Haller M, Brechtelsbauer H, Finsterer U, Forst H, Bein T, Briegel J, Peter K
Institut für Anaesthesiologie der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München.
Anaesthesist. 1992 Mar;41(3):115-20.
The importance of circulating blood (BV) and plasma volume (PV) in critically ill patients and physiological research is unchallenged. Recently, Evans blue (EB) [8, 25] and radioactively labelled serum albumin (RIHSA) [20] have mostly been used as tracers for PV determination. However, the disadvantages of radioactive contamination (RIHSA) and dye accumulation (EB), especially in repeated measurements, are obvious. In addition, recent reports show a possible carcinogenic potential for EB [15, 21]. This has prompted us to examine the feasibility of indocyanine green (ICG), a tricarbocyanine dye currently used for cardiac output and liver blood flow measurements, for the determination of PV. The volume of distribution of ICG has been reported to represent PV [5, 26]. METHODS. In 23 healthy volunteers (19 men and 4 women), PV was determined in duplicate (PV1, PV2) with an interval of 30 min. Before injection a tourniquet was put around the arm and a pressure above the systolic arterial pressure was applied for 2 min. During recirculation, ICG (2.5 mg/ml) was administered in a dose of 0.25 mg/kg as a bolus injection over 5 s via an antecubital vein. Blood was drawn from an antecubital vein of the contralateral arm at 1 min intervals. After centrifugation, the optical density (corrected for blank) was read in a densitometer. Third- to ninth-minute plasma samples were used to calculate monoexponential plasma decay curves. The ICG concentration at injection time was achieved by extrapolation. A calibration curve was generated using 5 different known ICG concentrations. PV was calculated from injected ICG dose divided by ICG concentration at injection time. BV and red cell volumes (EV) were derived from measured PV and hematocrit (hct). RESULTS. Between minutes 3 and 9, tracer decay was monoexponential in all but 1 subject. From minute 10 on the plasma decay of ICG represented another, slower compartment (Fig. 1). The plasma half-life of ICG was 3.2 +/- 0.6 min (mean +/- SD). Mean PVs per body weight and body surface area (BSA) were 44 +/- 5 ml/kg and 1662 +/- 176 ml/m2, respectively. Linear regression revealed PV2 = 0.92.PV1 + 226 (r = 0.92) (Fig. 2). The mean percentage of difference (D) was -0.6%, the methodologic error (SD) +/- 5.7% [27]. Linear regression of PV and BSA revealed PV = 1885.BSA -416 (r = 0.71, P less than 0.0001) (Fig. 3). BV and EV estimates (Table 2) obtained from PV and hct showed reproducibility in the range of the PV determination because of excellent reproducibility of hct measurements. DISCUSSION. ICG plasma half-life times in our experiments were comparable to those reported by other authors [18, 19, 24]. Reproducibility of PV determination was good and was well within the limits of other tracer methods (EB, RIHSA) [17, 27]. Using exclusively peripheral veins for ICG injection and blood withdrawal did not seem to affect the accuracy of PV determination. PV estimates obtained by the ICG method showed good agreement with those known from the literature [7, 10, 25]. Our results correspond especially well with the data reported by Hurley [14] obtained from 481 healthy men using different methods (Evans blue, RIHSA, or labelled red cells).
循环血量(BV)和血浆容量(PV)在危重症患者及生理学研究中的重要性是毋庸置疑的。最近,伊文思蓝(EB)[8, 25]和放射性标记血清白蛋白(RIHSA)[20]大多被用作测定PV的示踪剂。然而,放射性污染(RIHSA)和染料蓄积(EB)的缺点很明显,尤其是在重复测量时。此外,最近的报告显示EB可能具有致癌潜力[15, 21]。这促使我们研究吲哚菁绿(ICG)用于测定PV的可行性,ICG是一种目前用于心输出量和肝血流量测量的三碳菁染料。据报道,ICG的分布容积代表PV[5, 26]。方法:在23名健康志愿者(19名男性和4名女性)中,以30分钟的间隔重复测定PV两次(PV1、PV2)。注射前,在手臂上扎上止血带,并施加高于收缩压的压力2分钟。在再循环期间,通过肘前静脉以5秒内推注的方式给予剂量为0.25mg/kg的ICG(2.5mg/ml)。以1分钟的间隔从对侧手臂的肘前静脉采血。离心后,在密度计中读取光密度(校正空白)。使用第3至9分钟的血浆样本计算单指数血浆衰减曲线。注射时的ICG浓度通过外推法获得。使用5种不同的已知ICG浓度生成校准曲线。PV通过注射的ICG剂量除以注射时的ICG浓度来计算。BV和红细胞体积(EV)由测得的PV和血细胞比容(hct)得出。结果:在第3至9分钟之间,除1名受试者外,所有受试者的示踪剂衰减均为单指数形式。从第10分钟起,ICG的血浆衰减代表另一个较慢的部分(图1)。ICG的血浆半衰期为3.2±0.6分钟(平均值±标准差)。每体重和体表面积(BSA)的平均PV分别为44±5ml/kg和1662±176ml/m²。线性回归显示PV2 = 0.92·PV1 + 226(r = 0.92)(图2)。平均差异百分比(D)为-0.6%,方法误差(标准差)±为5.7%[27]。PV与BSA的线性回归显示PV = 1885·BSA - 416(r = 0.71,P<0.0001)(图3)。从PV和hct得出的BV和EV估计值(表2)显示出在PV测定范围内的可重复性,因为hct测量具有出色的可重复性。讨论:我们实验中ICG的血浆半衰期与其他作者报道的相当[18, 19, 24]。PV测定的可重复性良好,且完全在其他示踪剂方法(EB、RIHSA)[17, 27]的范围内。仅使用外周静脉进行ICG注射和采血似乎并未影响PV测定的准确性。通过ICG方法获得的PV估计值与文献中已知的值[7, 10, 25]显示出良好的一致性。我们的结果与Hurley[14]使用不同方法(伊文思蓝、RIHSA或标记红细胞)从481名健康男性获得的数据特别吻合。