Clinical significance of severe ultrasound detecting left ventricular outflow tract velocity-time integral and corrected flow time in shock patients before and after rapid fluid replacement test
-
摘要: 目的 探讨休克患者快速补液试验前后应用重症超声检测左室流出道速度时间积分(VTI)及校正血流时间(FTc)的临床意义。方法 选择我院2020年1月—2022年3月80例休克患者作为研究对象,均行快速补液试验,试验前后应用重症超声检测每搏量(SV)、VTI及FTc,定义试验前后SV增加值(ΔSV) < 15%为无容量反应性,根据容量反应情况将80例患者分为无反应组(n=34)及有反应组(n=46),检测血流动力学指标,分析其与ΔSV的相关性,采用受试者工作特征曲线(ROC)评估ΔVTI、ΔFTc对容量反应性的预测价值。结果 有反应组快速补液试验后SV、VTI及FTc均高于快速补液试验前(P < 0.05);有反应组快速补液试验后ΔSV、ΔVTI、ΔFTc均高于无反应组(P < 0.05);Pearson相关性分析显示,快速补液试验前后ΔVTI、ΔFTc与ΔSV均呈正相关(P < 0.05);由ROC曲线可知,休克患者快速补液试验前后ΔVTI、ΔFTc联合预测容量反应性的AUC为0.925,高于两者单独预测的0.848、0.812(P < 0.05)。结论 重症超声检测快速补液试验引起的VTI和FTc变化(ΔVTI、ΔFTc),能准确预测休克患者的容量反应性,可作为指导容量治疗的参考指标。Abstract: Objective To explore the clinical significance of severe ultrasound detecting left ventricular outflow tract velocity-time integral(VTI) and corrected flow time(FTc) in shock patients before and after rapid fluid replacement test.Methods A total of 80 patients with shock in the hospital from January 2020 to March 2022 were enrolled as the research objects. All of them underwent rapid fluid rehydration test. Stroke volume (SV), VTI and FTc were detected by severe ultrasound before and after the test. The increment of SV(ΔSV) < 15% before and after the test was defined as volume non-responsiveness. According to volume responsiveness, the 80 patients were divided into non-responsiveness group(n=34) and responsiveness group(n=46). The hemodynamics indexes between the two groups were compared before and after the test. The correlation between ultrasound indexes and ΔSV was analyzed by Pearson coefficient. The predictive value of ΔVTI and ΔFTc for volume responsiveness was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic(ROC) curves.Results After rapid fluid replacement test, SV, VTI and FTc were increased in responsiveness group(P < 0.05). After rapid fluid replacement test, ΔSV, ΔVTI and ΔFTc were increased in responsiveness group(P < 0.05). Pearson correlation analysis showed that ΔVTI and ΔFTc were positively correlated with ΔSV before and after the test(P < 0.05). ROC curves analysis showed that AUC of ΔVTI combined with ΔFTc for predicting volume responsiveness before and after rapid fluid rehydration test was 0.925, which was higher than 0.848 and 0.812 predicted by them alone (P < 0.05).Conclusion The changes of VTI and FTc(ΔVTI, ΔFTc) induced by rapid fluid replacement test detected by severe ultrasound can accurately predict the volume responsiveness in shock patients, and can be applied as a reference index to guide volumetric therapy.
-
表 1 2组患者一般资料比较
例(%) 一般资料 有反应组(n=46) 无反应组(n=34) χ2/t P 性别 0.389 0.533 男 28(60.87) 23(67.65) 女 18(39.13) 11(32.35) 年龄/岁 59.23±7.75 58.10±8.24 0.628 0.532 BMI/(kg/m2) 21.84±1.35 22.19±1.56 1.073 0.287 既往病史 冠心病 5(10.87) 3(8.82) 0.091 0.763 高血压 10(21.74) 6(17.65) 0.205 0.651 糖尿病 7(15.22) 4(11.76) 0.197 0.658 休克类型 1.921 0.383 感染性休克 23(50.00) 17(50.00) 失血性休克 22(47.83) 14(41.18) 创伤性休克 1(2.17) 3(8.82) ASA分级 0.068 0.794 Ⅱ级 12(26.09) 8(23.53) Ⅲ级 34(73.91) 26(76.47) SOFA评分/分 17.56±3.29 16.47±2.84 1.551 0.125 APACHEⅡ评分/分 19.62±3.67 21.09±4.25 1.656 0.102 血管活性药物 0.108 0.742 使用 24(52.17) 19(55.88) 未使用 22(47.83) 15(44.12) 表 2 2组患者快速补液试验前后血流动力学指标比较
X±S 组别 时间 MAP/mmHg HR/(次·min-1) SV/mL VTI/cm FTc/ms 有反应组(n=46) 试验前 70.84±7.74 102.63±16.57 52.69±7.06 18.63±3.29 346.06±33.72 试验后 72.97±8.92 99.43±13.06 64.25±10.141) 20.74±2.241) 364.75±25.071) 无反应组(n=34) 试验前 71.55±7.13 105.07±17.69 54.01±8.82 18.59±3.09 343.95±35.08 试验后 73.65±8.26 101.94±15.82 57.05±9.49 19.57±2.67 353.54±21.96 注:1 mmHg=0.133 kPa;与快速补液试验前比较,1)P < 0.05。 表 3 2组患者快速补液试验前后ΔVTI、ΔFTc、ΔSV比较
