限制性液体复苏在地震创伤失血性休克患者中的应用研究

目的 比较限制性液体复苏和积极/正压液体复苏救治地震创伤未控制失血性休克(TUHS)患者的临床效果和安全性,为临床应用提供参考.方法 将62例地震创伤未控制失血性休克的患者,随机数字表法分为限制性液体复苏组(Ⅰ组,30例)和积极/正压液体复苏组(Ⅱ组,32例),均用平衡液和贺斯为复苏液(2∶1),分别按限制性液体复苏和积极/正压液体复苏方案进行液体复苏,随后进行手术止血.动态监测平均动脉压(MAP)、心率、中心静脉压(CVP),在复苏的4个时相点检测剩余碱、乳酸和肌酐.结果 两组MAP在充分液体复苏前各自稳定在50～70 mm Hg和70～90 mm Hg,心率在早期复苏后明显下降,CVP升高(组内P＜0.01,组间T1P＜0.01),且均在正常范围内变化.总输液量Ⅰ组明显少于Ⅱ组(P＜0.01).两组尿量比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).两组在复苏后剩余碱值变化组内比较差异有统计学意义(P＜0.01),组间比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).复苏后两组乳酸水平均明显下降(P＜0.01),Ⅰ组变化更为显著,与Ⅱ组比较差异有统计学意义(P＜0.01).两组血清肌酐在复苏后均明显下降,组内比较差异有统计学意义(P＜0.01),组间比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 较于积极/正压液体复苏,限制性液体复苏在减少输液量的同时,能改善患者的血流动力学指标,增加组织氧供,改善微循环,保护肾功能,用于TUHS的液体复苏是安全、有效的.

Role of limited fluid resusciration in treatment of traumatic hemorrhagic shock patients attributable to China Wenchuan earthquake

Objective To compare the clinical effect and safety of limited fluid resuscitation and aggressive/normotensive fluid resuscitation in treatment of earthquake-induced traumatic hemorrhagic shock patients so as to provide reference for clinical application.Methods A total of 62 patients with traumatic hemorrhagic shock in earthquake were employed and divided randomly into limited fluid resuscitation group(Group Ⅰ,30 patients)and aggressive/normotensive fluid resuscitation group(Group Ⅱ,32 patients).All the patients were resuscitated by using halanted solution and HAES-steril as resuscitanaid resuscitation.Then,surgical hemostasis was carried out and dynamic changes of mean blood pressure(MAP),heart rate and central venous pressure(CVP)observed.The base excess,lactic acid and creatinine were detected at four resuscitation points.Results Before full fluid resuscitation,MAP remained at 50-70 mm Hg and 70-90 mm Hg respectively in both groups.After early resuscitation.heart rate showed significant decrease,while CVP increased(P＜0.01)but still changed at normal range.Total transfusion volume in Group Ⅰ was less than that of GroupⅡ(P＜0.01).There was no statistical difference upon urine volume(P＞0.05).There was statistical difierence upon base excess value after resuscitation within group(P＜0.01)but no statistical difference between two groups(P＞0.05).After resuscitation,hetic acid level wag obviously reduced in both groups(P＜0.01),with more significant change in Group Ⅰ,with statistical difference compared with Group Ⅱ(P＜0.01).There showed a significant decrease of creatinine in both groups after resuscitation.with statistical difierence within group (P＜0.01)but without statistical difference between two groups(P＞0.05).Conclusions Compared with aggressive/normotensive fluid resuscitation,limited fluid resuscitation is a more safe and effective way for fluid resuscitation of traumatic hemorrhagic shock,for it can not only reduce transfusion volume and ameliorate hemodynamic indices,but also can increase oxygen supply,improve microcirculation and protect renal function.