静脉体外膜肺氧合患者股动脉插管与股动脉和腋动脉联合插管的比较研究

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Na Jin, Xin Pang, Shiyang Song, Jin Zheng, Zhimeng Liu, Tianxiang Gu, Yang Yu
{"title":"静脉体外膜肺氧合患者股动脉插管与股动脉和腋动脉联合插管的比较研究","authors":"Na Jin, Xin Pang, Shiyang Song, Jin Zheng, Zhimeng Liu, Tianxiang Gu, Yang Yu","doi":"10.3389/fcvm.2024.1388577","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ObjectiveVeno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is a critical support technique for cardiac surgery patients. This study compares the outcomes of femoral artery cannulation vs. combined femoral and axillary artery cannulation in post-cardiotomy VA-ECMO patients. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of critically ill patients post-cardiac surgery under VA-ECMO support using different cannulation strategies. Specifically, the focus was on the impact of femoral artery (FA) cannulation vs. combined femoral artery and axillary artery (FA+AA) cannulation on patient outcomes.MethodsThrough a retrospective analysis, we compared 51 adult patients who underwent cardiac surgery and received VA-ECMO support based on the cannulation strategy employed—FA cannulation in 27 cases vs. FA+AA cannulation in 24 cases.ResultsThe FA+AA group showed significant advantages over the FA group in terms of the incidence of chronic renal failure (CRF) (37.50% vs. 14.81%, <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.045), preoperative blood filtration requirement (37.50% vs. 11.11%, <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.016), decreased platelet count (82.67 ± 44.95 vs. 147.33 ± 108.79, <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.014), and elevated creatinine (Cr) levels (151.80 ± 60.73 vs. 110.26 ± 57.99, <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.041), although the two groups had similar 30-day mortality rates (FA group 40.74%, FA+AA group 33.33%). These findings underscore that a combined approach may offer more effective hemodynamic support and better clinical outcomes when selecting an ECMO cannulation strategy.ConclusionDespite the FA+AA group patients presenting with more preoperative risk factors, this group has exhibited lower rates of complications and faster recovery during ECMO treatment. While there has been no significant difference in 30-day mortality rates between the two cannulation strategies, the FA+AA approach may be more effective in reducing complications and improving limb ischemia. These findings highlight the importance of individualized treatment strategies and meticulous monitoring in managing post-cardiac surgery ECMO patients.","PeriodicalId":12414,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparative study of femoral artery and combined femoral and axillary artery cannulation in veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients\",\"authors\":\"Na Jin, Xin Pang, Shiyang Song, Jin Zheng, Zhimeng Liu, Tianxiang Gu, Yang Yu\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fcvm.2024.1388577\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ObjectiveVeno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is a critical support technique for cardiac surgery patients. This study compares the outcomes of femoral artery cannulation vs. combined femoral and axillary artery cannulation in post-cardiotomy VA-ECMO patients. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of critically ill patients post-cardiac surgery under VA-ECMO support using different cannulation strategies. Specifically, the focus was on the impact of femoral artery (FA) cannulation vs. combined femoral artery and axillary artery (FA+AA) cannulation on patient outcomes.MethodsThrough a retrospective analysis, we compared 51 adult patients who underwent cardiac surgery and received VA-ECMO support based on the cannulation strategy employed—FA cannulation in 27 cases vs. FA+AA cannulation in 24 cases.ResultsThe FA+AA group showed significant advantages over the FA group in terms of the incidence of chronic renal failure (CRF) (37.50% vs. 14.81%, <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.045), preoperative blood filtration requirement (37.50% vs. 11.11%, <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.016), decreased platelet count (82.67 ± 44.95 vs. 147.33 ± 108.79, <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.014), and elevated creatinine (Cr) levels (151.80 ± 60.73 vs. 110.26 ± 57.99, <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.041), although the two groups had similar 30-day mortality rates (FA group 40.74%, FA+AA group 33.33%). These findings underscore that a combined approach may offer more effective hemodynamic support and better clinical outcomes when selecting an ECMO cannulation strategy.ConclusionDespite the FA+AA group patients presenting with more preoperative risk factors, this group has exhibited lower rates of complications and faster recovery during ECMO treatment. While there has been no significant difference in 30-day mortality rates between the two cannulation strategies, the FA+AA approach may be more effective in reducing complications and improving limb ischemia. These findings highlight the importance of individualized treatment strategies and meticulous monitoring in managing post-cardiac surgery ECMO patients.