|本期目录/Table of Contents|

[1]郭志强,王恩燕,戴坤鹏,等.中心静脉- 动脉血二氧化碳分压差联合液体负荷状态评价感染性休克预后的价值[J].传染病信息,2017,06:358-360,364.
 GUO Zhi-qiang*,WANG En-yan,DAI Kun-peng,et al.Significance of P(cv-a)CO2 combined withfluid load status in assessing prognosis of patients with septic shock[J].Infectious Disease Information,2017,06:358-360,364.
点击复制

中心静脉- 动脉血二氧化碳分压差联合液体负荷状态评价感染性休克预后的价值(PDF)

《传染病信息》[ISSN:1007-8134/CN:11-3886/R]

期数:
2017年06期
页码:
358-360,364
栏目:
论著
出版日期:
2017-12-20

文章信息/Info

Title:
Significance of P(cv-a)CO2 combined withfluid load status in assessing prognosis of patients with septic shock
作者:
郭志强王恩燕戴坤鹏王滨孔继昌李志云殷明胡坤董兰花王枫
062552 任丘,华北石油管理局总医院重症医学科(郭志强、王恩燕、戴坤鹏、王滨、孔继昌、李志云、胡坤、董兰花、王枫),内镜介入科(殷明)
Author(s):
GUO Zhi-qiang* WANG En-yan DAI Kun-peng WANG Bin KONG Ji-chang LI Zhi-yun YIN Ming HU Kun DONG Lan-huaWANG Feng
Department of Critical Care Medicine, General Hospital of North China Petroleum Administration Bureau, Renqiu 062552, China
关键词:
感染性休克中心静脉- 动脉血二氧化碳分压差液体过负荷
Keywords:
septic shock central venous-arterial carbon dioxide partial difference fluid overload
分类号:
R631.4
DOI:
10.3969/j.issn.1007-8134.2017.06.011
文献标识码:
A
摘要:
目的 探讨中心静脉- 动脉血二氧化碳分压差[central venous-arterial carbon dioxide partial difference,P(cv-a)CO2] 联合液体负荷状态评价感染性休克预后的价值。方法 收集2015 年10 月—2017 年3 月我科收治的95 例感染性休克患者资料,依据治疗72 h 后有无液体过负荷及P(cv-a)CO2 将患者分为4 组,A 组为液体过负荷+P(cv-a)CO2 ≥ 6 mmHg(1 mmHg=0.133 kPa);B 组为非液体过负荷+ P(cv-a)CO2 ≥ 6 mmHg;C 组为液体过负荷+ P(cv-a)CO2 < 6 mmHg;D 组为非液体过负荷+ P(cv-a)CO2 < 6 mmHg,比较各组28 d 和90 d 的病死率、机械通气时间、ICU住院时间、住院时间的差异。结果 4 组间机械通气时间、ICU 住院时间、住院时间、28 d 和90 d 的病死率差异均有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。结论 P(cv-a)CO2 和液体过负荷状态可以联合评价感染性休克的预后。
Abstract:
Objective To evaluate the value of P(cv-a)CO2 combined with fluid load status in assessing prognosis of patientswith septic shock. Methods The data of 95 patients with septic shock were collected from October 2015 to March 2017, and theincluded patients were divided into 4 groups according to the presence of fluid overload and P(cv-a)CO2 threshold of 6 mmHg (1mmHg=0.133 kPa) 72 hours after treatment. Group A: fluid overload + P(cv-a)CO2 ≥ 6 mmHg; Group B: non-fluid overload + P(cv-a)CO2 ≥ 6 mmHg; Group C: fluid overload + P(cv-a)CO2 < 6 mmHg; Group D: non-fluid overload + P(cv-a)CO2 < 6 mmHg. Thedifferences in the mortality rate on 28 and 90 days, mechanical ventilation time, ICU time, and hospital stay time were compared amongthe four groups. Results There were statistically significant differences in mechanical ventilation time, ICU time, hospital stay, 28-day mortality and 90-day mortality among the 4 groups (P < 0.05). Conclusions The combination of P(cv-a)CO2 and fluid overloadcondition can evaluate the prognosis of patients with septic shock.

参考文献/References

[1] Kelm DJ, Perrin JT, Cartin-Ceba R, et al. Fluid overload in patientswith severe sepsis and septic shock treated with early goal-directedtherapy is associated with increased acute need for fluid-relatedmedical interventions and hospital death[J]. Shock, 2015,43(1):68-73.
[2] Malbrain ML, Marik PE,Witters I, et al. Fluid overload, deresuscitation,and outcomes in critically ill or injured patients:a systematic review with suggestions for clinical practice[J].Anaesthesiol Intensive Ther, 2014, 46(5):361-380.
[3] Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Rhodes A, et al. Surviving sepsis campaign:international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septicshock, 2012[J]. Crit Care Med, 2013, 41(2):580-637.
[4] 何怀武,隆云. 容量状态与容量反应性[J]. 中国医刊,2016,51(7):13-16.
[5] 臧红,刘鸿凌,郝玉清,等. 慢加急肝衰竭并发感染的危险因素及对近期预后的影响[J]. 传染病信息,2015,28(5):288-292.
[6] 王珍燕,沈银忠,刘莉,等. 191 例AIDS 死亡患者临床特征及死因分析[J]. 传染病信息, 2016,29(2):97-100.
[7] Ogbu OC, Murphy DJ, Martin GS. How to avoid fluid overload[J].Curr Opin Crit Care, 2015, 21(4):315-321.
[8] Vincent JL, Sakr Y, Sprung CL, et al. Sepsis in European intensivecare units: results of the SOAP study[J]. Crit Care Med, 2006,34(2):344-353.
[9] Boyd JH, Forbes J, Nakada TA, et al. Fluid resuscitation in septicshock: a positive fluid balance and elevated central venous pressureare associated with increased mortality[J]. Crit Care Med, 2011,39(2):259-265.
[10] Mitchell KH, Carlbom D, Caldwell E, et al. Volume overload:prevalence, risk factors, and functional outcome in survivors ofseptic shock[J]. Ann Am Thorac Soc, 2015, 12(12):1837-1844.
[11] 赵昕,徐凯智,张咏晖. 限制性输液与充分液体复苏在感染性休克患者中的应用比较[J]. 中华医院感染学杂志,2014,24(2):411-413.
[12] 徐波,刘励军. 血清降钙素原(PCT) 的动态变化对感染性休克预后的意义[J]. 中国血液流变学杂志,2008,18(1):99-101.
[13] 钱宇清. 感染性休克患者CRP、PCT、cTnT、CK 水平的检测及与病情危重程度的相关性[J]. 国际检验医学杂志,2017,38(13):1817-1819.
[14] Ospina-Tascón GA, Uma?a M, Bermúdez WF, et al. Canvenousto-arterial carbon dioxide differences reflect microcirculatoryalterations in patients with septic shock[J]. Intensive Care Med,2016, 42(2):211-221.
[15] Cecconi M, De Backer D, Antonelli M, et al. Consensus oncirculatory shock and hemodynamic monitoring. Task force of theEuropean Society of Intensive Care Medicine[J]. Intensive CareMed, 2014, 40(12):1795-1815.

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
[通信作者] 郭志强,E-mail: humorlife2006@163.com
更新日期/Last Update: 2017-12-20