Objective To assess and compare the roles of plasma concentrations of neutrophil gelatinase associated lipocalin (NGAL) and Cystatin C for early diagnosis and treatment of septic acute kidney injury (AKI) in adult Surgical critically ill patient . Methods One hundred patients were divided into two groups ,the group of 63 cases of AKI and AKI group of 37 cases ,plasma NGAL and Cystatin C level of the 2 groups were determined by the method of enzyme‐linked immunosorbent (ELISA) ,latex en‐hanced immune turbidimetry (PETIA) respectively on arrival in the surgical intensive care unit(SICU) (T0 ) and 24 h after arrival in SICU(T1 ) .Results Compared with patients in non AKI group ,both plasma NGAL and Cystatin C level of patients in AKI group on T0 and T1 increased significantly ,the difference between the two groups had significant statistical difference (P<0 .01);Although ,plasma NGAL on T1 performed less well (AUC=0 .69) ,with a threshold value of 92 ng/mL(70 .3% sensitivity ,57%specificity) .Plasma NGAL showed significant discrimination for AKI diagnosis (AUC=0 .85) with a threshold value of 65 .95 ng/mL(81 .8% sensitivity ,76 .2% specificity) on T0 .Both plasma Cystatin C on T0 and T1 worked well for the diagnosis of AKI (AUC=0 .90 ,0 .88 ,thresholds 1 .49 and 1 .47 mg/L ,respectively) ,with diagnostic sensitivity of 89 .2% ,82 .5% respectively ,speci‐ficity of 83 .8% ,76 .2% respectively .Conclusion Plasma NGAL and Cystatin C are useful markers in predicting AKI in surgical critically ill patients ,the early diagnosis value of plasma Cystatin C for AKI is better than plasma NGAL on arrival in the surgical intensive care unit .

Objectives:To observe the role of nutritional support in patients after liver transplantation. Methods:Nutritional support was used in three patients after orthotopic liver transplantation(OLT).Total parenteral nutrition(TPN) was administered since the second day after the operation,the combination of enteral nutrition(EN) and parenteral nutrition(PN) was followed and then total enteral nutrition(TEN) was adopted.After that,oral intake of food was restored. Results:Postoperative patients were restored well. Conclusions:The supply of nutrition for patients after liver transplantation should be TPN→PN+EN→TEN,and then gradually increased.Once the gastroenteric functions of patients recover it is advisable to start EN as soon as possible.

Objective To compared analgesic effect of sufentanil and fentanyl in surgery patients during mechanical ventilation, and to explore the rational dosage of analgesic and sedative drugs. Methods A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted. 600 postoperative critically ill patients underwent mechanical ventilation for 12-72 hours admitted to Department of Critical Care Medicine of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University from April 2013 to March 2015 were enrolled. They were randomly divided into two groups, sufentanil and fentanyl was used for analgesia respectively, and 300 patients in each group. The initiate dosage of sufentanil and fentanil was 5 μg/h and 50 μg/h, and the dosage was adjusted. A postoperative pain score (Prince-Henry score) of 0-1, and Richmond agitation-sedation scale (RASS) score -1-0 were targeted. 1 mg/kg of propofol was used if patient could not fall in sleep or felt anxious after loading dose of sufentanil (5 μg) or fentanil (50 μg) for 5 minutes. The use of analgesic drugs, the proportion and dosage of propofol was observed in the two groups, and adverse reactions were recorded. Results The mean dose of sufentanil for analgesia was (0.07±0.02) μg·kg-1·h-1, and the mean dose of fentanyl was (0.67±0.12) μg·kg-1·h-1. The patients in the two groups received propofol 40 to 60 mg/h in night, and the use proportion of propofol in sufentanil group was slightly less than that in fentanyl group (25.7% vs. 28.3%), but the difference was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). It was found by subgroup age analysis that, the mean analgesic dose of sufentanil or fentanyl in patients over 80 years old was lower than that in 70-79 years, 60-69 years and < 60 years groups but without statistical significance. There were 11 cases (3.7%) and 21 cases (7.0%) patients suffered from respiratory depression in sufentanil group and fentanyl group, respectively, without statistical significance (P = 0.069). The hemodynamics of patients in two groups was stable during analgesia, and no accidental extubation due to restlessness was found. Conclusions A smaller dose of sufentanil for postoperative patients underwent mechanical ventilation with satisfactory analgesia was (0.07±0.02) μg·kg-1·h-1, but need to be added with 40-60 mg/h and a small dose of propofol to improve anxiety and sleep. The proportion of patients needing propofol addition was slightly lower than that of fentanyl.

Objective To investigate the accuracy and feasibility of brachial artery peak velocity variation (ΔVpeakbrach) and inferior vena cava variability (VIVC) as indicators of fluid responsiveness in critically ill patients. Methods A single-center prospective observation was conducted. The patients on mechanical ventilation with spontaneously breathing admitted to Department of Critical Care Medicine of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University from June 2013 to August 2015 were enrolled. The patients were diagnosed as severe sepsis or sepsis shock. The peak velocity in brachial artery and diameter of the inferior vena cava at the end of inspiration and expiration was measured by bedside portable ultrasonic machine, and then ΔVpeakbrach and VIVC were calculated. The hemodynamic parameters were collected at baseline and after volume expansion (VE). The stroke volume (SV) was measured by pulse-indicated continuous cardiac output (PiCCO). Patients were classified as responders or non-responders according to the variation of SV (ΔSV) increased ≥ 15% or not after VE. Receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) was plotted to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of ΔVpeakbrach and VIVC in predicting volume responsiveness. Results Among 58 patients after VE, 32 patients were defined as responders and the rest 26 were defined as non-responders.There were no differences in gender, age, acute physiology and chronic health evaluation Ⅱ (APACHE Ⅱ) score, dose of vasoactive agent, ventilator parameters and infection site. Compared with baseline hemodynamic parameters, heart rate (HR) was decreased (bpm: 95±18 vs. 103±21), and systolic blood pressure (SBP) was increased [mmHg (1 mmHg = 0.133 kPa): 92±8 vs. 80±7] after VE in responders; central venous pressure (CVP) was increased after VE in non-responders (mmHg: 11±4 vs. 8±3, all P < 0.05). The ΔVpeakbrach [(15.4±4.3)% vs. (11.2±3.5)%] and VIVC [(18.6±4.1)% vs. (14.3±3.6)%] in responders were significantly increased as compared with those of non-responders (both P < 0.05). The area under ROC curve (AUC) of ΔVpeakbrach for predicting volume responsiveness was 0.816. When the cut-off value of ΔVpeakbrach was ≥ 13.3%, the sensitivity was 71.9%, and the specificity was 80.8%. AUC of VIVC for predicting volume responsiveness was 0.733. When the cut-off value of VIVC was ≥ 19.25%, the sensitivity was 53.1%, and the specificity was 88.5%. Conclusion ΔVpeakbrach and VIVC are reliable indicators for predicting volume responsiveness in critical patients.