Suppr超能文献

失血后输血对血浆扩容剂和血液储存对毛细血管灌注的影响。

Plasma expander and blood storage effects on capillary perfusion in transfusion after hemorrhage.

机构信息

Department of Bioengineering, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093-0412, USA.

出版信息

Transfusion. 2013 Jan;53(1):49-59. doi: 10.1111/j.1537-2995.2012.03679.x. Epub 2012 May 3.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Treating hemorrhage with blood transfusions in subjects previously hemodiluted with different colloidal plasma expanders, using fresh autologous blood or blood that has been stored for 2 weeks, allows identifying the interaction between type of plasma expander and differences in blood storage.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Studies used the hamster window chamber model. Fresh autologous plasma, 130-kDa starch-based plasma expander (hydroxyethyl starch [HES]), or 4% polyethylene glycol-conjugated albumin (PEG-Alb) was used for 20% of blood volume (BV) hemodilution. Hemodilution was followed by a 55% by BV 40-minute hemorrhagic shock period, treated with transfusion of fresh or blood that was stored for 2 weeks. Outcome was evaluated 1 hour after blood transfusion in terms of microvascular and systemic variables.

RESULTS

Results were principally dependent on the type of colloidal solution used during hemodilution, 4% PEG-Alb yielding the best microvascular recovery evaluated in terms of the functional capillary density. This result was consistent whether fresh blood or stored blood was used in treating the subsequent shock period. Fresh blood results were significantly better in systemic and microvascular terms relative to stored blood. HES and fresh plasma hemodilution yielded less favorable results, a difference that was enhanced when fresh versus stored blood was compared in their efficacy of correcting the subsequent hemorrhage.

CONCLUSION

The type of plasma expander used for hemodilution influences the short-term outcome of subsequent volume resuscitation using blood transfusion, 4% PEG-Alb providing the most favorable outcome by comparison to HES or fresh plasma.

摘要

背景

在先前用不同胶体血浆扩容剂进行血液稀释的受试者中,使用新鲜的自体血液或储存 2 周的血液治疗出血,可以识别出血浆扩容剂的类型和血液储存之间的差异。

研究设计与方法

本研究使用仓鼠窗室模型。新鲜的自体血浆、130 kDa 淀粉基血浆扩容剂(羟乙基淀粉[HES])或 4%聚乙二醇修饰的白蛋白(PEG-Alb)用于 20%的血容量(BV)血液稀释。血液稀释后进行 55%BV 的 40 分钟失血性休克期,用新鲜血液或储存 2 周的血液进行输血治疗。输血后 1 小时评估微血管和全身变量。

结果

结果主要取决于血液稀释过程中使用的胶体溶液类型,4%PEG-Alb 产生的功能性毛细血管密度的微血管恢复效果最佳。无论是使用新鲜血液还是储存血液治疗随后的休克期,结果都是一致的。新鲜血液在全身和微血管方面的结果明显优于储存血液。HES 和新鲜血浆血液稀释的结果较差,当比较新鲜血液与储存血液在纠正随后出血方面的效果时,这种差异更加明显。

结论

用于血液稀释的血浆扩容剂类型会影响随后使用输血进行容量复苏的短期结果,4%PEG-Alb 与 HES 或新鲜血浆相比提供了最有利的结果。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

1
The ebb and flow of fluid (as in resuscitation).液体的潮起潮落(如在复苏过程中)。
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2015 Apr;41(2):119-27. doi: 10.1007/s00068-014-0437-0. Epub 2014 Aug 20.

本文引用的文献

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