X±S 组别 例数 ΔSV/% ΔVTI/cm ΔFTc/ms 有反应组 46 21.84±3.38 2.15±0.61 18.75±5.06 无反应组 34 5.72±1.05 1.22±0.34 10.92±3.02 t 26.830 13.701 12.585 P < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 表 4 快速补液试验前后ΔVTI、ΔFTc与ΔSV的相关性分析
指标 ΔSV r P ΔVTI 0.763 < 0.001 ΔFTc 0.728 < 0.001 表 5 休克患者快速补液试验前后ΔVTI、ΔFTc预测容量反应性的价值
指标 AUC 95%CI P 截断值 特异度/% 灵敏度/% ΔVTI 0.848 0.750~0.918 < 0.05 1.63 88.24 71.74 ΔFTc 0.812 0.709~0.891 < 0.05 15.48 97.06 58.70 两者联合 0.925 0.843~0.972 < 0.05 88.24 91.30 -
[1] 张向阳, 陈旭岩. 《急性循环衰竭中国急诊临床实践专家共识》解读[J]. 中国实用内科杂志, 2016, 36(8): 668-670. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SYNK201608014.htm
[2] Zhao HT, Long L, Wang ZK, et al. Successful treatment of acute circulatory failure of unknown cause using critical ultrasound-guided reverse fluid resuscitation: a case report[J]. Medicine, 2020, 99(51): e23594. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000023594
[3] 李根, 邵敏. 不同剂量容量负荷试验在感染性休克老年患者容量反应性评估中的应用价值[J]. 医学研究生学报, 2020, 33(12): 1288-1291. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JLYB202012012.htm
[4] 成爱琴, 朱超云, 蒋宝虎, 等. 下腔静脉直径塌陷指数和左室流出道速度-时间积分变异度联合被动抬腿试验对急性循环衰竭老年病人容量反应性的预测价值[J]. 实用老年医学, 2021, 35(7): 738-740. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SYLA202107021.htm
[5] 单丽红, 沈珏, 柳开忠. 小剂量容量负荷试验联合超声用于评估肿瘤重症休克患者容量反应性的临床应用[J]. 浙江临床医学, 2020, 22(12): 1750-1752. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YJZY202130015.htm
[6] 於江泉, 郑瑞强, 朱进, 等. 速度时间积分指导慢性阻塞性肺疾病合并感染性休克患者液体治疗的临床研究[J]. 中国全科医学, 2021, 24(23): 2945-2949. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-QKYX202123026.htm
[7] 邵雪波, 陈琪, 唐卫东, 等. 颈动脉超声联合被动抬腿试验对危重患者容量反应性的预测价值[J]. 中华危重病急救医学, 2021, 33(9): 1105-1109.
[8] 中国医师协会急诊医师分会. 急性循环衰竭中国急诊临床实践专家共识[J]. 中华急诊医学杂志, 2016, 25(2): 146-152. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SYNK201608014.htm
[9] 杨婷, 黄惠斌, 翁利, 等. 有效动脉弹性评估感染性休克患者容量反应性的临床研究[J]. 中华危重病急救医学, 2021, 33(3): 269-275.
[10] 亢春苗, 牛丹, 穆靓, 等. 迷你容量负荷试验联合床旁超声心动图快速评估重症机械通气患者容量反应性[J]. 宁夏医科大学学报, 2021, 43(8): 824-828. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XNXY202108012.htm
[11] 程礼川, 何修玉, 吴泽华. 重症超声联合被动抬腿试验在感染性休克患者液体复苏中的指导价值分析[J]. 中国医学装备, 2019, 16(4): 62-66. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YXZB201904018.htm
[12] Liu TY, Xu C, Wang M, et al. Reliability of pleth variability index in predicting preload responsiveness of mechanically ventilated patients under various conditions: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. BMC Anesthesiol, 2019, 19(1): 67.
[13] 杨娜, 谢永鹏, 刘克喜. 颈动脉校正血流时间及颈动脉峰流速变异度预测感染性休克病人容量反应性的研究[J]. 安徽医药, 2021, 25(12): 2416-2420. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-AHYY202112020.htm
[14] 陈势, 杨坤, 陶真, 等. 颈动脉校正血流时间在ICU重症患者血容量评估价值分析[J]. 广东医学, 2021, 42(9): 1136-1138. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GAYX202109028.htm
[15] 韩魁, 王小智, 王金忠, 等. 左室流出道血流速率时间积分预测老年感染性休克患者容量反应性的应用价值[J]. 中国老年学杂志, 2019, 39(15): 3622-3624. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZLXZ201915009.htm
[16] 任志慧. 超声联合小剂量容量负荷试验对感染性休克患者容量反应性的评估价值[J]. 内科急危重症杂志, 2020, 26(1): 50-51. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-NKJW202001016.htm
[17] 钱晓波, 张盼盼, 李晨杰, 等. 颈动脉校正血流时间评估老年患者容量反应性的有效性[J]. 临床麻醉学杂志, 2021, 37(9): 972-974. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-LCMZ202109019.htm
[18] 马倩, 石雪朵, 季晶晶, 等. 颈动脉校正血流时间和下腔静脉呼吸变异度预测术后患者容量反应性的比较[J]. 徐州医科大学学报, 2021, 41(8): 564-569. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XZYX202108005.htm