Lauermann I, Wilhelm G, Kirchner E
Abteilung für Anästhesiologie, Medizinische Hochschule, Hannover.
Infusionsther Transfusionsmed. 1994 Jun;21(3):138-42. doi: 10.1159/000222964.
There exists no method so far for the determination of circulating blood volume as an important parameter of circulatory function widely usable under clinical conditions. Therefore, the present study was designed to investigate whether identical distribution spaces could be measured by two methods for blood volume determination using sodium fluorescein (SoF) and radioactively labelled red blood cells (51Cr*).
Comparative study.
Operating theatre, recovery room, or intensive care unit of a university hospital.
35 patients undergoing abdominal, urological or vascular surgery.
Simultaneous determinations of blood volume using SoF and 51Cr* in the intra- and postoperative period.
There were no significant differences between the calculated means of blood volume (4,445 vs. 4,407 ml), red cell volume (1,554 vs. 1,540 ml), and plasma volume (2,891 vs. 2,807 ml) for 51Cr*-vs. SoF-stained red blood cells. The coefficient of correlation between the two methods was r = 0.95. The mean percentage error was -0.6% between the two methods, the precision 5.6%.
SoF-stained erythrocytes allow a determination of the same distribution space as the well-established radioactive method using 51Cr*. Therefore, SoF-staining may replace 51Cr* labelling of red blood cells for the determination of blood volume in patients.
目前尚无一种在临床条件下广泛适用的方法来测定作为循环功能重要参数的循环血容量。因此，本研究旨在调查使用荧光素钠（SoF）和放射性标记红细胞（51Cr*）的两种血容量测定方法是否能测量相同的分布空间。
对比研究。
大学医院的手术室、恢复室或重症监护病房。
35例接受腹部、泌尿外科或血管外科手术的患者。
在术中和术后同时使用SoF和51Cr*测定血容量。
对于51Cr*标记的红细胞和SoF标记的红细胞，计算得出的血容量均值（4445对4407ml）、红细胞容量均值（1554对1540ml）和血浆容量均值（2891对2807ml）之间无显著差异。两种方法之间的相关系数r = 0.95。两种方法之间的平均百分比误差为-0.6%，精密度为5.6%。
SoF标记的红细胞与成熟的使用51Cr的放射性方法能测定相同的分布空间。因此，SoF标记可替代51Cr标记红细胞用于测定患者的血容量。
