Ventilatory support in the intensive care unit

This article focuses on the functional features of positive-pressure ventilators, the modes of invasive and non-invasive mechanical ventilation, and the main ventilator settings. It also highlights the potential complications of mechanical ventilation, the basic principles of weaning, and the pathophysiological basis of patient-ventilator dyssynchrony.     

右美托咪啶与芬太尼联合对ICU 腹部外科术后机械通气患者镇静镇痛的效果比较

目的:探讨右美托咪啶与芬太尼联合在ICU腹部外科术后机械通气患者中的应用效果及对镇静、镇痛作用的影响。方法:选择2018年5月—2019年6月ICU腹部外科术后机械通气患者62例,随机分为对照组(n=31例)和观察组(n=31例)。两组均采用芬太尼持续静脉泵入,对照组采用咪达唑仑镇静镇痛,观察组采用右美托咪啶镇静镇痛,比较两组镇痛镇静效果、镇静剂使用剂量、苏醒及达到镇静所需时间、血流动力学水平及安全性。结果:两组T2、T3时间点VAS评分分别为(2.40±0.31 vs 2.43±0.32和2.01±0.12 vs 2.05±0.15)、Ramsay量表评分分别(3.21±0.35 vs 3.20±0.33和3.01±0.25vs 3.00±0.24)均低于T1时间点(VAS评分2.94±0.69 vs 2.96±0.71;Ramsay量表评分3.57±0.61 vs 3.58±0.62)(P0.05);观察组右美托咪啶联合芬太尼镇痛镇静达到镇静所需时间(34.29±3.56) min长于对照组(23.63±3.21)(t=5.535,P=0.043);观察组镇静剂使用剂量(220.59±15.25)μg、苏醒时间(3.29±0.69)min均少(短)于对照组镇静剂使用剂量(386.44±18.92)μg、苏醒时间(7.56±1.21)min(t=6.294、6.092,P=0.023、0.025);两组T1、T2时间点心率[观察组T1(88.47±9.76)次/min、T2(86.41±9.43)次/min;对照组T1(89.53±10.41)次/min、T2(87.46±9.58)次/min]均高于T0时间点[观察组(78.78±4.35)次/min、对照组(79.12±4.41)次/min](P0.05);观察组T1、T2时间点MVP(79.58±5.71、87.53±6.76)mmHg高于对照组(74.12±4.69、75.26±5.61)mmHg(t=9.613、7.223,P=0.011、0.016);观察组的不良反应发生率为6.45%,与对照组的12.90%差异无统计学意义(χ~2=1.214, P=0.643)。结论:将右美托咪啶联合芬太尼用于ICU腹部外科术后机械通气患者中能获得良好的镇痛、镇静效果,缩短苏醒及达到镇静所需时间,血流动力学相对稳定,药物安全性较高,值得推广应用。     

Is routine extubation overnight safe in cardiac surgery patients?

Objectives

Expedient extubation after cardiac surgery has been associated with improved outcomes, leading to postoperative extubation frequently during overnight hours. However, recent evidence in a mixed medical-surgical intensive care unit population demonstrated worse outcomes with overnight extubation. This study investigated the impact of overnight extubation in a statewide, multicenter Society of Thoracic Surgeons database.

Modern theatre design and usage: do joint replacements need laminar flow?

Since the introduction of laminar flow to theatre systems by Charnley, it has become a necessity in arthroplasty surgery. His initial work in the 1960s and 70s created improvements in terms of reducing overall rates of periprosthetic joint replacement, but it has been hard to ascertain if this stems from the laminar flow itself or improvements in asepsis and the utilization of perioperative antibiotics. The aim of this paper is therefore to establish if laminar flow is still a necessary addition to modern theatre design, particularly in joint replacement surgery, irrespective of other surgical factors. A wide variety of studies were utilized to form an objective analysis of whether laminar flow is essential to asepsis in theatre design. It explores a number of smaller earlier studies and ends with two large trials which provide evidence that laminar flow may in fact have a deleterious effect on the potential for peri-prosthetic joint infection (PJI). The article discusses potential reasons for these findings and seeks to explain them in context of overall asepsis during joint replacement surgery.     

后外侧结构重建在新鲜股骨颈骨折人工股骨头置换术中的应用

目的探讨后外侧结构重建对后外侧入路人工股骨头置换术术后早期关节脱位的影响。方法选取2016年9月至2017年8月于我院行后外侧入路初次人工股骨头置换术的股骨颈骨折患者60例,根据术中是否修补关节囊及外旋肌群分为重建组(33例:舌形切开关节囊,术中将关节囊及外旋肌群原位缝合在大转子后方及臀中肌肌腱附着处)和对照组(27例:切除关节囊后,术中未进行外旋肌群修复重建)。比较两组的手术情况及术后近期关节功能情况。结果重建组的手术时间为(45.0±15.3) min,长于对照组的(35.0±12.4) min (P <0.05)。重建组术腔引流量为(200.0±80.0) m L,少于对照组的(420.0±120.6) m L (P <0.05)。重建组的早期脱位率为0.000%(0例),与对照组的7.407%(2例)比较无统计学差异(P>0.05)。重建组术后Harris评分为(92.0±3.4)分,高于对照组的(88.2±5.0)分(P <0.05)。结论在后外侧入路人工股骨头置换过程中行后外侧结构重建能够有效减少术腔引流量,提高髋关节Harris评分,对维持髋关节软组织平衡具有重要意义。