\",\"PeriodicalId\":12414,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2024.1388577\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2024.1388577","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的体外膜肺氧合(VA-ECMO)是心脏手术患者的重要支持技术。本研究比较了股动脉插管与股动脉和腋动脉联合插管对心脏手术后 VA-ECMO 患者的治疗效果。本研究旨在比较心脏手术后重症患者在 VA-ECMO 支持下使用不同插管策略的临床效果。方法通过回顾性分析,我们比较了 51 名接受心脏手术并接受 VA-ECMO 支持的成年患者采用的插管策略--27 例采用股动脉插管,24 例采用股动脉和腋动脉联合插管。结果FA+AA 组在慢性肾功能衰竭 (CRF) 发生率(37.50% vs. 14.81%,P = 0.045)、术前血液滤过需求(37.50% vs. 11.11%,P = 0.016)、血小板计数减少(82.67 ± 44.95 vs. 147.33 ± 108.79,p = 0.014)和肌酐 (Cr) 水平升高(151.80 ± 60.73 vs. 110.26 ± 57.99,p = 0.041),尽管两组的 30 天死亡率相似(FA 组 40.74%,FA+AA 组 33.33%)。结论尽管 FA+AA 组患者术前风险因素较多,但该组患者在 ECMO 治疗期间并发症发生率较低,恢复较快。虽然两种插管策略的 30 天死亡率没有明显差异,但 FA+AA 方法在减少并发症和改善肢体缺血方面可能更有效。这些研究结果凸显了在管理心脏手术后 ECMO 患者时,个体化治疗策略和细致监测的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A comparative study of femoral artery and combined femoral and axillary artery cannulation in veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients
ObjectiveVeno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is a critical support technique for cardiac surgery patients. This study compares the outcomes of femoral artery cannulation vs. combined femoral and axillary artery cannulation in post-cardiotomy VA-ECMO patients. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of critically ill patients post-cardiac surgery under VA-ECMO support using different cannulation strategies. Specifically, the focus was on the impact of femoral artery (FA) cannulation vs. combined femoral artery and axillary artery (FA+AA) cannulation on patient outcomes.MethodsThrough a retrospective analysis, we compared 51 adult patients who underwent cardiac surgery and received VA-ECMO support based on the cannulation strategy employed—FA cannulation in 27 cases vs. FA+AA cannulation in 24 cases.ResultsThe FA+AA group showed significant advantages over the FA group in terms of the incidence of chronic renal failure (CRF) (37.50% vs. 14.81%, p = 0.045), preoperative blood filtration requirement (37.50% vs. 11.11%, p = 0.016), decreased platelet count (82.67 ± 44.95 vs. 147.33 ± 108.79, p = 0.014), and elevated creatinine (Cr) levels (151.80 ± 60.73 vs. 110.26 ± 57.99, p = 0.041), although the two groups had similar 30-day mortality rates (FA group 40.74%, FA+AA group 33.33%). These findings underscore that a combined approach may offer more effective hemodynamic support and better clinical outcomes when selecting an ECMO cannulation strategy.ConclusionDespite the FA+AA group patients presenting with more preoperative risk factors, this group has exhibited lower rates of complications and faster recovery during ECMO treatment. While there has been no significant difference in 30-day mortality rates between the two cannulation strategies, the FA+AA approach may be more effective in reducing complications and improving limb ischemia. These findings highlight the importance of individualized treatment strategies and meticulous monitoring in managing post-cardiac surgery ECMO patients.
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
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine Medicine-Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
11.10%
发文量
3529
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: Frontiers? Which frontiers? Where exactly are the frontiers of cardiovascular medicine? And who should be defining these frontiers? At Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine we believe it is worth being curious to foresee and explore beyond the current frontiers. In other words, we would like, through the articles published by our community journal Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine, to anticipate the future of cardiovascular medicine, and thus better prevent cardiovascular disorders and improve therapeutic options and outcomes of our patients.
×
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