Schlotman Taylor E, Suresh Mithun R, Koons Natalie J, Howard Jeffrey T, Schiller Alicia M, Cardin Sylvain, Convertino Victor A
From the US Army Institute of Surgical Research (T.E.S., M.R.S., N.J.K., V.A.C.), Joint Base San Antonio Fort Sam Houston; University of Texas at San Antonio, Department of Kinesiology, Health, and Nutrition (J.T.H.), San Antonio, Texas; University of Nebraska Medical Center, Department of Anesthesiology (A.M.S.), Omaha, Nebraska; and Naval Medical Research Unit-San Antonio (S.C.), Joint Base San Antonio Fort Sam Houston, San Antonio, Texas.
J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2020 Aug;89(2S Suppl 2):S161-S168. doi: 10.1097/TA.0000000000002605.
Hemorrhage remains the leading cause of death following traumatic injury in both civilian and military settings. Heart rate variability (HRV) and heart rate complexity (HRC) have been proposed as potential "new vital signs" for monitoring trauma patients; however, the added benefit of HRV or HRC for decision support remains unclear. Another new paradigm, the compensatory reserve measurement (CRM), represents the integration of all cardiopulmonary mechanisms responsible for compensation during relative blood loss and was developed to identify current physiologic status by estimating the progression toward hemodynamic decompensation. In the present study, we hypothesized that CRM would provide greater sensitivity and specificity to detect progressive reductions in central circulating blood volume and onset of decompensation as compared with measurements of HRV and HRC.
Continuous, noninvasive measurements of compensatory reserve and electrocardiogram signals were made on 101 healthy volunteers during lower-body negative pressure (LBNP) to the point of decompensation. Measures of HRV and HRC were taken from electrocardiogram signal data.
Compensatory reserve measurement demonstrated a superior sensitivity and specificity (receiver operator characteristic area under the curve [ROC AUC] = 0.93) compared with all HRV measures (ROC AUC ≤ 0.84) and all HRC measures (ROC AUC ≤ 0.86). Sensitivity and specificity values at the ROC optimal thresholds were greater for CRM (sensitivity = 0.84; specificity = 0.84) than HRV (sensitivity, ≤0.78; specificity, ≤0.77), and HRC (sensitivity, ≤0.79; specificity, ≤0.77). With standardized values across all levels of LBNP, CRM had a steeper decline, less variability, and explained a greater proportion of the variation in the data than both HRV and HRC during progressive hypovolemia.
These findings add to the growing body of literature describing the advantages of CRM for detecting reductions in central blood volume. Most importantly, these results provide further support for the potential use of CRM in the triage and monitoring of patients at highest risk for the onset of shock following blood loss.
在 civilian 和 military 环境中,出血仍然是创伤性损伤后死亡的主要原因。心率变异性(HRV)和心率复杂性(HRC)已被提议作为监测创伤患者的潜在“新生命体征”;然而,HRV 或 HRC 用于决策支持的额外益处仍不明确。另一种新范式,即代偿储备测量(CRM),代表了在相对失血期间负责代偿的所有心肺机制的整合,其开发目的是通过估计向血流动力学失代偿的进展来识别当前的生理状态。在本研究中,我们假设与 HRV 和 HRC 测量相比,CRM 在检测中心循环血容量的逐渐减少和失代偿发作方面将具有更高的敏感性和特异性。
在 101 名健康志愿者进行下肢负压(LBNP)直至失代偿时,对代偿储备和心电图信号进行连续、无创测量。HRV 和 HRC 的测量取自心电图信号数据。
与所有 HRV 测量(ROC 曲线下面积[AUC]≤0.84)和所有 HRC 测量(ROC AUC≤0.86)相比,代偿储备测量显示出更高的敏感性和特异性(曲线下面积[AUC]=0.93)。在 ROC 最佳阈值处,CRM 的敏感性和特异性值(敏感性=0.84;特异性=0.84)高于 HRV(敏感性≤0.78;特异性≤0.77)和 HRC(敏感性≤0.79;特异性≤0.77)。在所有 LBNP 水平的标准化值中,在渐进性低血容量期间,CRM 的下降更陡峭,变异性更小,并且比 HRV 和 HRC 解释了数据中更大比例的变异。
这些发现进一步丰富了描述 CRM 在检测中心血容量减少方面优势的文献。最重要的是,这些结果为 CRM 在对失血后休克发作风险最高的患者进行分诊和监测中的潜在应用提供了进一步支持。