论文部分内容阅读
目的 评价人工气道建立和有效通气在非心脏疾患引起心搏骤停患者心肺脑复苏 (CPCR)中的真正价值 ,分析与总结有效人工通气与Ⅰ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ期复苏成功率之间关系 ,探讨对这类患者采取CPCR的抢救步骤和时机 ,为临床采取切实有效CPCR步骤提供依据。方法 选择非单纯心脏疾患致心搏呼吸停止行CPCR患者 2 6例作为分析对象。按照心肺复苏(CPR)实际操作过程中所采取的方法不同 ,将患者分为CAB组 (12例 / 12例次 )和ABC组 (14例 / 18例次 )。CAB组中 ,按照C与AB步骤采取的间隔时间不同 ,分为 <5min、5～ 10min、>10min组 ;ABC组中 ,部分患者在发生心搏骤停以前 ,已经建立人工气道和接受有效通气治疗 ,一旦心搏骤停发生后 ,在AB措施已经存在条件下进行心脏复苏。统计与计算各组复苏成功率(% ) ,χ2 检验各组差异显著性。结果 CAB组患者接受C -AB间隔时间不等 ,Ⅰ、Ⅱ期复苏成功率无显著差异 ,但Ⅲ期复苏成功率差异显著 (P <0 0 5 )。ABC组Ⅲ期复苏成功率分别为 83 3% (15 / 18)、77 7% (14 / 18)、6 6 7% (12 / 18) ,与CAB组总体比较无显著差异 (P >0 0 5 )。结论 虽然CAB对非单纯心脏疾患致心搏呼吸骤停的患者也是可取的CPCR抢救步骤 ,但及时建立人工气道进行有效通气仍是不可忽视的重要步骤 ,尤其当 5min内?
Objective To evaluate the value of establishing and ventilating artificial airway in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPCR) in patients with cardiac arrest caused by non-heart disease, and to analyze and summarize the relationship between effective artificial ventilation and the successful rate of recovery in stage Ⅰ, Ⅱ and Ⅲ, To explore these patients take CPCR rescue steps and timing for clinical practice to provide effective basis CPCR steps. Methods Twenty - six patients with CPCR who had cardiac arrest caused by non - simple heart disease were selected as the analysis object. Patients were divided into the CAB group (12 cases / 12 cases) and the ABC group (14 cases / 18 cases) according to the method adopted in CPR practice. CAB group, according to C and AB steps taken at different intervals, divided into <5min, 5 ~ 10min,> 10min group; ABC group, some patients in the occurrence of cardiac arrest before, has established artificial airway and accepted effective Ventilation therapy, once the cardiac arrest occurs, in the AB measure already exists under the condition of cardiac resuscitation. Statistics and calculation of each group recovery success rate (%), χ2 test significant difference between the various groups. Results The patients in CAB group had different C-AB intervals. There was no significant difference in the success rate of stage Ⅰ and Ⅱ resuscitation, but the success rate of stage Ⅲ resuscitation was significantly different (P <0.05). The success rates of stage Ⅲ resuscitation in ABC group were 83 3% (15/18), 77 7% (14/18) and 6 67% (12/18), respectively, which were not significantly different from those in CAB group (P 0 0 0) 5). Conclusions Although CAB is also a desirable CPCR rescue procedure for patients with arrest of cardiac arrest due to non-simple heart disease, establishing an artificial airway for effective ventilation is still an important step not to be overlooked, especially when within 5 minutes?