[1]娄侠儒,林艺韵,罗锦麟,等.不同动脉血流峰流速变异度评估脓毒性休克患者容量反应性的价值[J].医学信息,2021,34(19):162-164,168.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2021.19.044]
 LOU Xia-ru,LIN Yi-yun,LUO Jin-lin,et al.Observational Study of Ultrasound Monitoring Variation of Different Arterial Peak Velocity in Evaluating Fluid Responsiveness in Patients with Septic Shock[J].Medical Information,2021,34(19):162-164,168.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2021.19.044]
点击复制

不同动脉血流峰流速变异度评估脓毒性休克患者容量反应性的价值()
分享到:

医学信息[ISSN:1006-1959/CN:61-1278/R]

卷:
34卷
期数:
2021年19期
页码:
162-164,168
栏目:
诊疗技术
出版日期:
2021-10-01

文章信息/Info

Title:
Observational Study of Ultrasound Monitoring Variation of Different Arterial Peak Velocity in Evaluating Fluid Responsiveness in Patients with Septic Shock
文章编号:
1006-1959(2021)19-0162-04
作者:
娄侠儒1林艺韵2罗锦麟2吴 翔1陶 飞1
佛山市禅城区中心医院重症医学科1,超声科2,广东 佛山 528031
Author(s):
LOU Xia-ru1LIN Yi-yun2LUO Jin-lin2WU Xiang1TAO Fei1
Department of Intensive Medicine1,Department of Ultrasound2,Central Hospital of Chancheng District,Foshan 528031,Guangdong,China
关键词:
脓毒性休克容量反应性动脉血流速度峰流速变异度
Keywords:
Septic shockFluid responsivenessVariation of arterial peak velocity
分类号:
R459.7
DOI:
10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2021.19.044
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
目的 评估不同动脉峰流速变异度在评估脓毒性休克患者容量反应的准确性。方法 选取2020年1月-12月我院收治的58例脓毒性休克患者,早期均根据脓毒性休克集束化治疗进行液体复苏,根据容量负荷试验(VE)将心脏每博量(SV)增加≥15%为液体反应阳性设为有反应组,SV增加<15%为液体反应阴性设为无反应组,比较两组超声测量VE前后不同动脉血流峰流速变异度及其指标。结果 VE前,有反应组△Vpeak-AO、△Vpeak-CA、△Vpeak-BA、△Vpeak-FA及PPV高于无反应组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);而两组CVP比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。VE后,有反应组与无反应组△Vpeak-AO、△Vpeak-CA、△Vpeak-BA、△Vpeak-FA及PPV、CVP比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 超声监测△Vpeak-AO、△Vpeak-CA、△Vpeak-BA、△Vpeak-FA和PPV均能有效预测脓毒性休克机械通气患者的容量反应性,可为临床诊断提供参考依据。
Abstract:
Objective To evaluate the accuracy of different arterial peak velocity variability in assessing fluid responsiveness in patients with septic shock.Methods 58 patients with septic shock in our hospital from January 2020 to December 2020 were selected. Early fluid resuscitation was based on septic shock bundled therapy, followed by volume expansion (VE).After VE, the stroke volume (SV) increased≥15% was defined as fluid positive was response group, and SV increased <15% was defined as fluid reaction negative was non-response group,the variation of different arterial peak velocity was measurd by ultrasound and other indicators were compared before and after VE.Results Before VE, △Vpeak-AO, △Vpeak-CA, △Vpeak-BA, △Vpeak-FA and PPV in the reaction group were higher than those in the non-reaction group, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). After VE, there was no significant difference between the response group and the non-response group in △Vpeak-AO, △Vpeak-CA, △Vpeak-BA, △Vpeak-FA, PPV and CVP (P>0.05).Conclusion Ultrasonographic monitoring of △Vpeak-AO, △Vpeak-CA, △Vpeak-BA, △Vpeak-FA and PPV can effectively predict volume responsiveness in patients with mechanical ventilation for septic shock, which can provide reference for clinical diagnosis.

