切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华危重症医学杂志(电子版) ›› 2020, Vol. 13 ›› Issue (03) : 195 -199. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-6880.2020.03.007

所属专题: 文献

论著

连续气道正压通气和高流量湿化氧疗方式下患者行纤维支气管镜诊疗的临床观察
杨智超1, 宋志1,(), 彭相虹1, 戢德宇1   
  1. 1. 518055 深圳,深圳大学总医院重症医学科
  • 收稿日期:2019-08-10 出版日期:2020-06-01
  • 通信作者: 宋志

Clinical observation of fiberoptic bronchoscopy in patients undergoing continuous positive airway pressure and high-flow humidification cannula oxygen therapy

Zhichao Yang1, Zhi Song1,(), Xianghong Peng1, Deyu Ji1   

  1. 1. Department of Intensive Care Unit, Shenzhen University General Hospital, Shenzhen 518000, China
  • Received:2019-08-10 Published:2020-06-01
  • Corresponding author: Zhi Song
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Song Zhi, Email:
引用本文:

杨智超, 宋志, 彭相虹, 戢德宇. 连续气道正压通气和高流量湿化氧疗方式下患者行纤维支气管镜诊疗的临床观察[J]. 中华危重症医学杂志(电子版), 2020, 13(03): 195-199.

Zhichao Yang, Zhi Song, Xianghong Peng, Deyu Ji. Clinical observation of fiberoptic bronchoscopy in patients undergoing continuous positive airway pressure and high-flow humidification cannula oxygen therapy[J]. Chinese Journal of Critical Care Medicine(Electronic Edition), 2020, 13(03): 195-199.

目的

探讨连续气道正压通气(CPAP)和高流量湿化氧疗(HFHCO)方式下患者行纤维支气管镜操作的临床效果。

方法

选择2018年12月至2019年7月使用纤维支气管镜诊疗的26例留置人工气道患者,根据患者行纤维支气管镜的操作次数,将其分为CPAP组(32例次)和HFHCO组(32例次)。比较两组患者在纤维支气管镜诊疗操作前及诊疗操作过程中心率、呼吸频率、平均动脉压、外周动脉血氧饱和度(SaO2)以及操作前后患者血液pH值、动脉血氧分压(PaO2)、动脉血二氧化碳分压(PaCO2)、脉搏血氧饱和度(SpO2)。记录两组患者在行纤维支气管镜诊疗中的不良反应发生情况。

结果

操作中,HFHCO组患者心率[(121 ± 3)次/ min vs.(130 ±3)次/ min]、呼吸频率[(21.3 ± 2.7)次/ min vs.(26.1 ± 2.3)次/ min]及平均动脉压[(99 ± 7)mmHg vs.(109 ± 8)mmHg]均较CPAP组患者显著降低(t = 5.232、5.164、6.424,P均< 0.001)。操作后,CPAP组和HFHCO组患者pH值[(7.45 ± 0.05)vs.(7.45 ± 0.07)]、PaO2 [(86.5 ± 7.3)mmHg vs.(88.3 ±6.7)mmHg]、PaCO2 [(40.1 ± 7.5)mmHg vs.(39.4 ± 6.8)mmHg]及SpO2 [(93.9 ± 2.4)% vs.(94.1 ± 2.0)%]水平比较,差异均无统计学意义(t = 0.222、0.468、0.420、0.348,P = 0.731、0.670、0.684、0.697)。与同组操作前比较,CPAP组和HFHCO组患者操作中心率[(86 ± 4)次/ min vs.(130 ± 3)次/ min,(87 ± 4)次/ min vs.(121 ± 3)次/ min,t = 9.826、9.612,P均< 0.001]、呼吸频率[(17.8 ± 2.5)次/ min vs.(26.1 ± 2.3)次/ min,(16.7 ± 2.9)次/ min vs.(21.3 ± 2.7)次/ min,t = 8.488、5.837,P均< 0.001]及平均动脉压[(78 ± 7)mmHg vs.(109 ± 8)mmHg,(77 ± 7)mmHg vs.(99 ± 7)mmHg,t = 9.104、8.224,P均< 0.001]及操作后PaO2 [(67.8 ± 2.6)mmHg vs.(86.5 ± 7.3)mmHg,(68.9 ± 4.0)mmHg vs.(88.3 ± 6.7)mmHg,t = 7.126、6.395,P均< 0.001]水平均显著升高。两组患者在进行纤维支气管镜诊疗操作过程中均未发生严重出血、恶性心律失常、气胸等事件。

