不同模式血液净化对ARDS的疗效评价  

Evaluation about the effect of different blood purification modes on acute respiratory distress syndrome

作　　者：韩芳[1] 倪银[1] 江玲芝[1] 孙仁华[1] 屠越兴[1] 

机构地区：[1]浙江省人民医院重症医学科,浙江杭州310014

出　　处：《中国现代医生》2014年第34期28-31,共4页China Modern Doctor

基　　金：浙江省重点科技创新团队科研协作(2011R50018-14)

摘　　要：目的探讨不同模式血液净化（BP）对ARDS患者疗效评价。方法将本科收治的44例ARDS患者随机分为两组,A组患者采用延长每日血液滤过（EDHF）进行治疗（每日持续上机8～10 hr）,B组则采用连续性静脉-静脉滤过（CVVH）的方法进行治疗（每日持续上机20 hr以上）。对所有患者治疗后的临床资料进行回顾性总结与分析。结果两种血液净化模式都可以明显增加ARDS患者肺顺应性,清除炎性因子,从而改善氧合（P〈0.05）;但两种不同模式之间在各个指标上均未见明显统计学差异（P〉0.05）。结论两种模式血液净化对ARDS患者疗效差别不大,但EDHF更简便,故在ARDS患者可推荐使用EDHF模式。Objective To evaluate about the effect of different blood purification（BP） modes on acute respiratory distress syndrome（ARDS）. Methods A total of 44 cases with ARDS in our department were divided randomly into two groups ： group A and group B. Group A was treated with extended daily hemofiltration（EDHF） therapy（continued 8-10 hours daily）, and group B was treated with continuous veno-venous hemofiltration（CVVH） therapy（continued above20 hours daily）. The clinical data of all patients were analyzed and summarized retrospectively. Results The two modes of BP both significantly increased pulmonary compliance of the patients with ARDS and remove inflammatory factor,therefore, the oxygenation of all patients was ameliorated（P0.05）. There was no significant difference in all indicators between the two modes of BP（P0.05）. Conclusion There is no significant difference in effect between the two modes of BP. EDHF mode was more convenient than CVVH, therefore, EDHF mode may be recommended for the patients with ARDS.

关 键 词：急性呼吸窘迫综合征 延长每日血液滤过 连续性静脉-静脉滤过 疗效 

分 类 号：R459.5[医药卫生—治疗学]