1999 Fiscal Year Final Research Report Summary
Is this possible that we would assist the depressed diaphragm function of chronic respiratory patients?
| Project/Area Number |
09671535
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
|
| Allocation Type | Single-year Grants |
|---|
| Section | 一般 |
|---|
| Research Field |
Anesthesiology/Resuscitation studies
|
|---|
| Research Institution | TOHOKU UNIVERSITY |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
MATSUKAWA Shue Tohoku University Hospital, Associate Professor, 医学部・附属病院, 助教授 (00108507)
|
|---|
| Co-Investigator(Kenkyū-buntansha) |
HORIUCHI Takashi Tohoku University Hospital, Lecturer, 医学部・附属病院, 講師 (00229238)
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
1997 – 1999
|
| Keywords | ultrasonography / diaphragm / respiratory failure |
|---|
| Research Abstract |
Continuous sedation in ICU depressing respiratory function is the well-known fact, but we don't realize clearly what mechanisms suppress the diaphragm function. The purpose in this study makes this question clear. Nine healthy volunteers were sedated with propofol or the mix solution of ketamine and midazolam (KM solution) as follow. Propofol was injected 1.5mg/kg bolus and then was maintained at 2mg/kg/hr. Ketamine and Midazolam solution was injected 0.5, 0.05mgkg bolus and then maintained at 1.0, 0.1mg/kg/hr. After 1 hour from the start of the sedation, respiratory function was measured with ultrasonography, respiratory monitor (OMR-1101), and respiratory inductive plethysmography.
The start of the inspiratory movement of rib cage was depressed remarkably, but that of abdomen was depressed little. Propofol suppressed the excursion of diaphragm slightly. The start of the diaphragm movement under KM solution was earlier than that without sedation. These facts might show that Propofol depress all the movement of rib cage, abdomen, and diaphragm, and KM solution depress the only movement of rib cage. Propofol decreased the excursion of diaphragm, but KM solution didn't influence that. Propofol and KM solution suppressed both of the rib cage and abdominal excursion. Propofol slightly suppressed the mean velocity of diaphragm contraction; that is the excursion of diaphragm divided by inspiratory time, but KM solution didn't suppress the mean velocity of diaphragm contraction at all.
In conclusion the pattern of the respiration with propofol is the same of the pattern without sedation because of propofol depressing all inspiratory movement of rib cage, abdomen, and diaphragm. On the other hand the pattern of the respiration with KM solution is different from that without sedation because KM solution don't influence the diaphragm movement but suppress the both of the movement of rib cage and abdomen.
|
Research Products
(4 results)
