指导流体治疗的血液动力学参数:指导流体治疗的血液动力学参数

P. Marik
{"title":"指导流体治疗的血液动力学参数:指导流体治疗的血液动力学参数","authors":"P. Marik","doi":"10.1111/J.1778-428X.2010.01133.X","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"SUMMARY \nThe clinical determination of the intravascular volume can be extremely difficult in critically ill and injured patients as well as those undergoing major surgery. This is problematic as fluid loading is considered the first step in the resuscitation of hemodynamically unstable patients. Yet, multiple studies have demonstrated that only about 50% of hemodynamically unstable patients in the ICU and operating room respond to a fluid challenge. Cardiac filling pressures including the central venous pressure and pulmonary artery occlusion pressure have traditionally been used to guide fluid management. However, studies performed over the last 30 years have demonstrated that cardiac filling pressures are unable to predict fluid responsiveness. Over the last decade a number of studies have been reported that have used heart–lung interactions during mechanical ventilation to assess fluid responsiveness. Specifically, the pulse pressure variation derived from analysis of the arterial waveform, the stroke volume variation derived from pulse contour analysis and the variation of the amplitude of the pulse oximeter plethysmographic waveform have been shown to be highly predictive of fluid responsiveness. While the left ventricular end-diastolic area as determined by transesophageal echocardiography is a more accurate measure of preload than either the central venous pressure or pulmonary artery occlusion pressure, it does not predict fluid responsiveness as well as the dynamic indices. This paper reviews the evolution and accuracy of methods for assessing fluid responsiveness in patients in the ICU and operating room.","PeriodicalId":90375,"journal":{"name":"Transfusion alternatives in transfusion medicine : TATM","volume":"11 1","pages":"102-112"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/J.1778-428X.2010.01133.X","citationCount":"18","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hemodynamic parameters to guide fluid therapy: HEMODYNAMIC PARAMETERS TO GUIDE FLUID THERAPY\",\"authors\":\"P. Marik\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/J.1778-428X.2010.01133.X\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"SUMMARY \\nThe clinical determination of the intravascular volume can be extremely difficult in critically ill and injured patients as well as those undergoing major surgery. This is problematic as fluid loading is considered the first step in the resuscitation of hemodynamically unstable patients. Yet, multiple studies have demonstrated that only about 50% of hemodynamically unstable patients in the ICU and operating room respond to a fluid challenge. Cardiac filling pressures including the central venous pressure and pulmonary artery occlusion pressure have traditionally been used to guide fluid management. However, studies performed over the last 30 years have demonstrated that cardiac filling pressures are unable to predict fluid responsiveness. Over the last decade a number of studies have been reported that have used heart–lung interactions during mechanical ventilation to assess fluid responsiveness. Specifically, the pulse pressure variation derived from analysis of the arterial waveform, the stroke volume variation derived from pulse contour analysis and the variation of the amplitude of the pulse oximeter plethysmographic waveform have been shown to be highly predictive of fluid responsiveness. While the left ventricular end-diastolic area as determined by transesophageal echocardiography is a more accurate measure of preload than either the central venous pressure or pulmonary artery occlusion pressure, it does not predict fluid responsiveness as well as the dynamic indices. This paper reviews the evolution and accuracy of methods for assessing fluid responsiveness in patients in the ICU and operating room.\",\"PeriodicalId\":90375,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Transfusion alternatives in transfusion medicine : TATM\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"102-112\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/J.1778-428X.2010.01133.X\",\"citationCount\":\"18\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Transfusion alternatives in transfusion medicine : TATM\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1778-428X.2010.01133.X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transfusion alternatives in transfusion medicine : TATM","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1778-428X.2010.01133.X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18

摘要

在危重患者和受伤患者以及接受大手术的患者中,临床测定血管内容积是非常困难的。这是有问题的,因为液体负荷被认为是血液动力学不稳定患者复苏的第一步。然而,多项研究表明,在ICU和手术室中,只有约50%的血流动力学不稳定患者对液体挑战有反应。心脏充盈压包括中心静脉压和肺动脉闭塞压传统上用于指导液体管理。然而,过去30年的研究表明,心脏充盈压力不能预测液体反应性。在过去的十年中,已经报道了一些研究,利用机械通气期间的心肺相互作用来评估液体反应。具体来说,从动脉波形分析得出的脉压变化,从脉冲轮廓分析得出的脑卒中容量变化,以及脉搏血氧仪体积描记波形振幅的变化,都被证明可以高度预测流体反应性。虽然经食管超声心动图测定的左心室舒张末期面积比中心静脉压或肺动脉闭塞压更准确地测量预负荷,但它不能预测液体反应性和动态指标。本文综述了评估ICU和手术室患者液体反应性方法的发展和准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Hemodynamic parameters to guide fluid therapy: HEMODYNAMIC PARAMETERS TO GUIDE FLUID THERAPY
SUMMARY The clinical determination of the intravascular volume can be extremely difficult in critically ill and injured patients as well as those undergoing major surgery. This is problematic as fluid loading is considered the first step in the resuscitation of hemodynamically unstable patients. Yet, multiple studies have demonstrated that only about 50% of hemodynamically unstable patients in the ICU and operating room respond to a fluid challenge. Cardiac filling pressures including the central venous pressure and pulmonary artery occlusion pressure have traditionally been used to guide fluid management. However, studies performed over the last 30 years have demonstrated that cardiac filling pressures are unable to predict fluid responsiveness. Over the last decade a number of studies have been reported that have used heart–lung interactions during mechanical ventilation to assess fluid responsiveness. Specifically, the pulse pressure variation derived from analysis of the arterial waveform, the stroke volume variation derived from pulse contour analysis and the variation of the amplitude of the pulse oximeter plethysmographic waveform have been shown to be highly predictive of fluid responsiveness. While the left ventricular end-diastolic area as determined by transesophageal echocardiography is a more accurate measure of preload than either the central venous pressure or pulmonary artery occlusion pressure, it does not predict fluid responsiveness as well as the dynamic indices. This paper reviews the evolution and accuracy of methods for assessing fluid responsiveness in patients in the ICU and operating room.
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信