[1]娄侠儒,王维策,黄响玲,等.FloTrac/Vigileo系统与超声在评估脓毒症休克血流动力学相关性及对比研究[J].医学信息,2026,39(10):47-51,56.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2026.10.007]
　LOU Xiaru,WANG Weice,HUANG Xiangling,et al.Correlation and Comparative Study of FloTrac/Vigileo System and Ultrasoundin Assessing Hemodynamics in Septic Shock[J].Journal of Medical Information,2026,39(10):47-51,56.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2026.10.007]
点击复制

FloTrac/Vigileo系统与超声在评估脓毒症休克血流动力学相关性及对比研究()

医学信息[ISSN:1006-1959/CN:61-1278/R]

卷:
39卷
期数:
2026年10期
页码:
47-51,56
栏目:
临床信息学
出版日期:
2026-05-15

文章信息/Info

Title:
Correlation and Comparative Study of FloTrac/Vigileo System and Ultrasoundin Assessing Hemodynamics in Septic Shock
文章编号:
1006-1959（2026）10-0047-06
作者:
娄侠儒1; 王维策2; 黄响玲1; 隋 鑫1; 张 莉1
佛山复星禅诚医院重症医学科1，超声科2，广东 佛山 528031
Author(s):
LOU Xiaru1;  WANG Weice2;  HUANG Xiangling1;  SUI Xin1;  ZHANG Li1
Intensive Care Unit1, Department of Ultrasound2, Foshan Fosun Chancheng Hospital,Foshan 528031, Guangdong, China
关键词:
脓毒症休克; 容量反应性; FloTrac/Vigileo系统; 重症超声; 下腔静脉; 抬腿试验
Keywords:
Septic shock;  Fluid responsiveness;  FloTrac/Vigileo systems;  Severe ultrasound;  Inferior vena cava;  Passive leg raise test
分类号:
R459.7
DOI:
10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2026.10.007
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
目的 对比超声与FloTrac/Vigileo系统对脓毒症休克患者液体复苏有效性的评估效果。方法 研究选取2023年1月-2024年8月我院重症医学科80例需机械通气的脓毒症休克患者，先进行早期集束化治疗，再用超声与FloTrac/Vigileo系统测量容量指标，通过容量负荷试验（VE）评估容量反应性，根据心脏每搏量增加（△SV）≥15%为有反应组，△SV＜15%为无反应组，其中有反应组38例，无反应组42例。对比两组在VE前，超声与FloTrac/Vigileo系统测量的相关参数数值，分析这些参数与△SV的相关性，以及它们对容量反应特性的预测价值。结果 VE前，有反应组的中心静脉压（CVP）、下腔静脉直径（IVC-D）低于无反应组，而下腔静脉膨胀指数（dIVC）、每搏量变异度（SVV）、抬腿试验前后每搏量变异度（△SV-PLR）则大于无反应组，具有统计学差异（P＜0.05）。根据相关性分析，VE前的CVP、IVC-D、dIVC、SVV、△SV-PLR与△SV均呈直线关系（r值分别为-0.367、-0.630、0.788、0.936、0.942，均P＜0.05），其中△SV-PLR的相关性最高；ROC曲线分析显示，VE前的CVP、IVC-D、dIVC、SVV、△SV-PLR在估计容量反应性的ROC曲线下面积（AUC）依次为0.404、0.160、0.683、0.829、0.860，以△SV-PLR的预测价值最高，而CVP、IVC-D无预测价值。结论 脓毒症休克机械通气的患者，超声监测dIVC及FloTrac/Vigileo系统监测SVV、△SV-PLR均能对机械通气脓毒症休克患者的容量反应性有效预测，但以△SV-PLR的特异度和敏感度最佳。
Abstract:
Objective To compare the effectiveness of ultrasound and the FloTrac/Vigileo system in evaluating fluid resuscitation in patients with septic shock. Methods From January 2023 to August 2024, 80 patients with septic shock requiring mechanical ventilation admitted to the Intensive Care Vnit of our hospital were enrolled. All patients received early goal-directed therapy, followed by volume status measurements using ultrasound and the FloTrac/Vigileo system. Volume responsiveness was assessed by volume expansion (VE). Patients were divided into two groups based on stroke volume increase (△SV): the response group (△SV≥15%, n=38) and the non-response group (△SV<15%, n=42). The parameters measured by ultrasound and the FloTrac/Vigileo system before VE were compared between the two groups. The correlations between these parameters and △SV were analyzed, and their predictive value for volume responsiveness was evaluated. Results Before VE, the central venous pressure (CVP) and inferior vena cava diameter (IVC-D) of the response group were lower than those of the non-response group, while the distensibility index of the inferior vena cava (dIVC), stroke volume variation (SVV), stroke volume variation before and after leg raising test (△SV-PLR) were higher than those of the non-response group, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). According to correlation analysis, CVP, IVC-D, dIVC ,SVV, △SV-PLR before VE were linearly correlated with △SV (r values were -0.367, -0.630, 0.788, 0.936, 0.942, all P<0.05), and △SV-PLR had the highest correlation; ROC curve analysis showed that the area under the ROC curve (AUC) of CVP, IVC-D, dIVC, SVV, and △SV-PLR before VE were 0.404, 0.160, 0.683, 0.829, and 0.860, and △SV-PLR had the highest predictive value, while CVP and IVC-D had no predictive value. Conclusion In patients with mechanical ventilation for septic shock, ultrasonic monitoring of dIVC and FloTrac/Vigileo system monitoring of SVV and △SV-PLR can effectively predict the fluid responsiveness of patients with mechanical ventilation septic shock, but △SV-PLR has the best specificity and sensitivity.

