Effectiveness and safety of nimodipine in preventing cerebral vasospasm after subarachnoid hemorrhage in children
10.3760/cma.j.issn.0578-1310.2019.05.005
- VernacularTitle: 尼莫地平预防儿童蛛网膜下腔出血后脑血管痉挛的疗效与安全性研究
- Author:
Yue SONG
1
;
Suyun QIAN
;
Yan LI
;
Jun LIU
;
Zheng LI
;
Xinlei JIA
;
Hengmiao GAO
;
Jiansheng ZENG
Author Information
1. Pediatric Intensive Care Unit, Beijing Children′s Hospital, Capital Medical University, National Center for Children′s Health, Beijing 100045, China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Child;
Subarachnoid hemorrhage;
Vasospasm, intracranial
- From:
Chinese Journal of Pediatrics
2019;57(5):338-343
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To evaluate the effect of prophylactic nimodipine in vasospasm prevention and outcome improvement in children with subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH).
Methods:A prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial which enrolled children with SAH who were admitted to pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) of Beijing Children′s Hospital from January 2015 to October 2018 was conducted. A total of 43 patients were randomly divided into nimodipine group (24 patients) and control group (19 patients) according to random number table. Transcranial Doppler (TCD) was used to dynamically monitor blood flow velocity and spectrum monography of bilateral middle cerebral artery (MCA) for vasospasm evaluation. Pediatric cerebral performance category (PCPC) scale was used to evaluate patients′ brain function on 28th day after discharge. Data were analyzed by t test, Mann-Whitney U test, χ2 test.
Results:Except heart rate ((157±26) vs. (137±34) beats/min, t=2.079, P=0.045), no significant differences existed between the two groups in basic demographic characteristics, primary diseases, and clinical manifestations (all P>0.05). The peak velocities of bilateral MCA on the 5th day after admission were significantly lower in nimodipine group (left MCA (136±34) vs. (158±23) cm/s, t=-2.890, P=0.006; right MCA (129±34) vs. (176±27) cm/s, t=-3.717, P=0.001). Likewise, a lower peak velocity of left MCA was observed on the 7th day after admission in nimodipine group ((127±45) vs. (152±13) cm/s, t=-2.903, P=0.007), but no significant difference existed in that of right MCA ((131±48) vs. (150±22) cm/s, t=-1.760, P=0.090). Eleven patients suffered from vasospasm, 25% (6/24) in nimodipine group and 26% (5/19) in control group (χ2=0.010, P=1.000), within whom 8 patients had complete remission after continuing nimodipine treatment, one died in hospital and the other two′s vasospasm still existed at the time of discharge. No significant differences were found between the two groups in mean length of hospitalization, proportion of mechanical ventilation, Glasgow coma scale at discharge, survival rate at discharge or survival rate on 28th day after discharge (all P>0.05). However, nimodipine group had a higher proportion of favorable PCPC brain function (92% (22/24) vs. 63% (12/19), χ2=5.208, P=0.030). No side effects such as hypotension, rash or injection site erythema were observed.
Conclusion:Prophylactic nimodipine cannot reduce vasospasm incidence in children with SAH but may improve short-term brain function, without any significant safety issues.
