Suppr超能文献

比尔阻滞驱血法:容积比较及静脉压研究

Bier block exsanguination: a volumetric comparison and venous pressure study.

作者信息

Mabee J, Orlinsky M

机构信息

Department of Emergency Medicine, Los Angeles County and University of Southern California Medical Center, 90033-1084, USA.

出版信息

Acad Emerg Med. 2000 Feb;7(2):105-13. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2000.tb00510.x.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Intravenous regional anesthesia (IVRA) is a useful ED anesthetic technique. However, venous pressure elevation during injection can cause anesthetic leakage and toxicity. This is minimized by preinjection limb exsanguination. Although standard, Esmarch exsanguination is intolerable with limb trauma. Thus, the authors' objective was to study alternative methods.

METHODS

Volunteers had upper limb exsanguination performed by Esmarch bandage, arm elevation/arterial compression (AE/AC), and a pneumatic vinyl splint. Resultant volume changes, measured by volume displacement, were normalized, and expressed as percent decreases from baseline. Volume changes of all three methods were compared. The physiologic effectiveness of the AE/AC method was tested by measuring IV pressures during simulated IVRA. Attainment of maximum venous pressure (MVP) indicated leakage under the tourniquet.

RESULTS

All methods reduced limb volume compared with baseline (p < 0.05). No difference occurred between AE/AC and vinyl splint exsanguination (p > 0.99), but neither method was as effective as Esmarch (p < 0.05). Gender differences were noted in absolute volumes exsanguinated, but there was no difference in percent exsanguination. The AE/AC method was the simplest procedure to perform. Peak IV pressure during simulated IVRA after AE/AC was 85 mm Hg (males), and 199 mm Hg (females) (p < 0.05). The MVP was not reached.

CONCLUSIONS

While Esmarch was the most effective exsanguinating method, the two alternatives provided significant and equivalent decreases in limb volume. The AE/AC technique was physiologically effective in preventing attainment of MVP. Further studies are indicated to determine the clinical effectiveness of this technique in providing anesthesia for patients with limb trauma.

摘要

目的

静脉区域麻醉(IVRA)是一种有用的急诊麻醉技术。然而,注射过程中静脉压力升高可导致麻醉药渗漏和中毒。通过注射前肢体驱血可将此情况降至最低。尽管采用标准的埃斯马赫驱血法,但肢体创伤时患者难以耐受。因此,作者的目的是研究替代方法。

方法

志愿者的上肢分别采用埃斯马赫绷带、手臂抬高/动脉压迫(AE/AC)和气动乙烯基夹板进行驱血。通过体积置换测量所得的体积变化进行标准化处理,并表示为相对于基线的百分比下降。比较三种方法的体积变化。通过在模拟IVRA期间测量静脉压力来测试AE/AC方法的生理有效性。达到最大静脉压力(MVP)表明止血带下方有渗漏。

结果

与基线相比,所有方法均使肢体体积减小(p < 0.05)。AE/AC法和乙烯基夹板驱血之间无差异(p > 0.99),但两种方法均不如埃斯马赫法有效(p < 0.05)。在绝对驱血体积方面存在性别差异,但在驱血百分比方面无差异。AE/AC法是操作最简单的方法。AE/AC法后模拟IVRA期间的静脉压力峰值男性为85 mmHg,女性为199 mmHg(p < 0.05)。未达到MVP。

结论

虽然埃斯马赫法是最有效的驱血方法,但两种替代方法能使肢体体积显著且同等程度地减小。AE/AC技术在生理上可有效防止达到MVP。需要进一步研究以确定该技术为肢体创伤患者提供麻醉的临床有效性。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验