University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Piscataway, NJ 08854-5653, USA.
Med Hypotheses. 2011 Oct;77(4):665-7. doi: 10.1016/j.mehy.2011.07.010. Epub 2011 Aug 5.
This paper discusses a current misinterpretation between different parameters of hemoglobin concentration measurement and its amplification under conditions of blood loss. The paper details the distinction between microcirculatory hematocrit and the hematocrit of the macrocirculation to analyze clinical use of real-time patient hemoglobin concentration measurement by noninvasive point-of-care devices such as the Rainbow Pulse CO-Oximetry™ (Masimo Corp., Irvine, CA). The hemoglobin concentration or hematocrit values have clinical significance such as for diagnosing anemia or as indicators to when a blood transfusion is needed. The device infers hemoglobin concentration from spectrophotometry of the fingertip and therefore the measured absorption is due to hemoglobin present in capillaries as well as in larger vessels, and the device accordingly reports the hemoglobin concentration as 'total hemoglobin' in a proprietary SpHb parameter. SpHb and macro hemoglobin concentration are different parameters. However, the numerical resemblance of SpHb values to values of macro hemoglobin concentrations, combined with the widely used unspecified term "Hb" in the medical setting, suggests that SpHb values are often interpreted by the clinician as macro hematocrit values. The claim of this paper is that under conditions of blood loss the portion of the SpHb total hemoglobin measure that is contributed from microcirculation increases, due to the decrease of macro hematocrit while microcirculatory hematocrit remains constant when above a critical value. The device is calibrated from phlembotomy drawn blood (from a vein in the arm), which is the gold standard in blood collection, and hence this changing contribution of microcirculatory hemoglobin to the SpHb value would distort the gap between macro hemoglobin and total hemoglobin, SpHb. The hypothesis is that if clinicians indeed interpret the SpHb values as macro hemoglobin values then there is an unreported discrepancy between SpHb to macro hemoglobin concentrations during blood loss due to the increasing effect of microcirculatory hemoglobin measurement on the mixed parameter, SpHb.
本文讨论了在失血情况下血红蛋白浓度测量的不同参数之间的一种当前误解及其放大。本文详细介绍了微循环血细胞比容和宏观循环血细胞比容之间的区别,以分析非侵入性即时护理设备(如 Rainbow Pulse CO-Oximetry™(Masimo 公司,尔湾,加利福尼亚州))对实时患者血红蛋白浓度测量的临床应用。血红蛋白浓度或血细胞比容值具有临床意义,例如诊断贫血或需要输血的指标。该设备通过指端分光光度法推断血红蛋白浓度,因此测量的吸收既来自毛细血管中的血红蛋白,也来自较大的血管中的血红蛋白,并且该设备相应地以专有 SpHb 参数报告血红蛋白浓度为“总血红蛋白”。SpHb 和宏观血红蛋白浓度是不同的参数。然而,SpHb 值与宏观血红蛋白浓度值之间的数值相似性,加上在医学环境中广泛使用的未指定术语“Hb”,表明 SpHb 值通常被临床医生解释为宏观血细胞比容值。本文的主张是,在失血情况下,由于宏观血细胞比容降低,SpHb 总血红蛋白测量中来自微循环的部分增加,而当微循环血细胞比容高于临界值时,微循环血细胞比容保持不变。该设备是根据静脉采血(手臂静脉)进行校准的,这是采血的金标准,因此,微循环血红蛋白对 SpHb 值的这种不断变化的贡献会扭曲宏观血红蛋白和总血红蛋白(SpHb)之间的差距。假设是,如果临床医生确实将 SpHb 值解释为宏观血红蛋白值,那么在失血期间由于混合参数 SpHb 中微循环血红蛋白测量的增加作用,SpHb 与宏观血红蛋白浓度之间存在未报告的差异。