Suppr超能文献

连续脉搏压变异监测与心脏充盈压联合预测液体反应性。

Combination of continuous pulse pressure variation monitoring and cardiac filling pressure to predict fluid responsiveness.

机构信息

Hospices Civils de Lyon, Groupement Hospitalier Est, Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Louis Pradel Hospital, Claude Bernard Lyon 1 University, Lyon, France.

出版信息

J Clin Monit Comput. 2012 Dec;26(6):401-5. doi: 10.1007/s10877-012-9365-x. Epub 2012 May 3.

Abstract

To assess if combining central venous pressure (CVP) and/or pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) information with arterial pulse pressure variation can increase the ability to predict fluid responsiveness in patients under general anesthesia. This study is a retrospective analysis of patients scheduled for coronary artery bypass surgery and monitored with a pulmonary artery catheter who underwent a volume expansion after induction of general anesthesia. Among the 46 patients studied, 31 were responders to volume expansion. CVP similar to PCWP, was a poor predictor of fluid responsiveness, as indicated by low values of areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves [0.585 (95 % CI 0.389-0.780) and 0.563 (95 % CI 0.373-0.753) respectively, p = 0.76]. The area obtained for PPV was 0.897 (95 % CI 0.801-0.992) with a threshold value of 12 %. The sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio was 83.9 %, 86.7 %, 6.29 and 0.19 respectively. Combining information on right and/or left cardiac filling pressures with PPV did not increase the ability to predict whether a patient will be a responder or a non-responder to volume expansion. The ability to identify a potentially fluid responsive patient was no better using PPV plus cardiac filling pressures when compared to using PPV alone. Therefore, if PPV values are being monitored in a patient, CVP and PCWP values do not provide additional information to predict fluid responsiveness.

摘要

评估在全身麻醉下,将中心静脉压(CVP)和/或肺毛细血管楔压(PCWP)信息与动脉脉搏压变异相结合,是否可以提高预测液体反应性的能力。本研究回顾性分析了接受冠状动脉旁路移植术且监测肺动脉导管的患者,这些患者在全身麻醉诱导后接受了容量扩张。在研究的 46 名患者中,有 31 名对容量扩张有反应。CVP 与 PCWP 相似,是液体反应性的不良预测指标,其受试者工作特征曲线下面积较低[分别为 0.585(95%置信区间 0.389-0.780)和 0.563(95%置信区间 0.373-0.753),p=0.76]。PPV 的面积为 0.897(95%置信区间 0.801-0.992),阈值为 12%。敏感性、特异性、阳性似然比和阴性似然比分别为 83.9%、86.7%、6.29 和 0.19。将右心和/或左心充盈压与 PPV 的信息相结合,并未增加预测患者对容量扩张是有反应还是无反应的能力。与单独使用 PPV 相比,使用 PPV 加心脏充盈压来识别潜在的液体反应性患者并没有更好的效果。因此,如果在患者中监测到 PPV 值,则 CVP 和 PCWP 值不能提供额外的信息来预测液体反应性。

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