论文部分内容阅读
目的 :评价 A (气道 )、B(呼吸 )、C(循环 )抢救步骤在心肺脑复苏 (CPCR)中的价值。方法 :收集 70例心搏、呼吸骤停行 CPCR患者临床资料 ,分析单纯心脏疾患致心搏、呼吸骤停 (4 4例 )和非单纯心脏疾患致心搏、呼吸骤停 (2 6例 )患者在实施 CPCR过程中采取的 A、B、C顺序及 CAB组依 C AB间隔时间 (<5分钟、5～ 10分钟和 >10分钟 )所分组的各期复苏成功率。结果 :单纯心脏疾患致心搏、呼吸骤停患者中 ,C组 (11例32例次 )各期复苏成功率均 >87.5 %,显著高于其它各组 (P均 <0 .0 1) ;CAB组 (2 4例 )依 C AB间隔时间不等 ,各期复苏成功率不同 ,<5分钟组各期复苏成功率均明显高于 >5分钟组 (P<0 .0 5或 P<0 .0 1) ;AB组(3例 )各期复苏成功率均≥ 6 6 .7%,ABC组 (6例 )各期复苏成功率均≥ 33.3%,均显著高于 CAB组 (P均 <0 .0 1)。非单纯心脏疾患致心搏、呼吸骤停患者中 ,ABC组各期复苏成功率与 CAB组总体成功率比较无显著差异 (P均 >0 .0 5 ) ;CAB组依 C AB间隔时间不等 ,一、二期复苏成功率间均无显著差异 (P均 >0 .0 5 ) ,三期复苏成功率差异显著 ,>10分钟组明显低于 <10分钟组 (P均 <0 .0 1)。结论 :CAB可能是各种原因致心搏骤停患者 CPCR中可取的抢救步骤 ,但 5分钟可能是进行有效人工通气的极限。
Objective: To evaluate the value of A (airway), B (respiration), and C (circulatory) rescue procedures in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPCR). Methods: The clinical data of 70 patients with cardiac arrest and respiratory arrest were collected and analyzed. Cardiac arrest and respiratory arrest (44 cases) and non-simple heart disease caused by cardiac arrest and respiratory arrest (26 cases) were analyzed. Patient’s A, B, C sequences during CPCR and success rate of each group of CAB grouping divided by CAB interval (<5 minutes, 5-10 minutes and> 10 minutes). Results: The success rates of C group (32 cases in 11 cases) were 87.5%, which were significantly higher than those in other groups (P <0.01) in patients with cardiac arrest and respiratory arrest. The CAB group (24 cases) had different success rates according to CAB interval, and the success rates of resuscitation in each period were significantly different (P <0.05 or P <0 5) .0 1). The successful rate of all the resuscitation in AB group (all three cases) was ≥6.67%, and the success rate of each group in ABC group (resuscitation) was ≥33.3%, which were significantly higher than those in CAB group (P < 0 .0 1). Non-simple heart disease induced cardiac arrest and respiratory arrest in patients with ABC group, the successful rate of recovery and CAB group, the overall success rate was no significant difference (P all> 0.05); CAB group according to C AB intervals , No significant difference between the success rates of the first and second resuscitation (P> 0.05), the success rate of the three resuscitation was significantly different,> 10 minutes group was significantly lower than <10 minutes group (P <0.01) ). Conclusion: CAB may be a desirable rescue procedure for CPCR in patients with cardiac arrest for a variety of reasons, but 5 minutes may be the limit for effective artificial ventilation.