http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
Keiji Yagisawa,Taku Kobayashi,Ryo Ozaki,Shinji Okabayashi,Takahiko Toyonaga,Miki Miura,Mari Hayashida,Eiko Saito,Masaru Nakano,Hajime Matsubara,Tadakazu Hisamatsu,Toshifumi Hibi 대한장연구학회 2019 Intestinal Research Vol.17 No.1
Background/Aims: Oral mesalazine is an important treatment for ulcerative colitis (UC), and non-adherence to mesalazineincreases the risk of relapse. Controlled-release (CR) mesalazine has 2 formulations: tablets and granules. The relative acceptabilitiesof these formulations may influence patient adherence; however, they have not been compared to date. This studyaimed to evaluate the acceptabilities of the 2 formulations of CR mesalazine in relation to patient adherence using a crossoverquestionnaire survey. Methods: UC patients were randomly assigned to 2 groups in a 1:1 ratio. Patients in each group tookeither 4 g of CR mesalazine tablets or granules for 6 to 9 weeks, and then switched to 4 g of the other formulation for a further 6to 9 weeks. The acceptability and efficacy were evaluated by questionnaires, and adherence was assessed using a visual analogscale. The difference in acceptabilities between the 2 formulations and its impact on adherence were assessed. Results: A totalof 49 patients were prospectively enrolled and 33 patients were included in the analysis. Significantly more patients found thetablets to be less acceptable than the granules (76% vs. 33%, P=0.0005). The granules were preferable to the tablets when the 2formulations were compared directly (73% vs. 21%, P=0.004), for their portability, size, and numbers of pills. The adherence ratewas slightly better among patients taking the granules (94% vs. 91%) during the observation period, but the difference was notsignificant (P=0.139). Conclusion: CR mesalazine granules are more acceptable than tablets, and may therefore be a better optionfor long-term medication. (Intest Res 2019;17:87-93)
Sanuki, Takuro,Mishima, Gaku,Kurata, Shinji,Watanabe, Toshihiro,Kiriishi, Kensuke,Tachi, Mizuki,Ozaki, Yu,Okayasu, Ichiro,Kawai, Mari,Matsushita, Yuki,Miura, Keiichiro,Ayuse, Takao The Korean Dental Society of Anesthsiology 2015 Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine Vol.15 No.3
Background: We hypothesized that ketamine, when administered as the anesthetic induction agent, may prevent cardiovascular depression during high-dose remifentanil administration, unlike propofol. To test our hypothesis, we retrospectively compared the hemodynamic effects of ketamine, during high-dose remifentanil administration, with those of propofol. Methods: Thirty-eight patients who underwent oral surgery at the Nagasaki University Hospital between April 2014 and June 2015 were included in this study. Anesthesia was induced by the following procedure: First, high-dose remifentanil ($0.3-0.5{\mu}g/kg/min$) was administered 2-3 min before anesthesia induction;next, the anesthetic induction agent, either propofol (Group P) or ketamine (Group K), was administered. Mean arterial pressure (MAP) and the heart rate were recorded by the automated anesthesia recording system at four time points: immediately before the administration of high-dose remifentanil (T1);immediately before the administration of propofol or ketamine (T2);2.5 min (T3), and 5 min (T4) after the administration of the anesthetic induction agent. Results: In Group P, the MAP at T3 ($75.7{\pm}15.5mmHg$, P = 0.0015) and T4 ($68.3{\pm}12.5mmHg$, P < 0.001) were significantly lower than those at T1 ($94.0{\pm}12.4mmHg$). However, the MAP values in the K group were very similar (P = 0.133) at all time points. The heart rates in both Groups P (P = 0.254) and K (P = 0.859) remained unchanged over time. Conclusions: We showed that ketamine, when administered as the anesthetic induction agent during high-dose remifentanil administration, prevents cardiovascular depression.