结论

对于留置气管插管或气管切开留置套管的患者,在应用CPAP或HFHCO给氧方式下行纤维支气管镜操作时均可改善患者气道通气,提高患者PaO2,但是HFHCO给氧方式下患者的舒适度更好,减轻了患者呼吸、血流动力学体征的明显波动。

Objective

To investigate the clinical effect of fiberoptic bronchoscopy in patients undergoing continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and high-flow humidification cannula oxygen therapy (HFHCO).

Methods

Twenty-six patients with indwelling artificial airway who were treated by fiberoptic bronchoscopy from December 2018 to July 2019 were enrolled. According to the operation times of fiberoptic bronchoscopy, they were divided into a CPAP group (32 times) and a HFHCO group (32 times). The heart rate, respiratory rate, mean arterial pressure, and peripheral arterial blood saturation (SaO2) before and during fiberoptic bronchoscopy and pH value, arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2), arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2), and pulse oxygen saturation (SpO2) before and after operation were compared between the two groups. The adverse effects of fiberoptic bronchoscopy were recorded in both groups.

Results

During operation, the heart rate [(121 ± 3) beats / min vs. (130 ± 3) beats / min], respiratory rate [(21.3 ± 2.7) breaths / min vs. (26.1 ± 2.3) breaths / min], and mean arterial pressure [(99 ± 7) mmHg vs. (109 ± 8) mmHg] in the HFHCO group were significantly lower than those in the CPAP group (t = 5.232, 5.164, 6.424; all P < 0.001). After operation, the pH value [(7.45 ± 0.05) vs. (7.45 ± 0.07)], PaO2 [(86.5 ± 7.3) mmHg vs. (88.3 ± 6.7) mmHg], PaCO2 [(40.1 ± 7.5) mmHg vs. (39.4 ± 6.8) mmHg], and SpO2 [(93.9 ± 2.4)% vs. (94.1 ± 2.0)%] of the the CPAP group and HFHCO group showed no significant difference (t = 0.222, 0.468, 0.420, 0.348; P = 0.731, 0.670, 0.684, 0.697). Compared with the same group before operation, the heart rate [(86 ± 4) beats / min vs. (130 ± 3) beats / min, (87 ± 4) beats / min vs. (121 ± 3) beats / min; t = 9.826, 9.612; both P < 0.001], respiratory rate [(17.8 ± 2.5) breaths / min vs. (26.1 ± 2.3) breaths / min, (16.7 ± 2.9) breath / min vs. (21.3 ± 2.7) breaths / min; t = 8.488, 5.837; both P < 0.001], and mean arterial pressure [(78 ± 7) mmHg vs. (109 ± 8) mmHg, (77 ± 7) mmHg vs. (99 ± 7) mmHg; t = 9.104, 8.224; both P < 0.001] during operation and PaO2 [(67.8 ± 2.6) mmHg vs. (86.5 ± 7.3) mmHg, (68.9 ± 4.0) mmHg vs. (88.3 ± 6.7) mmHg; t = 7.126, 6.395; both P < 0.001] after operation all significantly elevated in the CPAP group and HFHCO group. No serious bleeding, malignant arrhythmia, or pneumothorax occurred during the course of fiberoptic bronchoscopy in the two groups.

Conclusions

For patients with indwelling tracheal intubation or tracheotomy cannula, CPAP or HFHCO can improve their airway ventilation and PaO2 during bronchofibroscope procedures. However, patients with HFHCO are more comfortable and HFHCO can avoid significant fluctuations in their respiratory and hemodynamic signs.

