Suppr超能文献

烧伤患者的液体管理:一项欧洲调查的结果——问题多于答案。

Fluid management in burn patients: results from a European survey-more questions than answers.

作者信息

Boldt Joachim, Papsdorf Michael

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Klinikum der Stadt, Ludwigshafen, Bremserstr. 79, D-67063 Ludwigshafen, Germany.

出版信息

Burns. 2008 May;34(3):328-38. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2007.09.005. Epub 2008 Jan 16.

Abstract

Many strategies were proposed for fluid management in burn patients with different composition containing saline solution, colloids, or plasma. The actual clinical use of volume replacement regimen in burn patients in Europe was analysed by an international survey. A total of 187 questionnaires consisting of 20 multiple-choice questions were sent to 187 burn units listed by the European Burn Association. The response rate was 43%. The answers came from a total of 20 European countries. Volume replacement is mostly exclusively with crystalloids (always: 58%; often: 28%). The majority still use fixed formulae: 12% always use the traditional Baxter formula, in 50% modifications of this formula are used. The most often used colloid is albumin (always: 17%, often: 38%), followed by HES (always: 4%, often: 34%). Gelatins, dextrans, and hypertonic saline are used only very rarely. Fresh frozen plasma (FFP) is given in 12% of the units as the colloid of choice. Albumin was named most often to be able to improve patients' outcome (64%), followed by HES (53%), and the exclusive use of crystalloids (45%). Central venous pressure (CVP) is most often used to monitor volume therapy (35%), followed by the PiCCO-system (23%), and mixed-venous saturation (ScVO2; 10%). It is concluded that the kind of volume therapy differs widely among European burn units. This survey supported that no generally accepted volume replacement strategy in burn patients exists. New results, e.g. importance of goal-directed therapy or data concerning use of albumin in the critically ill, have not yet influenced strategies of volume replacement in the burn patient.

摘要

针对烧伤患者的液体管理,人们提出了许多策略,这些策略的成分各不相同,包括盐溶液、胶体或血浆。一项国际调查分析了欧洲烧伤患者容量替代方案的实际临床应用情况。共向欧洲烧伤协会列出的187个烧伤科室发送了187份包含20道多项选择题的问卷。回复率为43%。答案来自总共20个欧洲国家。容量替代大多仅使用晶体液(总是使用:58%;经常使用:28%)。大多数人仍使用固定公式:12%的人总是使用传统的巴克斯特公式,50%的人使用该公式的改良版。最常用的胶体是白蛋白(总是使用:17%,经常使用:38%),其次是羟乙基淀粉(总是使用:4%,经常使用:34%)。明胶、右旋糖酐和高渗盐水很少使用。12%的科室将新鲜冰冻血浆(FFP)作为首选胶体使用。白蛋白被认为最常能改善患者预后(64%),其次是羟乙基淀粉(53%),以及单纯使用晶体液(45%)。中心静脉压(CVP)最常用于监测容量治疗(35%),其次是脉搏指示连续心输出量(PiCCO)系统(23%),以及混合静脉血氧饱和度(ScVO2;10%)。得出的结论是,欧洲各烧伤科室的容量治疗方式差异很大。这项调查支持了目前不存在普遍接受的烧伤患者容量替代策略这一观点。新的研究结果,例如目标导向治疗的重要性或危重症患者白蛋白使用的数据,尚未影响烧伤患者容量替代的策略。

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