...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Intensive Care >Monitoring of muscle mass in critically ill patients: comparison of ultrasound and two bioelectrical impedance analysis devices
【24h】

Monitoring of muscle mass in critically ill patients: comparison of ultrasound and two bioelectrical impedance analysis devices

机译:严重病患者的肌肉肿块监测:超声波和两种生物电阻抗分析装置的比较

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Background:Skeletal muscle atrophy commonly occurs in critically ill patients, and decreased muscle mass is associated with worse clinical outcomes. Muscle mass can be assessed using various tools, including ultrasound and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA). However, the effectiveness of muscle mass monitoring is unclear in critically ill patients. This study was conducted to compare ultrasound and BIA for the monitoring of muscle mass in critically ill patients.Methods:We recruited adult patients who were expected to undergo mechanical ventilation for ?48?h and to remain in the intensive care unit (ICU) for ?5?days. On days 1, 3, 5, 7, and 10, muscle mass was evaluated using an ultrasound and two BIA devices (Bioscan: Malton International, England; Physion: Nippon Shooter, Japan). The influence of fluid balance was also evaluated between each measurement day.Results:We analyzed 93 images in 21 patients. The age of the patients was 69 (interquartile range, IQR, 59-74) years, with 16 men and 5 women. The length of ICU stay was 11?days (IQR, 9-25?days). The muscle mass, monitored by ultrasound, decreased progressively by 9.2% (95% confidence interval (CI), 5.9-12.5%), 12.7% (95% CI, 9.3-16.1%), 18.2% (95% CI, 14.7-21.6%), and 21.8% (95% CI, 17.9-25.7%) on days 3, 5, 7, and 10 (p???0.01), respectively, with no influence of fluid balance (r?=?0.04, p?=?0.74). The muscle mass did not decrease significantly in both the BIA devices (Bioscan, p?=?0.14; Physion, p?=?0.60), and an influence of fluid balance was observed (Bioscan, r?=?0.37, p???0.01; Physion, r?=?0.51, p???0.01). The muscle mass assessment at one point between ultrasound and BIA was moderately correlated (Bioscan, r?=?0.51, p???0.01; Physion, r?=?0.37, p???0.01), but the change of muscle mass in the same patient did not correlate between these two devices (Bioscan, r?=?-?0.05, p?=?0.69; Physion, r?=?0.23, p?=?0.07).Conclusions:Ultrasound is suitable for sequential monitoring of muscle atrophy in critically ill patients. Monitoring by BIA should be carefully interpreted owing to the influence of fluid change.Trial registration:UMIN000031316. Retrospectively registered on 15 February 2018.? The Author(s). 2019.
机译:背景:骨骼肌萎缩通常发生在危重病患者中,并且肌肉质量下降与临床结果更差。可以使用各种工具评估肌肉质量,包括超声波和生物电阻抗分析(BIA)。然而,肌肉大规模监测的有效性尚不清楚病患者。进行了本研究以比较超声和BIA在危重病人中监测肌肉肿块。方法:我们招募了预计会接受机械通气的成年患者>?48?H,并留在重症监护室(ICU)中适用于>?5?天。在第1,3,5,7和10天,使用超声波和两个BIA设备评估肌肉质量(Bioscan:Malton International,英格兰;生理:日本Nippon Shooters)。还在每个测量日之间评估液体平衡的影响。结果:我们在21例患者中分析了93个图像。患者的年龄是69(四分位数,IQR,59-74)年,16名男子和5名女性。 ICU逗留的长度为11?天(IQR,9-25?天)。通过超声监测的肌肉质量逐渐降低9.2%(95%置信区间(CI),5.9-12.5%),12.7%(95%CI,9.3-16.1%),18.2%(95%CI,14.7- 21.6%)和21.8%(95%CI,17.9-25.7%)分别在第3,5,7和10天(p ?? 0.01),没有流体平衡的影响(R?= 0.04 ,p?= 0.74)。 BIA设备(Bioscan,P?= 0.14;物理,P?= 0.60)中,观察到肌肉质量没有显着降低(BioScan,P?0.60)(Bioscan,R?= 0.37,P?< ?? 0.01;物理,r?= 0.51,p?

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