Suppr超能文献

急诊部无创心输出量研究(EDNICO):一项准确性研究。

Emergency department non-invasive cardiac output study (EDNICO): an accuracy study.

机构信息

Queen Mary University London and Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.

University of Western Australia School of Medicine and Pharmacology, Perth, Australia.

出版信息

Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2020 Jan 31;28(1):8. doi: 10.1186/s13049-020-0704-5.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

There is little published data investigating non-invasive cardiac output monitoring in the emergency department (ED). We assess here the accuracy of five non-invasive methods in detecting fluid responsiveness in the ED: (1) common carotid artery blood flow, (2) suprasternal aortic Doppler, (3) bioreactance, (4) plethysmography with digital vascular unloading method, and (5) inferior vena cava collapsibility index. Left ventricular outflow tract echocardiography derived velocity time integral is the reference standard. This follows an assessment of feasibility and repeatability of these methods in the same cohort of ED patients.

METHODS

This is a prospective observational study of non-invasive methods for assessing fluid responsiveness in the ED. Participants were non-ventilated ED adult patients requiring intravenous fluid resuscitation. Sensitivity and specificity of each method in determining the fluid responsiveness status of participants is determined in comparison to the reference standard.

RESULTS

Thirty-three patient data sets were included for analysis. The specificity and sensitivity to detect fluid responders was 46.2 and 45% for common carotid artery blood flow (CCABF), 61.5 and 63.2% for suprasternal artery Doppler (SSAD), 46.2 and 50% for bioreactance, 50 and 41.2% for plethysmography vascular unloading technique (PVUT), and 63.6 and 47.4% for inferior vena cava collapsibility index (IVCCI), respectively. Analysis of agreement with Cohen's Kappa - 0.08 for CCABF, 0.24 for SSAD, - 0.04 for bioreactance, - 0.08 for PVUT, and 0.1 for IVCCI.

CONCLUSION

In this study, non-invasive methods were not found to reliably identify fluid responders. Non-invasive methods of identifying fluid responders are likely to play a key role in improving patient outcome in the ED in fluid depleted states such as sepsis. These results have implications for future studies assessing the accuracy of such methods.

摘要

背景

在急诊科(ED)中,关于无创心输出量监测的研究数据较少。我们在此评估了五种无创方法在 ED 中检测液体反应性的准确性:(1)颈总动脉血流,(2)胸骨上主动脉多普勒,(3)生物电抗,(4)容积描记法与数字血管卸载法,以及(5)下腔静脉塌陷指数。左心室流出道超声心动图衍生的速度时间积分是参考标准。这是在同一组 ED 患者中评估这些方法的可行性和可重复性之后进行的。

方法

这是一项评估 ED 中评估液体反应性的非侵入性方法的前瞻性观察研究。参与者为需要静脉补液复苏的非通气性 ED 成年患者。将每种方法在确定参与者液体反应性状态方面的灵敏度和特异性与参考标准进行比较。

结果

共纳入 33 例患者的数据进行分析。颈总动脉血流(CCABF)的特异性和敏感性分别为 46.2%和 45%,以检测液体反应者;胸骨上动脉多普勒(SSAD)分别为 61.5%和 63.2%,生物电抗分别为 46.2%和 50%,容积描记法血管卸载技术(PVUT)分别为 50%和 41.2%,下腔静脉塌陷指数(IVCCI)分别为 63.6%和 47.4%。分析结果显示,CCABF 的 Cohen Kappa 值为 0.08,SSAD 为 0.24,生物电抗为-0.04,PVUT 为-0.08,IVCCI 为 0.1。

结论

在这项研究中,无创方法无法可靠地识别液体反应者。在 ED 中,识别液体反应者的非侵入性方法可能在液体耗尽状态(如败血症)下改善患者的预后方面发挥关键作用。这些结果对未来评估此类方法准确性的研究具有影响。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e3c8/6995135/4be03a74d224/13049_2020_704_Fig1_HTML.jpg

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