参考文献/References:

[1]Reinhart K,Daniels R,Kissoon N,et al.Recognizing Sepsis as a Global Health Priority-AWHO Resolution[J].N Engl J Med,2017,277(5):414-417.[2]Sun S,Ren H,Wang Y,et al.Respiratory Variations in Aortic Blood Flow to Predict Volume Responsiveness in Ventilated Children With Leukemia and Neutropenic Septic Shock[J].Pediatr Crit Care Med,2020,21(5):e247-e252. [3]Yang WS,Kang HD,Jung SK,et al.A mortality analysis of septic shock, vasoplegic shock and cryptic shock classified by the third international consensus definitions (Sepsis-3)[J].Clin Respir J,2020,14(9):857-863. [4]Levy MM,Evans LE,Rhodes A.The Surviving Sepsis Campaign Bundle: 2018 Update[J].Crit Care Med,2018,46(6):997-1000.[5]Rhodes A,Evans LE,Alhazzani W,et al.Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016[J].Intensive Care Med,2017,43(3):304-377.[6]Chu L,Li G,Yu Y,et al.Clinical effects of hemoperfusion combined with pulse high-volume hemofiltration on septic shock[J].Medicine (Baltimore),2020,99(9):e19058.[7]Zhao P,Zheng R,Xue L,et al.Early Fluid Resuscitation and High Volume Hemofiltration Decrease Septic Shock Progression in Swine[J].Biomed Res Int,2015(2015):181845. [8]李聪,冯宪真,黄马玉,等.心脏超声联合被动抬腿试验评价脓毒性休克患者容量反应性的价值[J].医学综述,2017,23(1):138-140,144.[9]Douglas IS,Alapat PM,Corl KA,et al.Fluid Response Evaluation in Sepsis Hypotension and Shock: A Randomized Clinical Trial[J].Chest,2020,158(4):1431-1445. [10]Rameau A,de With E,Boerma EC.Passive leg raise testing effectively reduces fluid administration in septic shock after correction of non-compliance to test results[J].Ann Intensive Care,2017,7(1):2. [11]申丽旻,龙玲,赵浩天,等.不同指标预测脓毒症休克合并心肌抑制患者容量反应性的准确性:下腔静脉超声指标,PiCCO指标,CVP的比较[J].中华麻醉学杂志,2019,39(5):629-632.[12]李跃东,周翔,王亚朋.每搏变异度,脉搏压变异度的变化评价感染性休克患者容量反应性的临床研究[J].中国医刊,2016,51(10):91-94.[13]彭绵,方伟强,蔡举瑜,等.机械通气脓毒症休克患者下腔静脉管径/呼吸变异指数与中心静脉压的关系[J].内科急危重症杂志,2015,21(5):333-335.[14]Via G,Tavazzi G,Price S.Ten situations where inferior vena cava ultrasound may fail to accurately predict fluid responsiveness: a physiologically based point of view[J].Intensive Care Med,2016,42(7):1164-1167.[15]Guinot PG,de Broca B,Bemard E,et al.Respiratory stroke volume variation assessed by oesophageal Doppler monitoring predicts fluid responsiveness during laparoscopy[J].Br J Anaesth,2014,112(4):600-664.[16]Lu N,Xi X,Jiang L,et al.Exploring the best predictors of fluid responsiveness in patients with septic shock[J].Am J Emerg Med,2017,35(9):1258-1261.[17]干朝晖,张立群,姚宝锋.超声测量股动脉流速变异率预测容量反应性的临床应用[J].中国基层医药,2016,23(14):2197-2200.[18]卢年芳,姜利,朱波,等.外周动脉峰流速变异度评估感染性休克患者容量反应性的临床研究[J].中华危重病急救医学,2018,30(3):224-229.[19]李吉光,曹立娟,刘素霞,等.超声监测左心不同部位血流速及呼吸变异度的研究[J].中华急诊医学杂志,2018,27(11):1276-1280.

相似文献/References:

[1]陈 伟,王鸿志,陈永权.下腔静脉扩张指数评估机械通气患者 容量反应性价值的Meta分析[J].医学信息,2019,32(12):80.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2019.12.025]
 CHEN Wei,WANG Hong-zhi,CHEN Yong-quan.Meta-analysis of the Value of Inferior Vena Caval Expansion Index in Evaluating the Volume Reactivity of Mechanical Ventilation Patients[J].Medical Information,2019,32(19):80.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2019.12.025]
[2]张 雪.乳酸清除率评估严重脓毒症及脓毒性休克预后的价值[J].医学信息,2020,33(16):104.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2020.16.031]
 ZHANG Xue.The Value of Lactate Clearance Rate in Evaluating the Prognosis of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock[J].Medical Information,2020,33(19):104.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2020.16.031]
[3]林宗钦,商 益,菅洪健,等.床旁超声评估下腔静脉呼吸变异度联合被动抬腿试验在重症脓毒症休克患者中的应用价值[J].医学信息,2023,36(17):142.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2023.17.029]
 LIN Zong-qin,SHANG Yi,JIAN Hong-jian,et al.Application Value of Bedside Ultrasound in Evaluating Inferior Vena Cava Respiratory Variability Combined with Passive Leg Raising Test in Patients with Severe Septic Shock[J].Medical Information,2023,36(19):142.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2023.17.029]

更新日期/Last Update: 1900-01-01