论文部分内容阅读
目的 探讨低流速法代替气道闭合法测定急性呼吸窘迫综合征 (ARDS)静态肺压力 容积曲线的可行性。方法 采用内毒素 (LPS)诱导的绵羊ARDS模型 ,利用低流速法和气道闭合法测定肺压力 容积曲线 ,并用双向直线回归法确定相应曲线低位转折点压力 (Pinf) ,低流速法和气道闭合法测定的Pinf分别表示为Pinfd和Pinfb。结果 Pinfd与Pinfb分别为 (8 91± 0 82 )cmH2 O与 (8 5 9±0 78)cmH2 O ,两者比较差异无显著性 ,具有显著相关性 (r=0 93,P <0 0 5 )。相同潮气量情况下 ,两种方法测定的相应气道压力呈正相关 (r =0 99,P <0 0 0 5 )。低流速法和气道闭合法测定的肺顺应性分别为 (19± 7)L/cmH2 O和 (2 0± 7)L/cmH2 O ,差异无显著性 (P >0 0 5 )。低流速法测定肺压力 容积曲线的时间需 3～ 4min ,气道闭合法需 30～ 35min。结论 低流速法测定肺压力 容积曲线准确安全 ,简便省时 ,可代替气道闭合法
Objective To investigate the feasibility of determining the static pulmonary pressure-volume curve of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) by low-flow rate instead of airway closure. Methods LPS-induced sheep ARDS model was used to measure the pulmonary pressure-volume curve with low-flow rate method and airway closure method. Pinf of the corresponding curve was determined by two-way linear regression method. The low flow velocity method and the airway closure method Pinf are denoted as Pinfd and Pinfb, respectively. Results The results showed that Pinfd and Pinfb were (8 91 ± 0 82) cmH 2 O and (8 59 ± 0 78) cmH 2 O, respectively. There was no significant difference between them (r = 0 93, P 0 05 ). The same tidal volume of the two methods measured the corresponding airway pressure was positively correlated (r = 0 99, P <0 0 0 5). Lung compliance was (19 ± 7) L / cmH 2 O and (20 ± 7) L / cmH 2 O, respectively, with no significant difference between low flow rate and airway closure (P> 0.05). Low flow velocity measurement of pulmonary pressure-volume curve time 3 ~ 4min, airway closure method takes 30 ~ 35min. Conclusions The low flow velocity method is accurate and safe to measure the lung pressure volume curve, which is simple and time-saving and can replace the airway closure method