Suppr超能文献

心脏手术期间四种床边血红蛋白评估方法的比较。

A comparison of four bedside methods of hemoglobin assessment during cardiac surgery.

作者信息

McNulty S E, Torjman M, Grodecki W, Marr A, Schieren H

机构信息

Jefferson Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107-5092, USA.

出版信息

Anesth Analg. 1995 Dec;81(6):1197-202. doi: 10.1097/00000539-199512000-00014.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of conductivity, adjusted conductivity, photometric, and centrifugation methods of measuring or estimating hemoglobin (Hb) with Coulter measured HB as the reference. These bedside methods were studied in 25 cardiac surgery patients during euvolemia and hemodilution and after salvaged autologous red blood cell transfusion. In vivo patient blood samples were obtained before induction, at the start of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), after CPB, and after blood transfusion. In 10 patients, blood was sampled in vitro from units of processed blood. Hb values were determined using conductivity by Stat-Crit, adjusted conductivity by Nova Stat Profile 9, bedside photometry by HemoCue, and centrifugation methods. The calculated bias values of Coulter test method Hb (mean +/- SD) for in vivo patient blood samples (n = 90) were: Stat-Crit = 0.6 +/- 0.8 g/dL; Nova Stat Profile 9 = -0.7 +/- 0.4 g/dL; HemoCue = -0.1 +/- 0.2 g/dL; and centrifuge = 0.1 +/- 0.5 g/dL (P < 0.0001). Hb bias values (g/dL) for in vitro samples (n = 10) obtained from processed blood were Stat-Crit = 5.1 +/- 0.6; Nova Stat Profile 9 = 3.0 +2- 0.6; HemoCue = 0.4 +/- 0.4; and centrifuge = 0.6 +/- 0.3 (P < 0.0001). Hb assessment by different test methods may be significantly affected during hemodilution and after blood transfusion. In vitro conditions exaggerated the inaccuracy of conductivity and adjusted conductivity Hb estimates. The rank order of closest approximation to the Coulter measurement for all in vivo blood samples was provided by bedside photometry, followed by centrifugation, adjusted conductivity, and uncorrected conductivity methods.

摘要

本研究的目的是以库尔特测量的血红蛋白(Hb)为参照,比较电导率法、校正电导率法、光度法和离心法测量或估算血红蛋白(Hb)的准确性。在25例心脏手术患者的血容量正常、血液稀释以及自体红细胞回输后,对这些床旁检测方法进行了研究。在诱导前、体外循环(CPB)开始时、CPB后以及输血后采集患者体内血样。在10例患者中,从处理过的血袋中体外采血。使用Stat-Crit电导率法、Nova Stat Profile 9校正电导率法、HemoCue床旁光度法和离心法测定Hb值。体内患者血样(n = 90)的库尔特检测法Hb计算偏差值(均值±标准差)为:Stat-Crit = 0.6±0.8 g/dL;Nova Stat Profile 9 = -0.7±0.4 g/dL;HemoCue = -0.1±0.2 g/dL;离心机法 = 0.1±0.5 g/dL(P < 0.0001)。从处理过的血液中获得的体外样本(n = 10)的Hb偏差值(g/dL)为:Stat-Crit = 5.1±0.6;Nova Stat Profile 9 = 3.0±0.6;HemoCue = 0.4±0.4;离心机法 = 0.6±0.3(P < 0.0001)。在血液稀释期间和输血后,不同检测方法的Hb评估可能会受到显著影响。体外条件夸大了电导率法和校正电导率法估算Hb的不准确性。对于所有体内血样,最接近库尔特测量值的排序依次为床旁光度法、其次是离心法、校正电导率法和未校正电导率法。

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