熊磊教授基于“脾为痰源”辨治儿童癫痫临证思路探赜

熊磊教授以理脾为本，将治痰贯穿始终。根据小儿脾常不足、肾常虚、肝常有余的生理特点，癫痫发作期治疗主以涤痰开窍，辅以理气健脾，同时配合活血化瘀通窍与平肝息风潜阳。主要选方为柴芍温胆汤、天麻钩藤饮、桃红四物汤加减；缓解期则以补肾养肝为主，兼以健脾化痰，主要选方为杞菊地黄丸合定痫丸加减，取得较好临床疗效。     

Use of a Checklist During Observation of a Simulated Cardiac Arrest Scenario Does Not Improve Time to CPR and Defibrillation Over Observation Alone for Subsequent Scenarios

Theory: Immersive simulation is a common mode of education for medical students. Observation of clinical simulations prior to participation is believed to be beneficial, though this is often a passive process. Active observation may be more beneficial. Hypotheses: The hypothesis tested in this study was that the active use of a simple checklist during observation of an immersive simulation would result in better participant performance in a subsequent scenario compared with passive observation alone. Methods: Medical students were randomized to either passive or active (with checklist) observation of an immersive simulation involving cardiac arrest prior to participating in their own simulation. Performance measures included time to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and time to defibrillation and were compared between first and second scenarios as well as between passive and active observers. Results: Seventy-nine simulations involving 232 students were conducted. Mean time to CPR was 18 seconds (SD = 11.6) for those using the checklist and 24 seconds (SD = 15.8) for those who observed passively (M difference = 6 seconds), t(35) = 1.46, p =.153. Time to defibrillation was 94 seconds (SD = 26.4) for those using the checklist and 92 seconds (SD = 23.8) for those who observed passively (M difference = –2 seconds), t(38) =.21, p =.837. Time to CPR was 24 seconds (SD = 15.8) for passive observers and 31 seconds (SD = 21.0; M difference = 7 seconds), t(35) = 1.13, p =.265, for their first scenario counterparts. Time to CPR was 18 seconds (SD = 11.6) for active observers and 36 seconds (SD = 26.2; M difference = 18 seconds), t(24) = 2.81, p =.010, for their first scenario counterparts. Time to defibrillation was 92 seconds (SD = 23.8) for passive observers and 125 seconds (SD = 32.2; M difference = 33 seconds), t(33) = 3.63, p =.001, for their first scenario counterparts. Time to defibrillation was 94 seconds (SD = 26.4) for the active observers and 132 seconds (SD = 52.9; M difference = 38 seconds), t(28) =.46, p =.008, for their first scenario counterparts. Conclusions: Observation alone leads to improved performance in the management of a simulated cardiac arrest. The active use of a simple skills-based checklist during observation did not appear to improve performance over passive observation alone.     

Impact of bystander-performed ventilation on functional outcomes after cardiac arrest and factors associated with ventilation-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A large observational study

AimTo determine the effectiveness of ventilations in bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (BCPR) and to identify the factors associated with ventilation-only BCPR.MethodsFrom out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) data prospectively collected from 2005 to 2011 in Japan, we extracted data for 210,134 bystander-witnessed OHCAs with complete datasets but no prehospital involvement of physician [no BCPR, 115,733; ventilation-only, 2093; compression-only, 61,075; and conventional (compressions+ventilations) BCPR, 31,233] and determined the factors associated with 1-month neurologically favourable survival using simple and multivariable logistic regression analyses. In 91,885 patients with known BCPR durations, we determined the factors associated with ventilation-only BCPR.ResultsThe rate of survival in the no BCPR, ventilation-only, compression-only and conventional group was 2.8%, 3.9%, 4.5% and 5.0%, respectively. After adjustment for other factors associated with outcomes, the survival rate in the ventilation-only group was higher than that in the no BCPR group (adjusted OR; 95% CI, 1.29; 1.01–1.63), but lower than that in the compression-only (0.76; 0.59–0.96) or conventional groups (0.70; 0.55–0.89). Conventional CPR had the highest OR for survival in almost all OHCA subgroups. The adjusted OR (95% CI) for survival after dividing BCPR into ventilation and compression components was 1.19 (1.11–1.27) and 1.60 (1.51–1.69), respectively. Older guidelines, female sex, younger patient age, bystander-initiated CPR without instruction, early BCPR and short BCPR duration were associated with ventilation-only BCPR.ConclusionsVentilation is a significant component of BCPR, but alone is less effective than compression in improving neurologically favourable survival after OHCAs.     

Association of the time to first epinephrine administration and outcomes in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: SOS-KANTO 2012 study

Objective

This study assessed the association between the timing of first epinephrine administration (EA) and the neurological outcomes following out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCAs) with both initial shockable and non-shockable rhythms.

