Suppr超能文献

心脏手术后危重症不稳定患者的心指数评估:压力记录分析方法。

Cardiac index assessment by the pressure recording analytic method in critically ill unstable patients after cardiac surgery.

机构信息

Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Via Olgettina 60, 20132 Milan, Italy.

出版信息

J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2013 Dec;27(6):1108-13. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2013.02.016. Epub 2013 Aug 29.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The authors measured cardiac index in unstable patients after cardiac surgery with the Pressure Recording Analytic Method (PRAM) and compared it with the reference method of thermodilution (ThD) with the pulmonary artery catheter; using the hypothesis that there were no significant differences between the 2 methods.

DESIGN

A prospective study.

SETTING

Cardiac surgery intensive care unit in a teaching hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Ninety-four measurements from 59 patients with ongoing high doses of inotropic drugs and/or an intra-aortic balloon pump for low-cardiac-output syndrome after cardiac surgery were studied.

INTERVENTIONS

The pulmonary artery catheter and the radial or femoral arterial catheter for measuring blood pressure were already in place for standard hemodynamic monitoring.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The mean of the total CI measurements was 2.94 ± 0.67 L/min/m(2) with PRAM and 2.95 ± 0.63 L/min/m(2) with ThD, with no significant difference according to the linear mixed models analysis. The PRAM and ThD techniques were similar in unstable patients without atrial fibrillation (mean bias 0.047 ± 0.395 L/min/m(2) and a percentage error of 29%), while no agreement between PRAM and ThD was found in unstable patients with atrial fibrillation (mean bias 0.195 ± 0.885 L/min/m(2) and a percentage error of 69%).

CONCLUSION

Cardiac index measurements after cardiac surgery performed with PRAM and with ThD showed a good agreement in hemodynamically unstable patients given high doses of inotropes and/or an IABP in patients in sinus rhythm, but not in those with atrial fibrillation.

摘要

目的

作者使用压力记录分析法(PRAM)测量心脏手术后不稳定患者的心指数,并将其与肺动脉导管的热稀释法(ThD)进行比较;假设这两种方法没有显著差异。

设计

前瞻性研究。

设置

教学医院的心脏外科重症监护病房。

参与者

对 59 名正在接受高剂量正性肌力药物和/或主动脉内球囊泵治疗的低心输出综合征的心脏手术后患者的 94 次测量进行了研究。

干预措施

已经放置了肺动脉导管和用于测量血压的桡动脉或股动脉导管,用于标准的血流动力学监测。

测量和主要结果

PRAM 的总 CI 测量平均值为 2.94 ± 0.67 L/min/m²,ThD 的平均值为 2.95 ± 0.63 L/min/m²,线性混合模型分析无显著差异。在没有心房颤动的不稳定患者中,PRAM 和 ThD 技术相似(平均偏差 0.047 ± 0.395 L/min/m²,误差百分比为 29%),而在有心房颤动的不稳定患者中,PRAM 和 ThD 之间没有一致性(平均偏差 0.195 ± 0.885 L/min/m²,误差百分比为 69%)。

结论

在接受高剂量正性肌力药物和/或主动脉内球囊泵治疗的血流动力学不稳定患者中,使用 PRAM 和 ThD 进行心脏手术后的心指数测量在窦性心律患者中具有良好的一致性,但在心房颤动患者中则不一致。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验