Suppr超能文献

正常志愿者的动态静脉压和柱中断时间的测量。

Measurement of ambulatory venous pressure and column interruption duration in normal volunteers.

机构信息

The Rane Center at St. Dominic Hospital, Jackson, Miss.

The Rane Center at St. Dominic Hospital, Jackson, Miss.

出版信息

J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2020 Jan;8(1):127-136. doi: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2019.06.012. Epub 2019 Sep 5.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Ambulatory venous pressure (AMVP) measurement is considered the gold standard in evaluating calf pump function in chronic venous disease. The AMVP protocol was standardized in the 1970s with pressure monitoring through the dorsal foot vein. This technique was based on the belief that it represents calf venous pressure dynamics owing to rapid equilibration in the superficial and deep systems. This notion is subject to some doubt not only on theoretical grounds, but also owing to a lack of clinical correlation in a segment of the population with chronic venous disease. Our aims were to (1) examine if AMVP measured simultaneously through the dorsal foot vein (DFV) and the great saphenous vein (GSV) would be similar and (2) attempt to devise a noninvasive substitute via duplex measurement for the AMVP test.

METHODS

The study was conducted in 76 limbs in 38 normal volunteers. Simultaneous AMVP measurements in DFV and GSV were made in 28 of these normal limbs. Column interruption duration (CID) after calf pump ejection was measured by monitoring duplex resumption of flow in the tibial veins and GSV after calf ejection. The return of AMVP back to baseline implies column restoration. The venous refill time therefore represents the CID via the pressure method. The pressure and duplex methods of CID were compared in the GSV.

RESULTS

Key AMVP parameters (percent drop and venous refill time) significantly differed in DFV and GSV, showing a lack of pressure equilibration. CID measured by duplex in GSV was not significantly different from pressure-derived CID in the same vein.

CONCLUSIONS

AMVP measured through the DFV does not reflect calf pump generated pressure events in GSV. A duplex method of measuring CID in GSV and posterior tibial vein is described. Duplex-derived CID is not significantly different from pressure-derived CID in the GSV.

摘要

背景

门诊静脉压(AMVP)测量被认为是评估慢性静脉疾病中小腿泵功能的金标准。AMVP 方案于 20 世纪 70 年代标准化,通过监测足底背静脉进行压力监测。该技术基于这样一种信念,即由于浅表和深部系统的快速平衡,它代表了小腿静脉压力动力学。这种观念不仅在理论上存在一些疑问,而且由于在慢性静脉疾病患者的一部分人群中缺乏临床相关性,因此也存在疑问。我们的目的是:(1)检查同时通过足底背静脉(DFV)和大隐静脉(GSV)测量的 AMVP 是否相似;(2)尝试通过双功能超声测量来设计一种非侵入性的 AMVP 替代方法。

方法

该研究在 38 名正常志愿者的 76 条肢体中进行。在其中 28 条正常肢体中同时测量了 DFV 和 GSV 中的 AMVP。通过监测小腿泵射血后胫骨静脉和 GSV 中的双功能超声恢复血流,测量小腿泵射血后柱中断持续时间(CID)。AMVP 恢复到基线意味着柱恢复。因此,静脉再充盈时间通过压力法表示 CID。比较了 GSV 中压力法和双功能超声法测量的 CID。

结果

DFV 和 GSV 中的关键 AMVP 参数(百分比下降和静脉再充盈时间)差异显著,表明缺乏压力平衡。GSV 中双功能超声测量的 CID 与同一静脉中压力衍生的 CID 无显著差异。

结论

通过 DFV 测量的 AMVP 不能反映 GSV 中小腿泵产生的压力事件。描述了一种测量 GSV 和后胫静脉 CID 的双功能超声方法。双功能超声衍生的 CID 与 GSV 中压力衍生的 CID 无显著差异。

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