Suppr超能文献

在440毫升/小时的输注速率下,Mega Acer Kit®比Ranger™和ThermoSens®在温热静脉输液方面更有效:一项实验性能研究。

Mega Acer Kit® is more effective for warming the intravenous fluid than Ranger™ and ThermoSens® at 440 ml/h of infusion rate: an experimental performance study.

作者信息

Kim Dong Joon, Kim Sang Hun, So Keum Young, An Tae Hun

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Chosun University Hospital, Gwangju, Korea.

Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Chosun University School of Medicine, Gwangju, Korea.

出版信息

Korean J Anesthesiol. 2017 Aug;70(4):456-461. doi: 10.4097/kjae.2017.70.4.456. Epub 2017 Jun 14.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Few studies have investigated the effectiveness of intravenous fluid warmers at low and moderate flow rates below 1,000 ml/h. In this study, we compared the effectiveness of three different fluid warmers at a low flow rate (440 ml/h).

METHODS

We experimentally investigated the fluid warming performances of Mega Acer Kit® (Group M, n = 10), Ranger™ (Group R, n = 10), and ThermoSens® (Group T, n = 10) at 440 ml/h for 60 min. All devices were set at a warming temperature of 41℃ with preheating for 10 min. Intravenous fluids were then delivered through them. The fluid temperature (primary endpoint) was measured at 76 cm from the device after infusion for 60 min. The expected decrease in mean body temperature (secondary endpoint) after 5 h infusion for a 70 kg patient (ΔMBT5) was also calculated.

RESULTS

The fluid temperature (mean [95% CI]) at 76 cm from the device, 60 minutes after the infusion was higher in group M (36.01 [35.73-36.29]℃), compared to groups T (29.81 [29.38-30.24]℃) and R (29.12 [28.52-29.72]℃) (P < 0.001). The ΔMBT5 (mean [95% CI]) was significantly smaller in group M (-0.04 [-0.04 to -0.03]℃) than that in groups T (-0.27 [-0.28 to -0.29]℃; P < 0.001) and R (-0.30 [-0.32 to -0.27]℃; P < 0.001). However, none of the fluid warmers provided a constant normothermic temperature above 36.5℃.

CONCLUSIONS

Mega Acer Kit® was more effective in warming the intravenous fluid with the smallest expected change in the mean body temperature, compared to Ranger™ and ThermoSens®, at a flow rate of 440 ml/h.

摘要

背景

很少有研究调查静脉输液加温器在低于1000ml/h的低、中流速下的有效性。在本研究中,我们比较了三种不同的输液加温器在低流速(440ml/h)下的有效性。

方法

我们通过实验研究了Mega Acer Kit®(M组,n = 10)、Ranger™(R组,n = 10)和ThermoSens®(T组,n = 10)在440ml/h流速下60分钟的液体加温性能。所有设备均设置为41℃的加温温度并预热10分钟。然后通过它们输送静脉输液。输液60分钟后,在距设备76cm处测量液体温度(主要终点)。还计算了一名70kg患者输液5小时后预期的平均体温下降值(次要终点)(ΔMBT5)。

结果

输液60分钟后,距设备76cm处M组(36.01 [35.73 - 36.29]℃)液体温度(平均值[95%置信区间])高于T组(29.81 [29.38 - 30.24]℃)和R组(29.12 [28.52 - 29.72]℃)(P < 0.001)。M组的ΔMBT5(平均值[95%置信区间])(-0.04 [-0.04至-0.03]℃)明显小于T组(-0.27 [-0.28至-0.29]℃;P < 0.001)和R组(-0.30 [-0.32至-0.27]℃;P < 0.001))。然而,没有一种输液加温器能提供高于36.5℃的恒定正常体温。

结论

在440ml/h的流速下,与Ranger™和ThermoSens®相比,Mega Acer Kit®在加温静脉输液方面更有效,且预期平均体温变化最小

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8b12/5548949/bec54c51da92/kjae-70-456-g001.jpg

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