• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

[评分——可操作性标准]

[Scoring--criteria for operability].

作者信息

Oestern H J

机构信息

Klinik für Unfall- und Wiederherstellungschirurgie, Allgemeinen Krankenhauses Celle.

出版信息

Zentralbl Chir. 1997;122(11):943-53.

PMID:9480600
Abstract

For therapeutic recommendations three different kinds of scores are essential: 1. The severity scores for trauma; 2. Severity scores for mangled extremities; 3. Intensive care scores. The severity of polytrauma patients is measurable by the AIS, ISS, RTS, PTS and TRISS which is a combination of RTS, ISS, age, and mechanism of injury. For mangled extremities there are also different scores available: MESI (Mangled Extremity Syndrome Index) and MESS (Mangled Extremity Severity Score). The aim of these scores is to assist in the indication with regard to amputate or to save the extremity. These scoring indices can be used to evaluate the severity of a systemic inflammatory reaction syndrome with respect to multiple organ failure. All scores are dynamic values which are variable with improvement of therapy.

摘要

对于治疗建议而言,三种不同类型的评分至关重要:1. 创伤严重程度评分;2. 肢体毁损严重程度评分;3. 重症监护评分。多发伤患者的严重程度可通过AIS、ISS、RTS、PTS以及TRISS(它是RTS、ISS、年龄和损伤机制的组合)来衡量。对于肢体毁损,也有不同的评分:MESI(肢体毁损综合征指数)和MESS(肢体毁损严重程度评分)。这些评分的目的是辅助判断是进行截肢还是挽救肢体。这些评分指数可用于评估与多器官功能衰竭相关的全身炎症反应综合征的严重程度。所有评分都是动态值,会随着治疗的改善而变化。

相似文献

1
[Scoring--criteria for operability].[评分——可操作性标准]
Zentralbl Chir. 1997;122(11):943-53.
2
Arterial reconstruction after mangled extremity: injury severity scoring systems are not predictive of limb salvage.严重肢体损伤后的动脉重建:损伤严重程度评分系统无法预测肢体挽救情况。
Vascular. 2005 Mar-Apr;13(2):114-9. doi: 10.1258/rsmvasc.13.2.114.
3
Mangled extremity severity score: an accurate guide to treatment of the severely injured upper extremity.肢体毁损严重程度评分:严重创伤上肢治疗的准确指南。
J Orthop Trauma. 1994 Aug;8(4):282-5. doi: 10.1097/00005131-199408000-00002.
4
[Are ISS and PTS unsuitable trauma scores for prediction of (possible) post-traumatic lung failure?].国际疾病分类损伤严重程度评分(ISS)和创伤后评分系统(PTS)是否不适用于预测(可能的)创伤后肺功能衰竭?
Langenbecks Arch Chir Suppl Kongressbd. 1996;113:331-3.
5
Reliability of the mangled extremity severity score in combat-related upper and lower extremity injuries.肢体严重损伤严重程度评分在与战斗相关的上肢和下肢损伤中的可靠性。
Indian J Orthop. 2015 Nov-Dec;49(6):656-60. doi: 10.4103/0019-5413.168759.
6
Are We Justified Doing Salvage or Amputation Procedure Based on Mangled Extremity Severity Score in Mangled Upper Extremity Injury.对于上肢严重毁损伤,我们基于肢体毁损伤严重程度评分来进行挽救或截肢手术是否合理?
J Orthop Case Rep. 2017 Jan-Feb;7(1):3-8. doi: 10.13107/jocr.2250-0685.662.
7
[Sepsis score in surgical intensive care medicine].[外科重症监护医学中的脓毒症评分]
Anasthesiol Intensivmed Notfallmed Schmerzther. 1996 Nov;31(9):556-62. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-995984.
8
Spectral analysis of heart rate variability for trauma outcome prediction: an analysis of 210 ICU multiple trauma patients.心率变异性的频谱分析用于创伤预后预测:对 210 例 ICU 多发创伤患者的分析。
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2021 Feb;47(1):153-160. doi: 10.1007/s00068-019-01175-5. Epub 2019 Jun 17.
9
Critical evaluation of mangled extremity severity scoring system in Indian patients.对印度患者肢体严重损伤严重程度评分系统的批判性评估。
Injury. 2003 Jul;34(7):493-6. doi: 10.1016/s0020-1383(02)00214-0.
10
Mangled lower extremity: can we trust the amputation scores?下肢严重毁损:我们能信赖截肢评分吗?
Int J Burns Trauma. 2012;2(1):51-8. Epub 2012 Feb 5.