Control Study of Inspiratory Holding and Circulatory Arresting Method in the Determination of Parameters of Venous Return

Yang Wanjie,Feng Qingguo,An Youzhong,Wang Qing,Zhao Xuefeng,Li Chang,Wang Wei,Wei Kai,Zhang Rumei,Teng Hongyun
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.2095-4352.2016.11.012
2016-01-01
Abstract:Objective To explore the correlation of inspiratory holding and circulatory arresting method in the determination of venous reflux parameters and validate the feasibility of inspiratory holding method determination for venous return parameters at the bedside. Methods Health mongrel pigs were divided into inspiratory holding and circulatory arresting groups based on the measurement methods implemented in them. Firstly, the first venous return curve was traced according to the 12 seconds inspiratory holding method and the first mean circulatory filling pressure (Pmsf1) was obtained. Then 500 mL 0.9% hydroxyethyl starch sodium chloride solution was infused rapidly within 15 minutes, and the second venous return curve was traced by the same way and the second mean circulatory filling pressure (Pmsf2) was obtained. Besides, based on the method of conversion of axis, the stress volume of Pmsf1 and Pmsf2 (Vstress1 and Vstress2) were calculated. Secondly, circulatory arresting was implemented immediately following Pmsf2 and Vstress2, and the mean circulatory filling pressure (Pmsf3) was obtained when the electrocardiogram oscilloscope was straight and pressure numerical was stable; following Pmsf3, bloodletting was started and the blood volume was recorded when the bloodletting stopped and pressure points were stable at 0 mmHg (1 mmHg = 0.133 kPa). The stress volume (Vstress3) can be obtained from the gap of liquids in and out during this period. Finally, venous return parameters (Pmsf2 and Pmsf3, Vstress2 and Vstress3) obtained by those two methods were compared and statistically analyzed. Results Finally, 50 animals were observed. ① Comparison of hemodynamic parameters between the venous return curve after the infusion was traced: there were no significant differences in heart rate (HR) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) before and after liquid infusion [HR (bpm): 113.70±7.84 vs. 110.88±8.95, t = 1.677, P = 0.097; MAP (mmHg, 1 mmHg = 0.133 kPa): 112.46±5.04 vs. 114.04±5.25, t = -1.534, P = 0.128]. Compared with the data before liquid infusion, central venous pressure (CVP), cardiac output (CO) and global end-diastolic volume (GEDV) after liquid infusion were significantly increased [CVP (mmHg): 6.24±0.87 vs. 3.92±0.75, t = -14.265, P = 0.000; CO (L/min): 5.98±0.15 vs. 5.45±0.12, t = -19.741, P = 0.000; GEDV (mL/kg): 735.46±12.56 vs. 676.62±6.67, t = -29.268, P = 0.000]. ② There were no significant statistical differences in parameters obtained by inspiratory holding and circulatory arresting methods [Pmsf2 and Pmsf3 (mmHg): 23.11±0.53 vs. 22.82±0.94, t = 1.677, P = 0.059; Vstress2 and Vstress3 (mL/kg): 13.10±15.79 vs. 10.60±1.49, t = -1.113, P = 0.268]. Conclusion No significant difference was found in the measurement of Pmsf and Vstress between inspiratory holding and classic circulatory arresting methods, which confirmed the feasibility of inspiratory holding method in the measurement of venous return parameters. Key words: Venous return;  Mean systemic filling pressure;  Stress volume;  Inspiratory hold
What problem does this paper attempt to address?