首页|重度烧伤患者非休克期两种输血治疗策略的对比研究

重度烧伤患者非休克期两种输血治疗策略的对比研究

扫码查看
目的 浅析重度烧伤患者(非休克期)应用两种输血治疗方案的临床效果。方法 选择 2020 年 4 月至 2023年 4 月郑州市第一人民医院收治的重度烧伤患者 88 例进行回顾性分析,依据输血策略的不同分为A组(限制性输血)与B组(开放性输血),各 44 例,就两组患者输血量,输血有效性[输血前后计算每单位红细胞输注前后的变化量,Δ红细胞(RBC)、Δ血红蛋白(Hb)和Δ红细胞压积(HCT)],电解质变化,凝血功能,不良反应风险进行组间比较。结果 A组患者输入RBC、血浆及总血量均低于B组,差异有统计学意义(P<0。05);A组输血有效性ΔRBC、ΔHb指标均高于B组,差异有统计学意义(P<0。05);A组治疗后钠离子(Na+)、钙离子(Ca2+)指标均高于于B组,且钾离子(K+)指标低于B组,差异有统计学意义(P<0。05);A组治疗后凝血酶原时间(PT)、凝血酶时间(TT)、活化部分凝血活酶时间(APTT)指标高于B组,纤维蛋白原浓度(FIB)指标低于B组,差异有统计学意义(P<0。05);A组不良反应风险(9。09%)与B组(20。45%)比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0。05)。结论 在治疗重度烧伤患者的非休克期输血过程中,采取限制性输血与开放性输血两种治疗策略均可达到良好的治疗效果,但限制性输血治疗可减少输血的频率,从而降低输血可能带来的风险,并节约血液资源,这对于临床合理安全使用血液具有重要意义。
The Comparative Studies of Two Transfusion Treatment Strategies for Severe Burn Patients During Non-Shock Phase
Objective To analyze the clinical effects of two transfusion treatment regimens on patients with severe burns(non-shock phase).Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on 88 severe burn patients admitted to Zhengzhou First People's Hospital from April 2020 to April 2023.According to the different transfusion therapies,patients were assigned to group A(restrictive transfusion)and group B(liberal transfusion).44 cases each,Intergroup comparisons were made regarding blood transfusion volume,transfusion effectiveness[calculate the amount of change per unit of red blood cells before and after transfusion,,Δ Red blood cells(RBC)Δ Hemoglobin(Hb)and Δ Hematocrit(HCT)],electrolyte changes,coagulation function,and the risk of adverse reactions.Results The input RBC(red blood cell),plasma and total blood volume in group A were lower than group B,with statistically significant difference(P<0.05);Effectiveness of Group A Blood Transfusion Δ RBC Δ The Hb index was higher than that of Group B,with statistically significant difference(P<0.05);after therapy,the sodium ion(Na+)and calcium ion(Ca2+)indicators in Group A were higher than those in Group B,and the potassium ion(K+)indicators were lower than those in Group B,with statistical significance(P<0.05);after therapy,the prothrombin time(PT),thrombin time(TT),and activated partial thromboplastin time(APTT)in group A were higher than those in group B,while the fibrinogen concentration(FIB)was lower than that in group B,with statistical significance(P<0.05);the adverse event rates in group A(9.09%)and group B(20.45%)were not significantly different(P>0.05).Conclusion In the non-shock phase,both of the restrictive transfusion and liberal transfusion have the fair treatment effects for severe burn patients;However,restrictive transfusion treatment can reduce the frequency of blood transfusion,thereby reducing the potential risks of blood transfusion and saving blood resources.This is of great significance for the rational and safe use of blood in clinical practice.

burnrestrictive transfusionliberal transfusionnon-shock phase

张冰、巴芳芳、宋小彦

展开 >

郑州市第一人民医院 输血科,河南 郑州 450000

烧伤 限制性输血 开放性输血 非休克期

2024

临床研究
西安交通大学

临床研究

影响因子:0.234
ISSN:2096-1278
年,卷(期):2024.32(5)
  • 17