A clinical study of hemoperfusion on extravascular lung water and other related factors of patients with septic shock

Bo Chen; Yufeng Feng; Shun Wen; Hongsheng Zhao; Hongwei YE; Jiajia Wang

Return

A clinical study of hemoperfusion on extravascular lung water and other related factors of patients with septic shock

VernacularTitle:血液灌流对脓毒性休克患者血管外肺水等相关因素影响的临床研究
Author: Bo CHEN ; Yufeng FENG ; Shun WEN ; Hongsheng ZHAO ; Hongwei YE ; Jiajia WANG
Publication Type:Journal Article
Keywords: Hemoperfusion; Hemofiltration; Septic shock; Extra-vascular lung water; Cardiac index; System vascular resistance index
From: Chinese Journal of Integrated Traditional and Western Medicine in Intensive and Critical Care 2015;22(5):521-523
CountryChina
Language:Chinese
Abstract: Objective To explore the therapeutic effect of combining continuous venovenous hemofiltration (CVVH) with hemoperfusion (HP) on patients with septic shock.Methods A prospective study was conducted. Thirty-two patients with septic shock admitted to Changshu No.1 People's Hospital were enrolled, and they were divided into two groups according to random digits table. The observation group (17 cases) was given HP before CVVH, in the control group (15 cases), only CVVH treatment was carried out, and lasting for 5 days in both groups. The changes of pulse oxygen saturation (SpO2), central venous pressure (CVP), systemic vascular resistance index (SVRI), cardiac index (CI), extra-vascular lung water index (EVLWI) were observed before treatment and 5 days after treatment.Results Compared with those before treatment, the levels of SpO2, CVP, SVRI, CI were obviously elevated, and EVLWI was markedly decreased after treatment in two groups. Compared with those of control group, the degrees of improvement of above indicators in observation group were more prominent [SpO2: 0.966±0.035 vs. 0.939±0.036, CVP (mmHg, 1 mmHg = 0.133 kPa): 8.5±3.2 vs. 8.1±4.2, SVRI (kPa·s·L-1·m-2): 1 497.35±157.08 vs. 1 343.60±144.48, CI (mL·s-1·m-2): 120.36±15.34 vs. 106.69±12.33, EVLWI (mL/kg): 6.84±0.73 vs. 7.65±0.70, allP < 0.05].Conclusion Combing HP with CVVH for treatment of patients with septic shock can improve their prognosis more obviously than using CVVH alone.