Griffin M, Kakkos S K, Geroulakos G, Nicolaides A N
The Vascular Noninvasive Screening and Diagnostic Centre, London, UK.
Int Angiol. 2007 Jun;26(2):158-64.
Previous studies have demonstrated the hemodynamic impact of sequential leg compression, compared to uniform compression. The aim of this study was to compare the hemodynamic effectiveness of three compression devices: 1) circumferential sequential gradient compression (CSG); 2) a posterior uniform compression device (PU) and a posterior sequential rapid gradient inflation device (PSR).
open, controlled trial. Thigh length sleeves were tested in 12 patients with primary bilateral varicose veins.
the three devices were tested in the semirecumbent position.
augmented flow velocity and volume flow, including the total and peak volume of blood expelled per hour during compression, were measured using duplex scanning. Refilling time was determined from velocity recordings of the common femoral vein. All values were expressed as median and interquartile range with P values obtained using the Mann-Whitney U-test.
Compared to the median baseline flow, all three devices increased flow during compression by 2.5-3 times (P<0.0001). The cycles per hour for the three devices CSG, PSR and PU were 78 (70-88), 60 and 60, respectively; the duplex effective compression time was 11, 12 and 6 s, respectively; single cycle volume expelled during compression was 105, 85 and 45 mL (P<0.005), respectively; the total volume expelled per hour was 7 800, 5 200 (P<0.028) and 3 300 (P<0.005) mL/hr, respectively; peak velocity increased (P<0.001) from baseline of 12 cm/s to 38 cm/s for the CSG, 33 cm/s for the PU and to 68 cm/s for the PSR.
The highest volume expelled per hour during compression was observed with the CSG and the lowest with the PSR. This was due to increased volume per cycle and more compression cycles over time, because of the CSG device's sensing of refill time. Although the peak velocity with the PSR was high, it was associated with reduced expelled volume, because of its short compression period. The PU occupied an intermediate position. The relative effectiveness of the three devices in deep vein thrombosis prevention should be tested in future studies.
与均匀压迫相比,先前的研究已证明了序贯腿部压迫对血流动力学的影响。本研究的目的是比较三种压迫装置的血流动力学效果:1)环形序贯梯度压迫(CSG);2)后侧均匀压迫装置(PU)和后侧序贯快速梯度充气装置(PSR)。
开放性对照试验。在12例原发性双侧静脉曲张患者中测试大腿长度的袖带。
在半卧位测试这三种装置。
使用双功扫描测量增强的流速和容积流量,包括压迫期间每小时排出的血液总量和峰值容积。根据股总静脉的速度记录确定再充盈时间。所有值均表示为中位数和四分位数间距,并使用曼-惠特尼U检验获得P值。
与基线血流中位数相比,所有三种装置在压迫期间均使血流增加2.5至3倍(P<0.0001)。CSG、PSR和PU三种装置每小时的循环次数分别为78(70-88)、60和60;双功有效压迫时间分别为11、12和6秒;压迫期间单循环排出容积分别为105、85和45毫升(P<0.005);每小时排出的总体积分别为7800、5200(P<0.028)和3300(P<0.005)毫升/小时;峰值速度从基线的每秒12厘米增加(P<0.001)至CSG的每秒38厘米、PU的每秒33厘米和PSR的每秒68厘米。
CSG在压迫期间每小时排出的容积最高,PSR最低。这是由于CSG装置对再充盈时间的感知,导致每个循环的容积增加以及随着时间推移更多的压迫循环。尽管PSR的峰值速度很高,但由于其压迫期短,排出容积减少。PU处于中间位置。三种装置在预防深静脉血栓形成方面的相对有效性应在未来研究中进行测试。