首页|CVP监测与重症超声指导液体复苏治疗脓毒症休克的临床价值研究

CVP监测与重症超声指导液体复苏治疗脓毒症休克的临床价值研究

扫码查看
目的 探究中心静脉压(CVP)监测与重症超声指导液体复苏治疗脓毒症休克的临床价值.方法 选取脓毒症休克患者 80 例作为本次研究对象,以患者的入院序列数为基础,采用随机数字分组的方式将患者分为对照组以及观察组,每组 40 例.对照组采用CVP监测结合常规液体复苏,观察组采用CVP监测结合重症超声指导液体复苏.比较两组治疗前后的血流动力学指标[平均动脉压(MAP)、CVP、心输出量(CO)、氧合指数(OI)]及免疫功能指标[CD4+、CD8+、白细胞介素-6(IL-6)、白细胞介素-8(IL-8)、肿瘤坏死因子-α(TNF-α)]水平.结果 观察组治疗后MAP为(81.97±10.62)mm Hg(1 mm Hg=0.133 kPa)、CVP 为(12.98±3.94)cm H2O(1 cm H2O=0.098 kPa)、CO 为(2.36±0.38)L/min、OI为(235.88±24.91)mm Hg,高于对照组的(76.19±9.13)mm Hg、(11.02±2.29)cm H2O、(2.19±0.28)L/min、(194.53±23.91)mm Hg(P<0.05).观察组治疗后CD4+为(43.02±4.09)%、CD8+为(28.30±5.33)%、IL-6为(81.72±16.33)pg/ml、IL-8 为(30.67±8.42)pg/ml、TNF-α为(151.55±18.86)pg/ml,对照组治疗后CD4+为(37.76±4.29)%、CD8+为(34.11±3.16)%、IL-6 为(106.89±19.83)pg/ml、IL-8 为(38.50±9.88)pg/ml、TNF-α为(256.09±26.63)pg/ml.治疗后,观察组CD4+高于对照组,CD8+、IL-6、IL-8、TNF-α低于对照组(P<0.05).结论 对脓毒症休克患者采用CVP监测结合重症超声指导液体复苏进行治疗,能够有效改善患者的血流动力学指标以及免疫功能,值得推广与应用.
Study on clinical value of CVP monitoring and critical care ultrasound guided fluid resuscitation in the treatment of septic shock
Objective To explore the clinical value of central venous pressure(CVP)monitoring and critical care ultrasound guided fluid resuscitation in the treatment of septic shock.Methods A total of 80 patients with septic shock were selected as the subjects of this study.Based on the number of admission sequences of patients,80 patients were randomly divided into a control group and an observation group by random numerical grouping method,with 40 cases in each group.The control group received CVP monitoring combined with routine fluid resuscitation,and the observation group received CVP monitoring combined with critical care ultrasound guided fluid resuscitation.Comparison was made on hemodynamic indexes[mean arterial pressure(MAP),CVP,cardiac output(CO),oxygenation index(OI)]and immune function indexes[CD4+,CD8+,interleukin-6(IL-6),interleukin-8(IL-8),tumor necrosis factor-α(TNF-α)]before and after treatment.Results After treatment,the observation group had MAP of(81.97±10.62)mm Hg(1 mm Hg=0.133 kPa),CVP of(12.98±3.94)cm H2O(1 cm H2O=0.098 kPa),CO of(2.36±0.38)L/min,and OI of(235.88±24.91)mm Hg,which were higher than(76.19±9.13)mm Hg,(11.02±2.29)cm H2O,(2.19±0.28)L/min,and(194.53±23.91)mm Hg of the control group(P<0.05).After treatment,CD4+ in the observation group was(43.02±4.09)%,CD8+ was(28.30±5.33)%,IL-6 was(81.72±16.33)pg/ml,IL-8 was(30.67±8.42)pg/ml and TNF-α was(151.55±18.86)pg/ml.After treatment,CD4+ in the control group was(37.76±4.29)%,CD8+ was(34.11±3.16)%,IL-6 was(106.89±19.83)pg/ml,IL-8 was(38.50±9.88)pg/ml and TNF-α was(256.09±26.63)pg/ml.After treatment,the observation group had higher CD4+ than that in the control group;and CD8+,IL-6,IL-8 and TNF-α in the observation group were lower than those in the control group(P<0.05).Conclusion CVP monitoring combined with critical care ultrasound guided fluid resuscitation in patients with septic shock can effectively improve the hemodynamic indexes and immune function of patients,which is worthy of promotion and application.

Central venous pressure monitoringCritical care ultrasoundFluid resuscitationSeptic shockHemodynamic indicatorsImmune function

高凡、周涛、李爱光、周康、王媛媛

展开 >

710100 西安航天总医院

中心静脉压监测 重症超声 液体复苏 脓毒症休克 血流动力学指标 免疫功能

2024

中国实用医药
中国康复医学会

中国实用医药

影响因子:0.797
ISSN:1673-7555
年,卷(期):2024.19(8)
  • 12