...
首页> 外文期刊>Open access Emergency Medicine >The clinical effectiveness of permissive hypotension in blunt abdominal trauma with hemorrhagic shock but without head or spine injuries or burns: a systematic review
【24h】

The clinical effectiveness of permissive hypotension in blunt abdominal trauma with hemorrhagic shock but without head or spine injuries or burns: a systematic review

机译:允许性低血压在钝性腹部外伤伴失血性休克但无头部或脊柱受伤或烧伤的临床疗效:系统评价

获取原文
           

摘要

Background: Trauma is a major cause of death and disability. The current trend in trauma management is the rapid administration of fluid as per the Advanced Trauma Life Support guidelines, although there is no evidence to support this and even some to suggest it might be harmful. Some guidelines, protocols, and recommendations have been established for the use of permissive hypotension although there is reluctance concerning its application in blunt injuries.Objectives: The aim of this review is to determine whether there is evidence of the use of permissive hypotension in the management of hemorrhagic shock in blunt trauma patients. This review also aims to search for any reason for the reluctance to apply permissive hypotension in blunt injuries.Methods: This systematic review has followed the steps recommended in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. It is also being reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Statement and checklist. Database searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination databases and the Cochrane Library were made for eligible studies as well as journal searches. Inclusion criteria included systematic reviews that have similar primary questions to this review and randomized controlled trials where patients with blunt torso injuries and hemorrhagic shock were not excluded. Rapid or early fluid administration was compared with controlled or delayed fluid resuscitation and a significant outcome was obtained.Results: No systematic reviews attempting to answer similar questions were found. Two randomized controlled trials with mixed types of injuries in the included patients found no significant difference between the groups used in each study. Data concerning the question of this review was sought after these papers were appraised.Conclusion: The limited available data are not conclusive. However, the supportive theoretical concept and laboratory evidence do not show any reason for treating blunt injuries differently from other traumatic injuries. Moreover, permissive hypotension is being used for some nontraumatic causes of hemorrhagic shock and in theater. Therefore, this should encourage interested researchers to continue clinical work in this important field.
机译:背景:创伤是导致死亡和残疾的主要原因。目前,创伤管理的趋势是根据《高级创伤生命支持》指南快速输注液体,尽管没有证据支持这一点,甚至没有证据表明它可能有害。尽管尚不愿意在钝性损伤中应用允许使用低血压的一些指导方针,方案和建议。目的:本次审查的目的是确定在管理中是否存在使用允许性低血压的证据。钝性创伤患者的失血性休克这篇综述还旨在寻找任何不愿在钝性损伤中施加允许性低血压的原因。方法:本系统综述遵循了《 Cochrane系统干预研究手册》中推荐的步骤。还根据“系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目”对报告进行了报告和核对表。对MEDLINE,EMBASE,评论和传播中心数据库和Cochrane图书馆进行了数据库搜索,以进行合格的研究以及期刊搜索。纳入标准包括系统评价,该评价具有与该评价相似的主要问题,以及随机对照试验,其中不排除躯干钝伤和失血性休克患者。将快速或早期输液与控制或延迟输液进行了比较,并获得了显着结果。结果:未找到试图回答类似问题的系统评价。在纳入的患者中进行的两种混合损伤类型的随机对照试验发现,每个研究中使用的组之间无显着差异。在对这些论文进行评估后,寻求有关该评价问题的数据。结论:有限的可用数据不是结论性的。但是,支持性的理论概念和实验室证据并未显示出与其他创伤性损伤不同的任何治疗钝性损伤的原因。此外,允许性低血压被用于失血性休克的一些非创伤性原因以及在战场上。因此,这应该鼓励感兴趣的研究人员继续在这一重要领域进行临床研究。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号