Shapiro B A
Department of Anesthesia, Northwestern University Medical School, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Respir Care Clin N Am. 1995 Sep;1(1):69-76.
The popularity of routine temperature correcting of pH, PCO2 and PO2 values is based on the observation that large differences in the blood gas values are present when the patient's temperature is profoundly hypo- or hyperthermic. This observation leads some clinicians to the unsubstantiated conclusion that uncorrected 37 degrees C values are "wrong." The danger in this superficial thought process is that one might reach the unfounded conclusion that temperature-corrected values are "right." The simple truth is: With significant changes in patient temperature, we do not fully understand the complexity of the effects on metabolism, vascular function, and respiration. Both corrected and uncorrected blood gas values, therefore, are of uncertain usefulness in patients with significant deviations in body temperature. There is no logical or scientific basis for the assumption that temperature-corrected values are better than the values obtained at 37 degrees C. In fact, the available technical and biological data lead to the conclusion that, in almost all circumstances, there is no clinical advantage to using values other than those at 37 degrees C. In addition, the routine process of temperature correction of blood gases involves several practical disadvantages. First, interpretation of the corrected values demands deviation from the familiar and well-documented guidelines for interpreting 37 degrees C values. Second, temperature correction assumes the laboratory has received the patient's true temperature at the time of sampling. My experience is that the patient's true temperature often is not reported or is reported erroneously. Third, temperature-corrected values can be confused with uncorrected values and vice versa. Available data support the practice that only uncorrected (37 degrees C) blood gas values should be used and reported routinely. Temperature-corrected values should be calculated only when specifically requested and the onus for clinical use of temperature-corrected values lies with the clinician who requests them.
对pH、PCO₂和PO₂值进行常规温度校正之所以流行,是基于这样的观察结果:当患者体温显著低于或高于正常体温时,血气值会存在很大差异。这一观察结果使一些临床医生得出了未经证实的结论,即未校正的37℃值是“错误的”。这种肤浅思维过程的危险在于,人们可能会得出毫无根据的结论,即经温度校正的值是“正确的”。简单的事实是:随着患者体温的显著变化,我们并未完全理解其对代谢、血管功能和呼吸影响的复杂性。因此,对于体温有显著偏差的患者,校正和未校正的血气值在临床上的有用性都不确定。认为经温度校正的值优于37℃时获得的值这一假设没有逻辑或科学依据。事实上,现有的技术和生物学数据得出的结论是,在几乎所有情况下,使用37℃以外的值并无临床优势。此外,血气的常规温度校正过程存在几个实际缺点。首先,对校正后的值进行解读需要偏离用于解读37℃值的熟悉且有充分记录的指南。其次,温度校正假定实验室在采样时已收到患者的真实体温。我的经验是,患者的真实体温常常未被报告或报告有误。第三,经温度校正的值可能会与未校正的值混淆,反之亦然。现有数据支持这样的做法,即仅应常规使用和报告未校正(37℃)的血气值。仅在特别要求时才应计算经温度校正的值,而对经温度校正的值进行临床使用的责任在于要求计算的临床医生。