目标导向液体治疗在老年患者开腹肝切除术中的应用
作者:
通讯作者:
作者单位:

作者简介:

蒋波, Email: jiangbo@medmail.com.cn

基金项目:

湖南省科技厅科技计划重点资助项目(2015SK2050);中国博士后科学基金资助项目(2017M620347);湖南省自然科学基金资助项目(2018JJ3291)。


Application of goal-directed fluid therapy in elderly patients undergoing open hepatectomy
Author:
Affiliation:

Fund Project:

  • 摘要
  • |
  • 图/表
  • |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献
  • |
  • 相似文献
  • |
  • 引证文献
  • |
  • 资源附件
  • |
  • 音频文件
  • |
  • 视频文件
    摘要:

    目的:探讨每搏量变异度(SVV)指导的目标导向液体治疗(GDFT)在老年患者开腹肝切除术中的应用效果。
    方法:将64例择期行开腹肝切除老年患者(≥65岁)随机均分为两组,术中分别行控制性低中心静脉压技术(CLCVP组)和SVV指导的GDFT(GDFT组)。比较两组患者麻醉诱导前5 min(T0)、进腹时(T1)、第二次肝血流阻断时(T2)、开始关腹(T3)、手术完成时(T4)5个时间点的血流动力学与血气指标,以及术中出血量、补液量、尿量、肝血流阻断时间等指标。
    结果:两组患者的一般资料具有可比性。与各自T0时间点血流动力学指标比较,两组平均动脉压(MAP)、中心静脉压(CVP)在T1、T2、T3、T4时间点均明显下降,心率(HR)在T1时间点明显下降(均P<0.05),CLCVP组心脏指数(CI)在T2、T3、T4时间点明显升高(均P<0.05),而GDFT组CI在T1、T2、T3、T4时间点均明显升高(均P<0.05)。两组间MAP、HR在各时间点差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05),但GDFT组CVP在T3时间点明显高于CLCVP组、CI在T2、T3、T4时间点均明显高于CLCVP组(均P<0.05)。与各自的T0时间点血气指标比较,两组血pH值在T2、T3、T4时间点均明显降低,CLCVP组中心静脉血氧饱和度(SCVO2)在各时间点均无明显变化(均P>0.05),GDFT组SCVO2在T2、T3、T4时间点均明显升高(均P<0.05),两组血乳酸(Lac)在T1、T2、T3、T4时间点均明显升高(均P<0.05)。两组间血pH值在各时间点均无明显差异(均P>0.05),但GDFT组SCVO2在T2、T3、T4时间点均明显高于CLCVP组、Lac在T3、T4时间点明显低于CLCVP组(均P<0.05)。两组晶体液、胶体液、总液体量、尿量比较均无统计学差异(均P>0.05),但GDFT组出血量少于CLCVP组、肝血流阻断时间短于CLCVP组(均P<0.05)。
    结论:SVV指导的GDFT能稳定老年肝切除患者术中血流动力学,改善血气指标,减少术中出血及肝血流阻断时间。

    Abstract:

    Objective: To investigate the application effects of the goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT) guided by stroke volume variation (SVV) on elderly patients undergoing open hepatectomy.
    Methods: Sixty-four elderly patients (≥65 years) undergoing elective open hepatectomy were randomly and equally assigned to two groups, to receive the controlled low central venous pressure (CLCVP) technique (CLCVP group) and SVV-guided GDFT (GDFT group) respectively during operation. Hemodynamic and blood gas indexes were compared between the two groups at 5 time points: 5 min before anesthesia induction (T0), immediately entering the abdominal cavity (T1), the second hepatic blood flow occlusion (T2), starting closure of abdomen (T3), and operation completion (T4). Other variables such as intraoperative blood loss, amount of fluid infusion, urine volume and time of hepatic blood flow occlusion were also compared.
    Results:  The general data of the two groups of patients were comparable. Compared with the hemodynamic variables at T0 time point within group, the mean arterial pressure (MAP) and central venous pressure (CVP) values were significantly decreased at T1, T2, T3 and T4 time points, the heart rates (HR) were significantly reduced at T1 time point in both groups, and the cardiac index (CI) was significantly increased at T2, T3 and T4 time points in CLCVP group and significantly increased at all T1, T2, T3 and T4 time points in GDFT group (all P<0.05). The MAP and HR showed no significant differences between the two groups at any time point (all P>0.05), but the CVP at T3 time point, CI at T2, T3 and T4 time points in GDFT group were significantly higher than those in CLCVP group (all P<0.05). Compared with the blood gas variables at T0 time point within group, the blood pH values were significantly decreased in both groups at T2, T3 and T4 time points (all P<0.05), the central venous oxygen saturation (SCVO2) showed no significant differences in CLCVP group at each time point (all P>0.05), but was significantly increased at T2, T3 and T4 points in GDFT group (all P<0.05), and the blood lactic acid (Lac) levels were significantly increased at all T1, T2, T3 and T4 time points in both group (all P<0.05). The pH values showed no significant differences between the two groups at any time point (all P>0.05), but the SCVO2 values were significantly higher at T2, T3 and T4 time points and the Lac levels were significantly lower at T3 and T4 time points in GDFT group than those in CLCVP group (all P<0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in the amounts of crystal fluid, colloidal fluid and total fluid and urine volume (all P>0.05), but the intraoperative blood loss and time of hepatic blood flow occlusion were reduced in GDFT group compared with CLCVP group (both P<0.05).
    Conclusion: In elderly patients undergoing open hepatectomy, using SVV-guided GDFT can stabilize the hemodynamic status, improve the blood gas indexes and reduce intraoperative hemorrhage and the time of liver blood flow occlusion.

    参考文献
    相似文献
    引证文献
引用本文

申盛乾, 段小辉, 刘苏来, 赵媛, 魏来, 李雪鹏, 张智桦, 蒋波.目标导向液体治疗在老年患者开腹肝切除术中的应用[J].中国普通外科杂志,2019,28(1):77-83.
DOI:10.7659/j. issn.1005-6947.2019.01.011

复制
分享
文章指标
  • 点击次数:
  • 下载次数:
历史
  • 收稿日期:2018-10-10
  • 最后修改日期:2018-12-16
  • 录用日期:
  • 在线发布日期: 2019-01-15