Suppr超能文献

在脊柱手术患者围手术期,中心与外周置入静脉压监测的比较效用。

Comparative utility of centrally versus peripherally transduced venous pressure monitoring in the perioperative period in spine surgery patients.

机构信息

Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.

出版信息

J Clin Anesth. 2012 Nov;24(7):542-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2012.03.005. Epub 2012 Sep 20.

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To compare central venous pressure (CVP) with peripheral venous pressure (PVP) monitoring during the intraoperative and postoperative periods in patients undergoing spine surgery.

DESIGN

Prospective observational study.

SETTING

University-affiliated teaching hospital.

PATIENTS

35 ASA physical status 1, 2, and 3 patients.

INTERVENTIONS

A peripheral catheter in the forearm or hand and a central catheter into the internal jugular vein were placed for PVP and CVP monitoring, respectively.

MEASUREMENTS

CVP and PVP values were collected simultaneously and recorded electronically at 5-minute intervals throughout surgery and in the recovery room. The number of attempts for catheter placement, ease of use, maintenance, and interpretation were recorded. Patient comfort, frequency of complications, and cost were analyzed.

MAIN RESULTS

The correlation coefficient between CVP and PVP was 0.650 in the operating room (P < 0.0001) and 0.388 in the recovery room (P < 0.0001). There was no difference between groups in number of attempts to place either catheter, maintenance, and interpretation with respect to PVP and CVP monitoring in the operating room. In the recovery room, the nurses reported a higher level of difficulty in interpretation of PVP than CVP, but no differences were noted in ease of maintenance. There were no complications related to either central or peripheral catheter placement. Patient comfort and cost efficiency were higher with a peripheral than a central catheter.

CONCLUSION

During clinically relevant conditions, there was limited correlation between PVP and CVP in the prone position during surgery and postoperatively in the recovery room.

摘要

研究目的

比较脊柱手术患者术中及术后监测中心静脉压(CVP)与外周静脉压(PVP)的差异。

设计

前瞻性观察性研究。

地点

大学附属医院。

患者

35 名 ASA 分级为 1、2 和 3 的患者。

干预措施

在前臂或手部放置外周导管,在内颈静脉内置入中心导管,分别用于 PVP 和 CVP 监测。

测量

在整个手术过程中和恢复室中,每隔 5 分钟同时收集 CVP 和 PVP 值,并以电子方式记录。记录导管放置的尝试次数、使用方便程度、维护和解释的难易程度。分析患者舒适度、并发症发生率和成本。

主要结果

在手术室中,CVP 和 PVP 之间的相关系数为 0.650(P<0.0001),在恢复室中为 0.388(P<0.0001)。在手术室中,两组患者放置两种导管的尝试次数、维护和解释 PVP 和 CVP 监测方面均无差异。在恢复室中,护士报告在解释 PVP 时比解释 CVP 时难度更大,但在维护方面没有差异。与中心或外周导管放置相关的并发症均未发生。与中心导管相比,外周导管具有更高的患者舒适度和成本效益。

结论

在临床相关条件下,手术时患者处于俯卧位以及术后恢复室中,PVP 与 CVP 之间相关性有限。

相似文献

7
Peripheral venous pressure as a hemodynamic variable in neurosurgical patients.
Anesth Analg. 2001 Jan;92(1):172-9. doi: 10.1097/00000539-200101000-00033.
9
Usefulness of a central venous catheter during hepatic surgery.肝手术中中心静脉导管的效用
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2008 Mar;52(3):388-96. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2007.01553.x.

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