<0.05).The incidence of adverse events of children in the study group was significantly lower than that in the control group (P<0.05).Conclusion On the basis of routine clinical treatment, with labetalol, psychological intervention on patients with gestational hypertension and can significantly improve the blood pressure control effect, to ensure the safety of mother and infant.
ABSTRACT
Objective To investigate the effect of labetalol in treatment of severe preeclampsia clinical effect.Methods The control group of severe preeclampsia patients received routine clinical treatment,the study group were treated with labetalol,two groups of patients with severe preeclampsia were treated for 7 d.Results After treatment,the two groups of DBP,SBP,HR,and 24 HUP were significantly lower than before,the study group improved the above indicators better(P<0.05).The study group of patients with severe preeclampsia premature delivery rate,postpartum hemorrhage rate,neonatal asphyxia rate(10.20%,8.16%,6.12%)were significantly lower than the control group(28.57%,34.69%,20.41%)(P<0.05).Conclusion The application of conventional therapy combined with labetalol can significantly improve the hypotensive effect of severe preeclampsia,is conducive to the protection of maternal physical and mental health and life safety.