表1 两组留置人工气道的患者一般资料比较(±s
表2 两组留置人工气道的患者在纤维支气管镜操作前及操作中心率、呼吸频率、平均动脉压及SaO2水平比较(±s
表3 两组留置人工气道的患者在纤维支气管镜操作前和操作后血气分析比较(±s
1
Liu Z, Liu X, Huang Y, et al. Intraoperative mechanical ventilation strategies in patients undergoing one-lung ventilation: a meta-analysis[J]. Springerplus, 2016, 5 (1): 1251.
2
刘大为. 实用重症医学(第2版)[M]. 北京:人民卫生出版社,2017:421-425.
3
Movassagi R, Montazer M, Mahmoodpoor A, et al. Comparison of pressure vs. volume controlled ventilation on oxygenation parameters of obese patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy[J]. Pak J Med Sci, 2017, 33 (5): 1117-1122.
4
吴丽娟. 关注呼吸衰竭治疗的新技术——加温加湿经鼻高流量氧疗[J]. 中华医学杂志,2017,97(5):321-324.
5
Roca O, Riera J, Torres F, et al. High-flow oxygen therapy in acute respiratory failure[J]. Respir Care,2010, 55 (4): 408-413.
6
张顺凤. 双水平气道正压通气对COPD合并呼吸衰竭生活质量的影响[J]. 中国预防医学杂志,2016,17(12):954-957.
7
Cirio S, Piran M, Vitacca M, et al. Effects of heated and humidified high flow gases during high-intensity constant-load exercise on severe COPD patients with ventilatory limitation[J]. Respir Med, 2016 (118): 128-132.
8
Lemiale V, Mokart D, Resche-Rigon M, et al. Effect of noninvasive ventilation vs oxygen therapy on mortality among immunocompromised patients with acute respiratory failure: a randomized clinical trial[J]. JAMA, 2015, 314 (16): 1711-1719.
9
吕姗,安友仲. 主动温湿化的经鼻高流量氧疗在成人患者中的应用[J]. 中华危重病急救医学,2016,28(1):84-88.
10
Brotfain E, Zlotnik A, Schwartz A, et al. Comparison of the effectiveness of high flow nasal oxygencannula vs. standard non-rebreather oxygen face mask in post-extubation intensive care unit patients[J]. Isr Med Assoc J, 2014, 16 (11): 718-722.

URL    
11
Chanques G, Constantin JM, Sauter M, et al. Discomfort associated with underhumidified high-flowoxygen therapy in critically ill patients[J]. Intensive Care Med, 2009, 35 (6): 996-1003.
12
邹晓月,韩慧,包芸,等. 慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重期患者有创-无创序贯治疗中无创通气时长的临床研究[J/CD]. 中华危重症医学杂志(电子版),2018,11(5):357-360.

URL    
13
Pisani L, Vega ML. Use of nasal high flow in stable COPD: rationale and physiology[J]. COPD, 2017, 14 (3): 346-350.
14
张宏,孙辉,欧阳文,等. 不同时机行有创机械通气治疗慢阻肺急性发作合并重度呼吸衰竭患者的对照研究[J]. 中国煤炭工业医学杂志,2017,20(2):139-144.
15
王可,徐思成,左蕾,等. 经鼻高流量吸氧治疗急性呼吸衰竭的系统评价[J]. 中华急诊医学杂志,2017,26(8):879-884.
16
高瑞丽,李彦波,费月海. 经鼻高流量吸氧装置在高龄急性呼吸衰竭患者中应用[J]. 临床军医杂志,2018,46(3):305-306,309.
17
Spence CJ, Buchmann NA, Jermy MC. Unsteady flow in the nasal cavity with high flow therapy measured by stereoscopic PIV[J]. Exp Fluids, 2012, 52 (3): 569-579.

URL    
18
Chanques G, Riboulet F, Molinari N, et al. Comparison of three high flow oxygen therapy delivery devices: a clinical physiological cross-over study[J]. Minerva Anestesiol, 2013, 79 (12): 1344-1355.

