Objective To investigate the value of continuous blood purification （CBP）in early treatment of patients with ARDSexp （ARDS caused by extrapulmonary causes），especially in reducing inflammation mediators and extravascular lung water （EVLW）.Methods According the hospital admission sequence，the patients with APACHEⅡ scores from 15 to 20 and PaO2/FiO2 from 100 to 200 were recruited.The ARDSexp patients were divide into an intervention group treated with CBP （Mode：CVVHDF，rate of displacement liquid and dialysate：1.5 L/h，rate of blood：100-200 mL/h，and the time of CBP：72 hours），and a control group without CBP treatment. The NICO and PICCO monitoring data and the survival rates were recorded and analyzed using the SPSS software. Results The mortality rate of the intervention group was lower than that of the control group （6.3% vs. 36.8%，P=0.032）. In the 72 h monitoring dada of NICO and PICCO，the time of improving PCBF，Pm，Cdyn，VCO2，MValv，Pm，PIP，Raw，RSBI，Vd/Vt，and PaO2/FiO2 of the intervention group was severer than those in the control group，and the severety was also more than that of control group which was was significantly different at 72 h（Plt;0.05）. In the PICCO data，the time of decreasing EVWL and PVPI was shorter than the control group，and the decreasing extent was more than the control group，with significant difference at 72 h. But the changes of Apm，CI，and CVP were not significant （Pgt;0.05）. Conclusions In treatment of ARDSexp patients，CBP therapy can induce the PCBC and EVLW，improve pulmonary compliance and MValv，and reduce the mortality rate，while doesn’t influence heart function and the stability of circulation.
目的 观察三种不同血液净化方式[血液透析（HD）、血液透析滤过（HDF）、血液透析+血液灌流（HD+HP）]对维持性血液透析患者高磷血症清除效果。 方法 选择2009年2月－2011年2月行维持性血液透析的48例高磷血症患者为研究对象，所有患者在低钙透析（1.25 mmol/L）的基础，随机分为HD组、HDF组、HD+HP组，每组16例，分别在治疗时及治疗后4周、8周检查钙、磷、钙磷乘积和全段甲状旁腺激素，并观察其变化。 结果 在治疗4周、8周后，HDF组、HD+HP组磷较前均显著下降（P值均＜0.05），两组同时点相比较差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）；HD组较前血磷无明显变化（P＞0.05）。 结论 HDF、HP清除维持性血液透析患者高磷有显著的效果，而HD效果则不佳。
目的 通过比较三种血液净化方式对炎症介质、甲状旁腺激素等中大分子毒素的清除效果，并观察促红细胞生成素（EPO）的治疗效果，探寻有利于肾性贫血改善的最佳透析模式。 方法 2011年5月－8月采用前瞻性、随机对照、开放式设计，选择维持性血透患者60例，随机分成3组，每组20例。血液灌流（HDP）组[每2周5次血液透析（HD）+1次HDP]、血液透析滤过治疗（HDF）组（每2周5次HD+1次HDF）、HD组（每2周6次HD），随访3个月。检测试验前后反应蛋白（CRP）、β2微球蛋白、甲状旁腺素（PTH）、白介素-6的水平以及各组患者肾性贫血指标的变化。 结果 3个月试验结束时，HDP组和HDF组4项尿毒症毒素水平均显著下降，其中HDP组CRP水平明显低于HDF组（P＜0.05）；HDP组和HDF组试验后的血红蛋白水平较试验前升高，ERI值下降。HD组试验前后的毒素水平无明显变化，ERI值升高。3组患者均未出现严重不良事件。 结论 HDP和HDF清除中大分子毒素的能力优于HD，有利于缓解微炎症状态，改善EPO治疗效果。HDP和HDF的远期效果哪种更好，尚有待于进一步的研究。
目的:总结急性重症中毒并急性肾功能衰竭(ARF)的临床特点并探讨多种血液净化(BP)模式抢救急性重症中毒的临床疗效。方法:回顾性分析我院30例急性中毒并ARF患者,其中9例行血液透析(HD)治疗,11例行HD串联血液灌流(HD＋HP)治疗,10例采用连续性静脉-静脉血液透析滤过(CVVHDF)治疗,各组均给予综合性治疗,比较单纯HD组、HD＋HP组、CVVHDF组之间治疗效果。结果:CVVHDF组治愈率高,肾功能恢复优于其他血液净化组(P﹤0.05),昏迷者的清醒时间快,住院时间缩短(P﹤0.05),无明显毒副作用。结论:CVVHDF、HD＋HP血液净化治疗抢救各种急性中毒并ARF患者成功率高,对急性重症中毒伴多器官功能障碍者,提倡早期行CVVHDF治疗,同时重视洗胃、营养支持、水电解质酸碱平衡、抗感染等综合治疗,以利于急危重症中毒患者的救治。
Objective To investigate the effects of normal saline flushing and its frequency on extracorporeal circuit lifespan and solute removal in continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) without anticoagulation. Methods Patients undergoing continuous veno-venous hemodiafiltration (CVVHDF) without anticoagulation between June and September 2021 were prospectively collected. The patients were randomly divided into three groups by envelope method, namely 30 min-flushing group (flushing every 30 minutes for extracorporeal circulation), 2 h-flushing group (flushing every 2 hours for extracorporeal circulation), and non-flushing group (no flushing for extracorporeal circulation during treatment). All patients were treated with Prismaflex V8.0 CRRT machine and matched AN69ST-ST150 extracorporeal circuit, through either femoral or internal jugular venous double-lumen catheter. CVVHDF was adopted, the blood pump rate was 200 mL/min, and the rates of replacement fluid and dialysate were both 1 000 mL/h. The replacement fluid was pre-post dilution. Extracorporeal circuit lifespan, treatment time delayed by flushing, overall treatment time of CRRT, actual treatment time of CRRT, proportion of actual treatment time achieved, delayed daily treatment time, and small molecule solute removal efficiency before and after treatment were recorded. Results A total of 83 patients were included, including 24 in the 30 min-flushing group, 30 in the 2 h-flushing group, and 29 in the non-flushing group. There were significant differences in the indexes of extracorporeal circuit lifespan and various treatment time indicators among the three groups (P<0.05). Compared with the 2 h-flushing group and the non-flushing group, the 30 min-flushing group significantly shortened the extracorporeal circuit lifespan, delayed more treatment time by flushing, and delayed the longest daily treatment time (P<0.05). The proportion of actual treatment time in the non-flushing group was significantly higher than that in the 30 min-flushing group and the 2 h-flushing group (P<0.05), and in the 2 h-flushing group was also higher than that in the 30 min-flushing group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the blood urea nitrogen clearance rate among the three groups (P=0.570), but the serum creatinine clearance rate was significantly different among the three groups (P=0.020). Compared with the 30 min-flushing group, the 2 h-flushing group had a higher serum creatinine clearance rate, and there was statistical significance (P<0.05). Twenty-five patients had hypotension during treatment. The frequency of 30 min-flushing caused a higher risk of coagulation during cardiopulmonary bypass (hazard ratio=2.502, P=0.001). Conclusion For CVVHDF without anticoagulation, longer extracorporeal circuit lifespan and longer effective treatment time can be achieved without using normal saline flush.