Suppr超能文献

条件性肢体麻醉并不能消除人类皮肤微循环的远程缺血预处理刺激。

Anesthesia of the conditioned limb does not abolish the remote ischemic conditioning stimulus on cutaneous microcirculation in humans.

机构信息

Department of Hand, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, BG Unfallklinik Tuebingen, Eberhard Karls University Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.

Department of Plastic Surgery, Burn Center, BG University Hospital Bergmannsheil, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.

出版信息

Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2020;74(2):155-166. doi: 10.3233/CH-190626.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Mechanism of remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) remain not fully understood yet. Thus, a clinical trial was performed to assess the neuronal influence on its signal induction.

METHODS

RIC was conducted on 45 patients who were randomized into 3 groups. Group A and B underwent brachial plexus anesthesia while RIC was performed on the blocked (A) and non-blocked side (B), respectively. In group C, RIC was conducted before regional anesthesia, thus serving as control group. All measurements were taken contralateral to RIC. The relative increase of microcirculatory parameters compared to baseline was evaluated and compared between the groups.

RESULTS

Superficial blood flow (sBF) significantly increased in group A and C but values were higher among group C. Compared to group A, group C showed a significant increase of sBF during the initial 5 minutes of reperfusion (1.75; CI 1.139 - 2.361 vs. 0.97, CI 0.864 - 1.076, p < 0.05). Deep blood flow, tissue oxygen saturation and relative hemoglobin content were marginally influenced by RIC irrespectively of the presence of regional anesthesia.

CONCLUSION

Despite regional anesthesia a significant RIC stimulus can be induced although its microcirculatory response is attenuated compared to control. Hence, RIC induction does not merely depend on neuronal signaling.

摘要

背景

远程缺血预处理(RIC)的机制尚未完全阐明。因此,进行了一项临床试验,以评估神经元对其信号诱导的影响。

方法

将 45 名患者随机分为 3 组。A 组和 B 组接受臂丛神经阻滞麻醉,同时对阻滞(A)和非阻滞侧(B)进行 RIC。在 C 组中,RIC 在区域麻醉前进行,作为对照组。所有测量均在 RIC 的对侧进行。评估并比较各组与基线相比微循环参数的相对增加。

结果

A 组和 C 组的浅表血流(sBF)明显增加,但 C 组的值更高。与 A 组相比,C 组在再灌注的最初 5 分钟内 sBF 显著增加(1.75;CI 1.139 - 2.361 与 0.97,CI 0.864 - 1.076,p < 0.05)。深度血流、组织氧饱和度和相对血红蛋白含量无论是否存在区域麻醉,均受到 RIC 的轻微影响。

结论

尽管存在区域麻醉,但即使与对照组相比,其微循环反应减弱,仍能诱导出明显的 RIC 刺激。因此,RIC 的诱导不仅仅依赖于神经元信号。

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