URL    
19
Frat JP, Brugiere B, Ragot S, et al. Sequential application of oxygen therapy via high-flow nasal cannula and noninvasive ventilation in acute respiratory failure: an observational pilot study[J]. Respir Care, 2015, 60 (2): 170-178.
20
Roca O, Pérez-Terán P, Masclans JR, et al. Patients with New York Heart Association class Ⅲ heart failure may benefit with high flow nasal cannula supportive therapy: high flow nasal cannula in heart failure[J]. J Crit Care, 2013, 28 (5): 741-746.

URL    
21
Chidekel A, Zhu Y, Wang J, et al. The effects of gas humidification with high-flow nasal cannula on cultured human airway epithelial cells[J]. Pulm Med, 2012: 380686.
[1] 李小钦, 翁丽红, 林晟, 何华强, 李鸿茹, 陈愉生, 许能銮. 脱机拔管后呼吸衰竭患者序贯经鼻高流量湿化氧疗失败的危险因素分析[J]. 中华危重症医学杂志(电子版), 2022, 15(04): 271-278.
[2] 韩进海, 王皓, 孙晓林, 贾贵彬. 经鼻高流量氧疗在高原地区慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重合并呼吸衰竭患者中的应用[J]. 中华危重症医学杂志(电子版), 2019, 12(05): 323-327.
[3] 庄元华, 王娜, 李晓莺, 刘建红. 经鼻双水平气道正压通气与连续气道正压通气在重度呼吸窘迫综合征早产儿撤机后的应用[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2020, 16(03): 316-321.
[4] 王伏东, 符明凤, 陈敏华, 吴明赴, 宋祥芳, 张丽, 刘凤, 蒋丽军. 肺表面活性物质不同给药方案治疗早产儿呼吸窘迫综合征的临床研究[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2020, 16(03): 299-308.
[5] 刘莉, 唐军. 新生儿胎粪吸入综合征的防治研究现状[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2020, 16(03): 249-256.
[6] 金宝, 高翔羽, 杨波, 黄迪, 任漪. 枸橼酸咖啡因联合加温湿化高流量鼻导管通气预防呼吸窘迫综合征早产儿拔管失败的临床研究[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2019, 15(06): 695-702.
[7] 翟敬芳, 吴杰斌, 金宝, 刘枭, 王彦波, 周广玲, 宋晓玉, 王珂, 周彬, 王凯. 加温湿化高流量鼻导管通气与经鼻持续气道正压通气对轻度新生儿呼吸窘迫综合征初始呼吸支持治疗比较[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2019, 15(06): 632-638.
[8] 李文星, 唐军, 陈超, 邱霞, 岳艳, 曾燕, 屈艺, 母得志. 预防早产儿拔管失败:加温湿化高流量鼻导管通气与经鼻持续气道正压通气效果比较的Meta分析[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2019, 15(02): 171-179.
[9] 王继灵, 杨莉, 陈国辉, 张欣欣, 罗源, 杨庆斌. 新型经电子纤维支气管镜下防污染支气管肺泡灌洗、支气管肺泡灌洗以及常规痰检法在肺部感染诊治中的应用[J]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2019, 13(03): 221-226.
[10] 杨智晖, 赵宇博, 许倩, 潘洁, 常兴芳, 路康, 许宁. 经鼻高流量湿化氧疗治疗支气管扩张症伴感染临床分析[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2023, 16(02): 206-208.
[11] 李林, 刘璐, 何芳. 经鼻高流量湿化氧疗治疗AECOPD合并Ⅱ型呼吸衰竭的疗效分析[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2021, 14(04): 422-426.
[12] 曹登秀, 孙小莉. 纤维支气管镜预处理标准操作规程应用[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2019, 12(05): 660-662.
[13] 范慧明, 魏海龙, 罗林成, 刘玮. 支气管镜下局部治疗支气管结核临床分析[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2019, 12(03): 321-324.
[14] 高美丽, 赛亚飞, 金发光, 李王平, 冯志军. 慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重期患者病原菌分布特点[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2019, 12(01): 68-72.
[15] 张连钰, 白焕英. 纤维支气管镜治疗重症肺部感染合并肺不张患者的临床效果[J]. 中华卫生应急电子杂志, 2021, 07(05): 277-280.
阅读次数
全文


摘要