休息和运动时二氧化碳再呼吸法和直接菲克法测定心输出量的比较。

T Reybrouck, A Amery, L Billiet, R Fagard, H Stijns
{"title":"休息和运动时二氧化碳再呼吸法和直接菲克法测定心输出量的比较。","authors":"T Reybrouck,&nbsp;A Amery,&nbsp;L Billiet,&nbsp;R Fagard,&nbsp;H Stijns","doi":"10.1042/cs0550445","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>1. To study the validity of a CO2-rebreathing method at rest and during graded exercise, cardiac output was measured simultaneously on 59 occasions in 16 subjects with normal pulmonary function with the CO2-rebreathing method and the direct Fick method for oxygen. The correlation coefficient between the results of both methods was significantly higher during exercise than at rest. 2. No systematic difference was shown between (a-v)CO2 content difference determined on whole blood and end-tidal gas, which justified the exclusion of a correction factor for blood to alveolar gas PCO2 gradients. 3. In the calculation of cardiac output by the direct Fick method for CO2 and by CO2 rebreathing, a standard CO2 dissociation curve was preferred to a synthetic CO2 dissociation curve, constructed by allowance for changes in haemoglobin concentration, pH and oxygen saturation. The latter curve tended to increase values for cardiac output and induced a large dispersion around the line of identity, when compared with simultaneous cardiac output estimates by the direct Fick method for oxygen.</p>","PeriodicalId":10356,"journal":{"name":"Clinical science and molecular medicine","volume":"55 5","pages":"445-52"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1978-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1042/cs0550445","citationCount":"36","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of cardiac output determined by a carbon dioxide-rebreathing and direct Fick method at rest and during exercise.\",\"authors\":\"T Reybrouck,&nbsp;A Amery,&nbsp;L Billiet,&nbsp;R Fagard,&nbsp;H Stijns\",\"doi\":\"10.1042/cs0550445\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>1. To study the validity of a CO2-rebreathing method at rest and during graded exercise, cardiac output was measured simultaneously on 59 occasions in 16 subjects with normal pulmonary function with the CO2-rebreathing method and the direct Fick method for oxygen. The correlation coefficient between the results of both methods was significantly higher during exercise than at rest. 2. No systematic difference was shown between (a-v)CO2 content difference determined on whole blood and end-tidal gas, which justified the exclusion of a correction factor for blood to alveolar gas PCO2 gradients. 3. In the calculation of cardiac output by the direct Fick method for CO2 and by CO2 rebreathing, a standard CO2 dissociation curve was preferred to a synthetic CO2 dissociation curve, constructed by allowance for changes in haemoglobin concentration, pH and oxygen saturation. The latter curve tended to increase values for cardiac output and induced a large dispersion around the line of identity, when compared with simultaneous cardiac output estimates by the direct Fick method for oxygen.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10356,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical science and molecular medicine\",\"volume\":\"55 5\",\"pages\":\"445-52\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1978-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1042/cs0550445\",\"citationCount\":\"36\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical science and molecular medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1042/cs0550445\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical science and molecular medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1042/cs0550445","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 36

摘要

1. 为了研究静止和分级运动时co2再呼吸法的有效性,对16例肺功能正常的59例受试者,分别用co2再呼吸法和直接Fick法同时测量心输出量。两种方法结果的相关系数在运动时显著高于休息时。2. 全血测定的(a-v)CO2含量差异与潮末气测定的(a-v)CO2含量差异无系统差异,这证明排除血液到肺泡气体PCO2梯度的校正因子是合理的。3.在直接菲克法计算心排血量和CO2再呼吸计算心排血量时,考虑血红蛋白浓度、pH值和氧饱和度的变化,选择标准CO2解离曲线,而不是合成CO2解离曲线。与氧的直接菲克法同时估计的心输出量相比,后一条曲线倾向于增加心输出量的值,并在同一性线上引起较大的离散。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of cardiac output determined by a carbon dioxide-rebreathing and direct Fick method at rest and during exercise.

1. To study the validity of a CO2-rebreathing method at rest and during graded exercise, cardiac output was measured simultaneously on 59 occasions in 16 subjects with normal pulmonary function with the CO2-rebreathing method and the direct Fick method for oxygen. The correlation coefficient between the results of both methods was significantly higher during exercise than at rest. 2. No systematic difference was shown between (a-v)CO2 content difference determined on whole blood and end-tidal gas, which justified the exclusion of a correction factor for blood to alveolar gas PCO2 gradients. 3. In the calculation of cardiac output by the direct Fick method for CO2 and by CO2 rebreathing, a standard CO2 dissociation curve was preferred to a synthetic CO2 dissociation curve, constructed by allowance for changes in haemoglobin concentration, pH and oxygen saturation. The latter curve tended to increase values for cardiac output and induced a large dispersion around the line of identity, when compared with simultaneous cardiac output estimates by the direct Fick method for oxygen.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信