Bredbacka S, Kawachi S, Norlander O, Kirk B
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1984 Aug;28(4):462-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.1984.tb02099.x.
In recent years a number of commercial instruments for on-line gas exchange measurements has been introduced. One of them, the Engström Metabolic Computer (EMC), is here clinically validated as compared to the standard Douglas bag method for gas sampling and a Centronic Mass Spectrometer (CMS) for gas analysis. VO2, VCO2 and RQ were simultaneously measured and calculated with both methods. Twenty individual gas exchange determinations were made at different times on 12 critically ill patients at the intensive care unit. There was a small but significant difference (P less than 0.025) of 4.3% +/- 8.4% (s.d.) between the two methods when they were used to measure VO2 (the EMC giving the lower value). The corresponding value of VCO2 was 2.4% +/- 9.1% (s.d.), and for RQ the difference was -1.98% +/- 7.1% (s.d.). These differences are not significant at the 95% level of significance. Determinations of oxygen uptake during ventilator treatment with standard methods usually involve technical difficulties and are associated with errors of method around 10%. Our results indicate a probable error of about 8.5% for VO2 in clinical situations. Considering the difficulties involved in determinations of gas exchange, the EMC method seems to be a valuable technique with an accuracy within acceptable limits.
近年来,已推出了一些用于在线气体交换测量的商业仪器。其中之一,恩斯特龙代谢计算机(EMC),在此与用于气体采样的标准道格拉斯袋法和用于气体分析的森创质谱仪(CMS)进行了临床验证。两种方法同时测量并计算了VO₂、VCO₂和RQ。在重症监护病房对12名危重症患者在不同时间进行了20次个体气体交换测定。当两种方法用于测量VO₂时(EMC得出的值较低),两者之间存在4.3%±8.4%(标准差)的微小但显著差异(P小于0.025)。VCO₂的相应值为2.4%±9.1%(标准差),RQ的差异为-1.98%±7.1%(标准差)。在95%的显著性水平上,这些差异不显著。用标准方法测定呼吸机治疗期间的氧摄取通常存在技术困难,且与约10%的方法误差相关。我们的结果表明,在临床情况下,VO₂的可能误差约为8.5%。考虑到气体交换测定中涉及的困难,EMC方法似乎是一种有价值的技术,其准确性在可接受范围内。