Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Ann Emerg Med ; 21(3): 237-42, 1992 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-1536481

RESUMO

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We compared the efficacies of cimetidine (an H2-receptor antagonist) and diphenhydramine (an H1-receptor antagonist) alone and in combination for alleviation of symptoms of acute allergic reactions. STUDY DESIGN AND INTERVENTIONS: In this prospective, randomized, double-blind study, patients and examiners assessed the severity of symptoms and signs of acute allergic reactions using a visual-analog scale before treatment and 30 minutes after treatment with 300 mg IV cimetidine and placebo, 50 mg IV diphenhydramine and placebo, or diphenhydramine plus cimetidine. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-nine patients with acute allergic reactions presenting to two emergency departments of teaching hospitals. RESULTS: Of the 35 patients with pruritus, all 12 receiving diphenhydramine placebo had clinically significant relief compared with six of ten (60%) receiving cimetidine plus placebo (P = .03). Twelve of 13 (92%) receiving diphenhydramine plus cimetidine had relief, which was not a significant difference from the single drugs. Comparison of mean differences in pretreatment and post-treatment symptom scores (relief scores) among groups of patients with pruritus detected significantly more relief in the group receiving diphenhydramine plus placebo (80.3 +/- 7.4) than in those receiving cimetidine plus placebo (48.8 +/- 13.4) (P = .022). Of the 33 patients with urticaria, five of 11 (46%) receiving diphenhydramine plus placebo had clinically significant relief compared with eight of ten (80%) receiving cimetidine plus placebo (P = .18). Eleven of 12 patients (92%) receiving diphenhydramine plus cimetidine had relief, which is a significant difference from those receiving diphenhydramine plus placebo (P = .027). Comparison of mean relief scores in patients with urticaria detected significantly more relief in the group receiving diphenhydramine plus cimetidine (55.3 +/- 6.5) than in the group receiving diphenhydramine plus placebo (30.7 +/- 6.1) (P = .006). CONCLUSION: For treatment of pruritus from acute allergic reactions, diphenhydramine is more effective than cimetidine, and the combination offers no additional benefit. For treatment of acute urticaria, the combination of cimetidine and diphenhydramine is more effective than diphenhydramine alone.


Assuntos
Anafilaxia/complicações , Cimetidina/uso terapêutico , Difenidramina/uso terapêutico , Prurido/tratamento farmacológico , Urticária/tratamento farmacológico , Adulto , Anafilaxia/fisiopatologia , Pressão Sanguínea/efeitos dos fármacos , Cimetidina/administração & dosagem , Cimetidina/farmacologia , Difenidramina/administração & dosagem , Difenidramina/farmacologia , Método Duplo-Cego , Quimioterapia Combinada , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , Feminino , Frequência Cardíaca/efeitos dos fármacos , Hospitais de Ensino , Humanos , Infusões Intravenosas , Masculino , North Carolina/epidemiologia , Estudos Prospectivos , Prurido/epidemiologia , Prurido/etiologia , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Urticária/epidemiologia , Urticária/etiologia , Utah/epidemiologia
2.
Ann Emerg Med ; 18(4): 352-4, 1989 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-2650588

RESUMO

Pain from ureteral stones is believed to be due to spasm and hyper-peristalsis of the involved ureter. Nifedipine has been shown to decrease human ureteral spasm in vitro. Conflicting results have been reported concerning the clinical efficacy of nifedipine in relieving acute renal colic. This prospective, double-blind, crossover clinical trial evaluated the acute pain relief obtained in 30 patients who had ureteral stones. All patients had ureteral stones documented either by plain abdominal radiograph (six), intravenous pyelogram (16), or passage of the stone(s) in the urine (eight). Each patient served as his own control. The mean pain relief scores for placebo versus 10 to 20 mg oral nifedipine were 0.7 +/- 1.8 and 1.2 +/- 2.5, respectively, as measured on a visual analogue scale (P = .404). Seven patients received clinically significant relief associated with nifedipine, and three patients received relief from placebo (P = .300). Twenty patients (66%) did not experience clinically significant relief from either treatment. We conclude that nifedipine does not differ significantly from placebo in providing relief from acute renal colic.


Assuntos
Cólica/tratamento farmacológico , Nifedipino/uso terapêutico , Cálculos Ureterais/fisiopatologia , Adulto , Ensaios Clínicos como Assunto , Cólica/fisiopatologia , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Contração Muscular/efeitos dos fármacos , Músculo Liso/efeitos dos fármacos , Dor/tratamento farmacológico , Medição da Dor , Estudos Prospectivos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...