液体复苏在高呼吸末正压通气导致的肺泡微循环障碍中的作用

目的明确高呼气末正压（PEEP）条件下肺泡微循环的变化情况以及液体复苏在高PEEP情况下对肺泡微循环的影响。 方法选用北京当地的15条健康成年杂种狗进行实验，分别观察基线（PEEP 5 cmH₂O，1 cmH₂O=0.098 kPa）、高PEEP（平均动脉压下降≥20 mmHg，1 mmHg=0.133 kPa）及液体复苏后的呼吸、系统循环及肺泡微循环情况，肺泡微循环利用旁流暗视野成像（SDF）技术进行观察、留取视频结果，线下利用AVA3.2软件进行分析，不同条件下的实验数据之间的差异利用Wilcoxon秩和检验进行分析。 结果高PEEP可导致中心静脉压（CVP）升高（P=0.001）及心输出量（CO）下降（P=0.002），肺泡微循环表现为总微血管数量（TVDa，P=0.036）、灌注血管数量（PVDa，P=0.002）、灌注血管比例（PPVa，P=0.003）、血流状态（MFIa，P=0.002）显著下降，肺泡周围毛细血管密度下降不明显（TVDs，P=0.319）；液体复苏恢复整体循环后，微循环参数均无显著改善。 结论过高的PEEP水平可导致肺泡微循环的显著恶化，通过液体复苏不能改善由此产生的微循环障碍。     

PBL教学法在临床心肺复苏术教学中的应用分析

目的 分析重症医学科PBL教学法在临床心肺复苏术教学中的应用效果.方法 本次实验的开展基础数据选择2016年9月—2018年7月进入医院重症医学科实习学生64例,按照学生自身意愿以及学校安排将参与实验学生分为均数相同的两个小组(对照组、观察组),每组实验人数均为32例,其中对照组(n=32)采用传统教学方法 ,观察组(n=32)则应用PBL教学法教学,对比两组学生在学期结束后整体的学习质量情况和教学满意率.结果 观察组学生经过测试后理论知识和专业技能得分均对比对照组更高,教学效果更加理想,观察组学生对于教学的满意率评价更高,P<0.05.结论 重症医学科临床心肺复苏术教学中应用PBL教学法,将理论与实践进行结合,对教学方法 进行改进,全面提升学生的思维理解能力,培养良好的动手能力,促进理论教学与实践的结合,为学生以后的职业生涯提供更加理想的条件.     

单侧液压脑损伤对大鼠双侧海马GFAP表达和CA1区突触传递的影响

目的研究单侧液压脑损伤(FPI)对大鼠双侧海马区胶质纤维酸性蛋白(GFAP)表达和CA1区突触传递的影响。方法建立大鼠单侧液压脑损伤模型,脑标本分为对照组(包括正常对照和假手术对照)、FPI损伤同侧组和FPI损伤对侧组。免疫组化法检测海马水平切片GFAP表达,对海马CA1区锥体神经元进行细胞内记录。结果FPI大鼠双侧海马齿状回门区和CA1区GFAP表达均比对照组明显增强。FPI损伤同侧组兴奋性输入-输出关系曲线的斜率比其他两组显著增大(P<0.05);FPI损伤同侧组和对侧组双脉冲易化(PPF)比值和抑制性突触后电位(IPSP)幅值均比对照组显著减小(P<0.05);FPI损伤同侧组和对侧组双脉冲抑制(PPD)比值均比对照组显著增大(P<0.05)。结论大鼠单侧液压脑损伤对双侧海马均可产生影响,导致双侧海马CA1区兴奋性突触传递增强,抑制性突触传递减弱。     

未控制出血性休克与TNF—a的关联性及不同液体复苏的作用

目的 研究未控制出血性休克时不同液体复苏的作用以及，INF—a的变化规律，以期阐明限制性液体复苏降低未控制出血性休克的死亡率和改善预后的相关机制。方法采用改良后的Krausz方法建立重度脾创伤未控制出血性休克大鼠模型。采用随机分组的原则将大鼠分为假处理组、限制输液组、常规输液组、不输液组。观察各组动物的出血量、输液量、存活率、存活时间及各时间点的血压、血细胞比容（Hct）和TNF—a的变化情况。结果①限制输液组的输液量明显少于常规输液组（P〈0．05），出血量也明显少于常规输液组（P〈0．05）。②限制输液组Hct明显高于常规输液组（P〈0．05）。②限制输液组的存活时间比常规输液组及不输液组明显延长（P均〈0．05）。限制输液组在72h内的存活率明显高于常规输液组和不输液组。但低于假处理组（P均〈0．1）。④除假处理组外其余各组在伤后90min和180min血TNF—a水平均较伤前均有明显升高（P均〈0．05）；常规输液组，TNF—a水平明显高于限制输液组（P〈0．05）。⑤死亡者TNF—a水平明显高于生存者。结论本研究结果表明，在重度未控制出血条件下，限制性液体复苏可明显降低出血量，提高存活率。未控制性出血休克时的TNF—a水平与预后密切相关，TNF—a高预后不良，而限制性液体复苏时TNF—a水平明显降低。