Effect of Electroacupuncture at Zusanli Point Combined with Delayed Resuscitation on the Hemorrhagic Shock Rats with 60 ％ Blood Volume
Zhong Yuxian,Zhang Huiping,Wang Haibin,Wu Yushou,Ma Liqian,Zhang Wenhua,Yao Yongming,Hu Sen
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-9450.2020.01.004
2020-01-01
Abstract:Objective To study the effect of electroacupuncture at Zusanli point combined with delayed venous fluid resuscitation on survival rate,hemodynamics,blood gas index,blood flow and organ function of 60％ blood volume hemorrhagic shock (HS) rats.Methods A total of 144 adult male SPF rats were selected to make a 60％ HS model.After anesthesia,the rats were placed into tube,and the abdominal cavity was cut open about 4 cm along the midline of the abdomen,and covered with gauze impregnated with 0.9％ sodium chloride solution.After injected 1％ heparin saline from the femoral vein for systemic heparin,blood was drawn from the femoral artery.Firstly,40％ of the whole body blood was drawn from the femoral artery within 10 minutes,and then 20％ of the whole body blood was slowly drawn from the femoral vein using a suction pump within 170 minutes.The total blood loss was 60％ of the whole body blood of the rat.HS model was completed and recorded as shock immediately.(1) In experiment one,seventy-two rat HS models were selected and divided into shock non-hydration group (HS group),shock electroacupuncture group (HS + EA group),shock delayed fluid replacement group (HS + DFR group) and electroacupuncture combined delayed fluid replacement group (HS + EA + DFR group) according to the random number table method.HS group:only HS model was made,acupuncture and rehydration were not performed.HS + EA group:acupuncture both sides of Zusanli 30 minutes after the completion of HS model,without rehydration;HS + DFR group:3 h after shock,3 times blood loss of lactated Ringer's solution for femoral vein infusion for 30 minutes without acupuncture;HS + EA + DFR group:30 minutes after the completion of the HS model,acupuncture both sides of Zusanli point,and 3 hours after shock,the same intravenous delayed rehydration as in the HS + DFR group was performed.Calculate the immediate,3,12,and 24 h aftere shock survival rates of the 4 groups of rats;monitor the mean arterial pressure (MAP) and blood flow in the abdominal organs 30 minutes before the shock,3,12 h after shock.(2) Experiment two:72 rat HS models were selected,grouped and treated in the same way as experiment one,and arterial blood gas and organ function indexes of each group were calculated at 3 h after shock.Data were processed with one-way analysis of variance or Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test,t test,log-rank test.Results (1) Immediate shock,the survival rate of each group was 100.0％,and 3 h after shock,the survival rates of rats in the HS group,HS + EA group,HS + DFR group,and HS + EA + DFR group were 61.1％,77.8％,77.8％ and 88.9％,there was no statistically significant difference between the 4 groups (P ＞ 0.05).At 12 h after shock,the survival rates of the rats in the HS + EA group,HS + DFR group,and HS + EA + DFR group were 55.6％,55.6％,and 61.1％,which were significantly higher than that (0) of the HS group,the differences were statistically significant (t =6.51,6.73,6.84;with P values below 0.05).At 24 h after shock,the survival rate of the rats in the HS + EA + DFR group was 50.0％,significantly higher than those in the HS +DFR group (16.7％) and the HS +EA group(11.1％) (t =2.51,2.17;with P values below 0.05).