参考文献/References:

[1]Singer M,Deutschman CS,Seymour CW,et al.The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3)[J].JAMA,2016,315(8):801-810[2]中国医疗保健国际交流促进会急诊医学分会,中华医学会急诊医学分会,中国医师协会急诊医师分会,等.中国“脓毒症早期预防与阻断”急诊专家共识[J].中华危重病急救医学,2020,32(5):518-530.[3]Dellinger RP,Rhodes A,Evans L,et al.Surviving Sepsis Campaign[J].Crit Care Med,2023,51(4):431-444.[4]Schlapbach LJ,Watson RS,Sorce LR,et al.International Consensus Criteria for Pediatric Sepsis and Septic Shock[J].JAMA,2024,331(8):665-674.[5]Evans L,Rhodes A,Alhazzani W,et al.Surviving Sepsis Campaign:International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2021[J].Crit Care Med,2021,49(11):e1063-e1143.[6]尹万红,王小亭,刘大为,等.重症超声应用及培训原则与质量控制标准[J].中华内科杂志,2022,61(6):631-643.[7]黄惠斌,刘光云,许彪,等.感染性休克患者容量负荷试验后反应性评估时间的选择[J].中华危重病急救医学,2019,31(4):407-412.[8]李玉婷,李洪祥,张东,等.脓毒性休克患者容量过负荷的危险因素及预后分析[J].中华急诊医学杂志,2018,27(5):524-528.[9]Kuwauchi A,Yoshida S,Tanaka S,et al.Hemodynamic Monitoring Using a Pulmonary Artery Catheter Versus the Vigileo/FloTrac System during Elective Cardiac Surgery Based on Real-world Data in Japan[J].Annals of Clinical Epidemiology,2022,4(3):81-91.[10]Huan S,Dai J,Song S,et al.Stroke volume variation for predicting responsiveness to fluid therapy in patients undergoing cardiac and thoracic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J].BMJ Open,2022,12(5):e051112.[11]Khwannimit B,Jomsuriya R.Comparison the accuracy and trending ability of cardiac index measured by the fourth-generation of FloTrac with the PiCCO device in septic shock patients[J].Turk J Med Sci,2020,50(4):860-869.[12]余琨,陈淼,陈涛,等.重症超声在成人脓毒性休克患者液体复苏中的临床应用价值[J].中国中西医结合急救杂志,2023,30(2):185-190.[13]余群锋,叶晨曦,俞啸,等.心脏超声联合下腔静脉变异度对感染性休克容量反应性的评估价值[J].中华医院感染学杂志,2024,34(14):2163-2167. [14]Kaur KB,Nakra M,Mangal V,et al.Comparative evaluation of stroke volume variation and inferior vena cava distensibility index for prediction of fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients[J].Ann Card Anaesth,2021,24(3):327-332.[15]陈晗,龚书榕,尚秀玲,等.脓毒症患者早期测量中心静脉压与病死率的关系[J].中华危重病急救医学,2021,33(7):786-791.[16]Khwannimit B,Bhurayanontachai R.Prediction of fluid responsiveness in septic shock patients: comparing stroke volume variation by FloTrac/Vigileo and automated pulse pressure variation[J].Eur J Anaesthesiol,2012,29(2):64-69. [17]Latham HE,Bengtson CD,Satterwhite L,et al.Stroke volume guided resuscitation in severe sepsis and septic shock improves outcomes[J].J Crit Care,201,42:42-46.[18]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.[19]Mallat J,Fischer MO,Granier M,et al.Passive leg raising-induced changes in pulse pressure variation to assess fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients:a multicentre prospective observational study[J].Br J Anaesth,2022,129(3):308-316.[20]Sndergaard S.A critical review of the hemodynamics in assessment of volume responsiveness by using passive leg raising (PLR)[J].Trends in Anaesthesia and Critical Care,2023,53:101292.

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].Journal of Medical Information,2019,32(10):80.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2019.12.025]
[2]王国粉,王繁静,马 滨,等.右美托咪定对脓毒症休克患者围术期血流动力学、乳酸清除率的影响[J].医学信息,2022,35(12):153.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2022.12.037]
　WANG Guo-fen,WANG Fan-jing,MA Bin,et al.Effect of Dexmedetomidine on Perioperative Hemodynamics and Lactate Clearance Rate in Patients with Septic Shock[J].Journal of Medical Information,2022,35(10):153.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2022.12.037]
[3]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.[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].Journal of Medical Information,2021,34(10):162.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2021.19.044]
[4]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].Journal of Medical Information,2023,36(10):142.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2023.17.029]

更新日期/Last Update: 1900-01-01