心脏手术围术期血液动力学监测。

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY Current Opinion in Anesthesiology Pub Date : 2024-02-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-20 DOI:10.1097/ACO.0000000000001327
Michael C Grant, Rawn Salenger, Kevin W Lobdell
{"title":"心脏手术围术期血液动力学监测。","authors":"Michael C Grant, Rawn Salenger, Kevin W Lobdell","doi":"10.1097/ACO.0000000000001327","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Cardiac surgery has traditionally relied upon invasive hemodynamic monitoring, including regular use of pulmonary artery catheters. More recently, there has been advancement in our understanding as well as broader adoption of less invasive alternatives. This review serves as an outline of the key perioperative hemodynamic monitoring options for cardiac surgery.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Recent study has revealed that the use of invasive monitoring such as pulmonary artery catheters or transesophageal echocardiography in low-risk patients undergoing low-risk cardiac surgery is of questionable benefit. Lesser invasive approaches such a pulse contour analysis or ultrasound may provide a useful alternative to assess patient hemodynamics and guide resuscitation therapy. A number of recent studies have been published to support broader indication for these evolving technologies.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>More selective use of indwelling catheters for cardiac surgery has coincided with greater application of less invasive alternatives. Understanding the advantages and limitations of each tool allows the bedside clinician to identify which hemodynamic monitoring modality is most suitable for which patient.</p>","PeriodicalId":50609,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Anesthesiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perioperative hemodynamic monitoring in cardiac surgery.\",\"authors\":\"Michael C Grant, Rawn Salenger, Kevin W Lobdell\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/ACO.0000000000001327\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Cardiac surgery has traditionally relied upon invasive hemodynamic monitoring, including regular use of pulmonary artery catheters. More recently, there has been advancement in our understanding as well as broader adoption of less invasive alternatives. This review serves as an outline of the key perioperative hemodynamic monitoring options for cardiac surgery.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Recent study has revealed that the use of invasive monitoring such as pulmonary artery catheters or transesophageal echocardiography in low-risk patients undergoing low-risk cardiac surgery is of questionable benefit. Lesser invasive approaches such a pulse contour analysis or ultrasound may provide a useful alternative to assess patient hemodynamics and guide resuscitation therapy. A number of recent studies have been published to support broader indication for these evolving technologies.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>More selective use of indwelling catheters for cardiac surgery has coincided with greater application of less invasive alternatives. Understanding the advantages and limitations of each tool allows the bedside clinician to identify which hemodynamic monitoring modality is most suitable for which patient.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50609,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Opinion in Anesthesiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Opinion in Anesthesiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/ACO.0000000000001327\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ACO.0000000000001327","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

审查目的:心脏手术历来依赖侵入性血液动力学监测,包括定期使用肺动脉导管。最近,我们对这种方法的认识有所提高,并更广泛地采用了侵入性较小的替代方法。本综述概述了心脏手术围术期血液动力学监测的主要选择:最近的研究表明,在接受低风险心脏手术的低风险患者中使用肺动脉导管或经食道超声心动图等侵入性监测的益处值得怀疑。脉搏轮廓分析或超声波等侵入性较小的方法可能是评估患者血液动力学和指导复苏治疗的有效替代方法。摘要:在心脏手术中更有选择性地使用留置导管的同时,创伤较小的替代方法也得到了更广泛的应用。了解了每种工具的优势和局限性,床旁临床医生就能确定哪种血液动力学监测模式最适合哪位患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Perioperative hemodynamic monitoring in cardiac surgery.

Purpose of review: Cardiac surgery has traditionally relied upon invasive hemodynamic monitoring, including regular use of pulmonary artery catheters. More recently, there has been advancement in our understanding as well as broader adoption of less invasive alternatives. This review serves as an outline of the key perioperative hemodynamic monitoring options for cardiac surgery.

Recent findings: Recent study has revealed that the use of invasive monitoring such as pulmonary artery catheters or transesophageal echocardiography in low-risk patients undergoing low-risk cardiac surgery is of questionable benefit. Lesser invasive approaches such a pulse contour analysis or ultrasound may provide a useful alternative to assess patient hemodynamics and guide resuscitation therapy. A number of recent studies have been published to support broader indication for these evolving technologies.

Summary: More selective use of indwelling catheters for cardiac surgery has coincided with greater application of less invasive alternatives. Understanding the advantages and limitations of each tool allows the bedside clinician to identify which hemodynamic monitoring modality is most suitable for which patient.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
8.00%
发文量
207
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: ​​​​​​​​Published bimonthly and offering a unique and wide ranging perspective on the key developments in the field, each issue of Current Opinion in Anesthesiology features hand-picked review articles from our team of expert editors. With fifteen disciplines published across the year – including cardiovascular anesthesiology, neuroanesthesia and pain medicine – every issue also contains annotated references detailing the merits of the most important papers.
期刊最新文献
Postoperative pain management after abdominal transplantations. An update on the perioperative management of postcraniotomy pain. Anesthesia for traumatic brain injury. Harnessing artificial intelligence for predicting and managing postoperative pain: a narrative literature review. Keeping patients in the dark: perioperative anesthetic considerations for patients receiving 5-aminolevulinic acid for glioma resection.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1