(2) Immediately after shock,the MAP,liver tissue blood flow (HBF),renal tissue blood flow (RBF),and small intestinal mucosal blood flow (IMBF) in the 4 groups were significantly reduced compared with 30 minutes before modeling,and the differences were statistically significant (with P values below 0.05).At 3 and 12 h after shock,the MAP of the HS group,HS + EA group,HS + DFR group,and HS + EA +DFR group were (43.32±5.94),(64.09±9.64),(52.85 ± 10.12),(62.04±7.12) mmHg (1 mmHg=0.133 kPa) and0,(55.52±11.32),(67.39 ±12.03),(94.78 ±9.54) mmHg,the differences between the HS group and the HS + EA group at the two time points were statistically significant (t =3.61,37.00;with P values below 0.05);the differences between the HS + EA + DFR group and the HS + DFR group were statistically significant (t =2.01,6.54;with P values below 0.05);at 3 h after shock,there was no statistically significant difference between the HS + EA + DFR group and the HS + EA group (t =1.04,P ＞ 0.05),at 12 h after shock,the difference between the 2 groups was statistically significant (t =3.68,P＜0.05).At 3 and 12 h after shock,the HBF in the HS group,HS + EA group,HS + DFR group,and HS+EA +DFR group were (41.31 ±4.13),(47.55 ±3.21),(42.54 ±4.19),(49.86 ± 4.68) U and 0,(52.14 ± 5.53),(66.24 ± 4.04),(79.41 ± 7.51) U,there were statistically significant differences between HS group and HS + EA group at two time points (t =4.16,45.00;with P values below 0.05);the differences between the HS + EA + DFR group and the HS + DFR group were statistically significant (t =3.41,3.12;with P values below 0.05);at 3 h after shock,there was no statistically significant difference between HS + EA + DFR group and HS + EA group (t =1.58,P ＞ 0.05),at 12 h after shock,the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (t =3.98,P ＜ 0.05).At 3,12 h after shock,the RBF in the HS,HS +EA,HS +DFR and HS +EA +DFR groups were (81.29 ±8.49),(106.48±9.74),(77.59±8.32),(100.18±10.48) U and0,(86.81 ±4.58),(113.38 ± 10.03),(158.01 ± 11.63) U,there were statistically significant differences between HS group and HS + EA group at two time points (t =3.21,24.00;with P values below 0.05);the difference between the HS + EA + DFR group and the HS + DFR group was statistically significant (t =2.67,3.49;with P values below 0.05);at 3 h after shock,there was no statistically significant difference between the HS + EA + DFR group and HS + EA group (t =1.55,P ＞ 0.05),and at 12 h after shock,the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (t =3.71,P ＜ 0.05).At 3,12 h after shock,the IMBF ofHSgroup,HS +EA group,HS +DFR group and HS +EA + DFR group were (43.98 ±4.75),(89.92±4.72),(51.03±6.90),(94.50±7.61)Uand 0,(76.65±11.32),(104.42±12.03),(143.26 ±9.54) U,the differences between the HS group and the HS + EA group at two time points were statistically significant (t =3.71,30.00;with P values below 0.05);the differences between the HS + EA + DFR group and the HS + DFR group were statistically significant (t =2.37,4.38;with P values below 0.05);at 3 h after shock,there was no statistically significant difference between the HS + EA + DFR group and the HS + EA group (t =1.08,P ＞ 0.05),and at 12 h after shock,the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (t =4.74,P ＜ 0.05).(3) At 3 h after shock,the pH,lactic acid,partial pressure of arterial carbon dioxide,alanine aminotransferase,creatinine,and diamine oxidase in the HS group were 7.04 ±0.07,(9.11 ± 1.28) mmol/L,(50.08 ±3.07) mmHg,(153.15 ± 16.56) U/L,(82.70± 7.26) mmol/L,(19.06 ± 2.50) U/L,and HA +EA group [7.19 ±0.03,(7.16 ± 1.18) mmol/L,(42.53 ± 4.40) mmHg,(98.26 ± 11.45) U/L,(74.4 ± 6.56) mmol/L,(29.35 ± 2.06) U/L],by comparison,the differences were statistically significant (t =8.36,4.75,5.97,11.57,3.60,13.48;with P values below 0.05);at 3 h after shock,each index of the HS + DFR group was 7.04± 0.04,(9.06 ± 1.15) mmol/L,(48.14± 3.10) mmHg,(136.46± 14.24) U/L,(86.5 ± 7.38) mmol/L,(20.56 ± 2.64) U/L,and HS + EA + DFR group [7.17 ± 0.14,(7.22 ± 1.07) mmol/L,(40.52±3.09) mmHg,(99.01 ±10.14)U/L,(72.5±6.41) mmoL/L,(25.74±3.20)U/L],the differences were statistically significant (t =3.79,4.97,7.39,9.09,6.08,5.30;with P values below 0.05);there were no statistically significant differences between HS + EA group and HS + EA + DFR group (t =0.31,0.28,0.33,0.36,0.29,0.35;with P values above 0.05).Conclusion Electroacupuncture at Zusanli point can significantly improve tissue perfusion of fatal hemorrhagic shock model and protect organ function,and improve the 24-hour survival rate of rats with delayed fluid replacement.