Suppr超能文献

左心室流出道速度和整体舒张末期容积指数的变化可靠地预测心脏手术患者的液体反应性。

Variation of left ventricular outflow tract velocity and global end-diastolic volume index reliably predict fluid responsiveness in cardiac surgery patients.

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Germany.

出版信息

J Crit Care. 2012 Jun;27(3):325.e7-13. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2011.07.073. Epub 2011 Aug 19.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The ability of the global end-diastolic volume index (GEDVI) and respiratory variations in left ventricular outflow tract velocity (ΔVTI(LVOT)) for prediction of fluid responsiveness is still under debate. The aim of the present study was to challenge the predictive power of GEDVI and ΔVTI(LVOT) compared with pulse pressure variation (PPV) and stroke volume variation (SVV) in a large patient population.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Ninety-two patients were studied before coronary artery surgery. Each patient was monitored with central venous pressure (CVP), the PiCCO system (Pulsion Medical Systems, Munich, Germany), and transesophageal echocardiography. Responders were defined as those who increased their stroke volume index by greater than 15% (ΔSVI(TPTD) >15%) during passive leg raising.

RESULTS

Central venous pressure showed no significant correlation with ΔSVI(TPTD) (r = -0.06, P = .58), in contrast to PPV (r = 0.71, P < .0001), SVV (r = 0.61, P < .0001), GEDVI (r = -0.54, P < .0001), and ΔVTI(LVOT) (r = 0.54, P < .0001). The best area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) predicting ΔSVI(TPTD) greater than 15% was found for PPV (AUC, 0.82; P < .0001) and SVV (AUC, 0.77; P < .0001), followed by ΔVTI(LVOT) (AUC, 0.74; P < .0001) and GEDVI (AUC, 0.71; P = .0006), whereas CVP was not able to predict fluid responsiveness (AUC, 0.58; P = .18).

CONCLUSIONS

In contrast to CVP, GEDVI and ΔVTI(LVOT) reliably predicted fluid responsiveness under closed-chest conditions. Pulse pressure variation and SVV showed the highest accuracy.

摘要

目的

全球舒张末期容积指数(GEDVI)和左心室流出道速度呼吸变化(ΔVTI(LVOT))预测液体反应性的能力仍存在争议。本研究旨在挑战 GEDVI 和 ΔVTI(LVOT)与脉压变化(PPV)和每搏量变异(SVV)在大型患者人群中的预测能力。

材料和方法

92 例患者在冠状动脉搭桥术前进行了研究。每位患者均接受了中心静脉压(CVP)、PICCO 系统(Pulsion Medical Systems,慕尼黑,德国)和经食管超声心动图监测。反应者定义为在被动抬腿期间其每搏量指数增加大于 15%(ΔSVI(TPTD)>15%)的患者。

结果

中心静脉压与ΔSVI(TPTD)无显著相关性(r = -0.06,P =.58),而与 PPV(r = 0.71,P <.0001)、SVV(r = 0.61,P <.0001)、GEDVI(r = -0.54,P <.0001)和ΔVTI(LVOT)(r = 0.54,P <.0001)显著相关。预测ΔSVI(TPTD)大于 15%的最佳受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC)为 PPV(AUC,0.82;P <.0001)和 SVV(AUC,0.77;P <.0001),其次是ΔVTI(LVOT)(AUC,0.74;P <.0001)和 GEDVI(AUC,0.71;P =.0006),而 CVP 不能预测液体反应性(AUC,0.58;P =.18)。

结论

与 CVP 相比,GEDVI 和 ΔVTI(LVOT)在闭胸条件下可靠地预测液体反应性。PPV 和 SVV 具有最高的准确性。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验