简要报告：脑灌注压测量的临床与研究实践比较：文献回顾与从业者调查。
Brief report: a comparison of clinical and research practices in measuring cerebral perfusion pressure: a literature review and practitioner survey.
机构信息
From the Perelman School of Medicine; and Departments of Neurosurgery, Neurology, and Anesthesiology and Critical Care, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
出版信息
Anesth Analg. 2013 Sep;117(3):694-698. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e31829cc765. Epub 2013 Aug 6.
BACKGROUND
Our objective was to determine whether there is variability in the foundational literature and across centers in how mean arterial blood pressure is measured to calculate cerebral perfusion pressure.
METHODS
We reviewed foundational literature and sent an e-mail survey to members of the Neurocritical Care Society.
RESULTS
Of 32 articles reporting cerebral perfusion pressure data, the reference point for mean arterial blood pressure was identified in 16: 10 heart and 6 midbrain. The overall survey response rate was 14.3%. Responses from 31 of 34 (91%) United Council for Neurologic Subspecialties fellowship-accredited Neurointensive Care Units indicated the reference point was most often the heart (74%), followed by the midbrain (16%). Conflicting answers were received from 10%.
CONCLUSIONS
There is substantive heterogeneity in both research reports and clinical practice in how mean arterial blood pressure is measured to determine cerebral perfusion pressure.
背景
我们的目的是确定在基础文献中和不同中心之间，测量平均动脉压以计算脑灌注压的方法是否存在差异。
方法
我们回顾了基础文献，并向神经危重病学会的成员发送了电子邮件调查。
结果
在报告脑灌注压数据的 32 篇文章中，有 16 篇文章确定了平均动脉压的参考点：10 篇文章为心脏，6 篇文章为中脑。总体调查回复率为 14.3%。来自 34 个（91%）神经重症监护单位的 31 个单位（神经重症监护单位的附属）表示，参考点通常是心脏（74%），其次是中脑（16%）。10%的单位收到了相互矛盾的答案。
结论
在研究报告和临床实践中，测量平均动脉压以确定脑灌注压的方法存在很大的异质性。
Zotero 插件