首页|PICCO监测下液体复苏对感染性休克患者TcPO2、SvO2、SChE水平及预后的影响

PICCO监测下液体复苏对感染性休克患者TcPO2、SvO2、SChE水平及预后的影响

扫码查看
目的 探究脉搏指数连续心输出量(PICCO)监测下液体复苏对感染性休克患者经皮氧分压(TcPO2)、混合静脉血氧饱和度(SvO2)及血清胆碱酯酶(SChE)水平的影响.方法 选取北京大学国际医院2021年4月-2023年2月94例感染性休克患者为研究对象,按照随机数字表法分为观察组和对照组,每组47例.对照组采用常规方法监测液体复苏效果,观察组采用PICCO监测液体复苏效果.比较两组血流动力学指标[TcPO2、SvO2、平均动脉压(MAP)、中心静脉压(CVP)]、治疗效果[液体量、尿量、血乳酸水平、急性生理功能和慢性健康状况评分系统Ⅱ(APACHEⅡ)评分]、临床治疗时间及预后情况.结果 与治疗前比较,治疗后两组TcPO2、SvO2、MAP、CVP均显著升高(P均<0.05),且观察组较对照组更高,差异均有统计学意义(t=3.765、4.137、3.616、6.935,P均<0.05).治疗后两组尿量、SChE水平均显著增加(P均<0.05),血乳酸、APACHE Ⅱ评分均显著降低(P均<0.05),且观察组尿量、SChE水平显著高于对照组(t=4.514、3.000,P均<0.05),血乳酸、APACHE Ⅱ评分显著低于对照组(t=4.062、3.015,P均<0.05),差异均有统计学意义.观察组机械通气时间、液体复苏时间、血管活性药物治疗时间、ICU入住时间均显著短于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(t=3.750、7.270、2.177、3.559,P均<0.05).观察组临床复苏成功率显著高于对照组(x2=4.967,P<0.05),继发肺水肿占比显著低于对照组(x2=4.919,P<0.05),差异均有统计学意义.两组死亡率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).结论 PICCO指导下液体复苏治疗可明显改善患者的血流动力学、氧代谢及组织血流灌注,患者复苏成功率较高,临床恢复较快,值得推荐.
Effect of fluid resuscitation under PICCO monitoring on TcPO2,SvO2,SChE levels and prognosis in patients with septic shock
Objective To explore the effect of fluid resuscitation under pulse indicator continuous cardiac output(PICCO)monitoring on transcutaneous partial pressure of oxygen(TcPO2),venous oxygen saturation(SvO2)and serum cholinesterase(SChE)in patients with septic shock.Methods A total of 94 patients with septic shock in the Peking University International Hospital were selected as the research subjects and were divided into observation group and control group with 47 cases in each group according to the random number table method.The observation group adopted conventional method to monitor fluid resuscitation effect,and the observation group was given PICCO for fluid resuscitation effect monitoring.Hemodynamic parameters[TcPO2,SvO2,mean arterial pressure(MAP),central venous pressure(CVP)],therapeutic effect[fluid volume,urine volume,blood lactate level,actue physiology and chronic health evaluation Ⅱ(APACHE Ⅱ)score],clinical treatment time(mechanical ventilation time,fluid resuscitation time,vasoactive drug treatment time,ICU stay)and prognosis were compared between both groups.Results Compared with before treatment,after treatment,TcPO2,SvO2,MAP,and CVP in both groups were significantly increased(P<0.05),and the observation group was higher than the control group,with statistically significant differences(t=3.765,4.137,3.616,6.935;all P<0.05).Urine volume and SChE level in both groups were significantly enhanced(P<0.05)while blood lactate and APACHE Ⅱ score were significantly reduced(P<0.05),and the urine volume and SChE level in observation group were significantly higher(t=4.514,3.000;all P<0.05)while blood lactate and APACHE Ⅱ score were significantly lower than those in control group(t=4.062,3.015;all P<0.05).The mechanical ventilation time,fluid resuscitation time,vasoactive drug treatment time and ICU stay in observation group were significantly shorter than those in control group(t=3.750,7.270,2.177,3.559;all P<0.05).The success rate of clinical resuscitation in observation group was significantly higher than that in control group(x2=4.967,P<0.05),and the proportion of secondary pulmonary edema was significantly lower than that in control group(x2=4.919,P<0.05).There was no statistical significance in mortality between the two groups(P>0.05).Conclusion Fluid resuscitation therapy under PICCO guidance could significantly improve the hemodynamics,oxygen metabolism and tissue blood perfusion of patients,and it had high success rate of resuscitation and fast clinical recovery.

Septic shockFluid resuscitationPulse index continuous cardiac outputTranscutaneous partial pressure of oxygenVenous oxygen saturationCholinesterase

汤子鸣、宁峥、李泽暄、张彤

展开 >

北京大学国际医院急诊科,北京 100000

感染性休克 液体复苏 脉搏指数连续心输出量 经皮氧分压 静脉血氧饱和度 胆碱酯酶

首都卫生发展科研专项计划项目

首发2022-1-1151

2024

热带医学杂志
广东省寄生虫学会 中华预防医学会

热带医学杂志

CSTPCD
影响因子:0.643
ISSN:1672-3619
年,卷(期):2024.24(1)
  • 19