...
首页> 外文期刊>The veterinary clinics of North America: small animal practice >Fluid Management in Patients with Trauma: Restrictive Versus Liberal Approach
【24h】

Fluid Management in Patients with Trauma: Restrictive Versus Liberal Approach

机译:创伤患者的流体管理:限制与自由主义方法

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Massive hemorrhage remains a major cause of traumatic deaths. The ideal fluid resuscitative strategy is much debated. Research has provided inconsistent results regarding which fluid strategy is ideal; the optimum fluid type, timing, and volume remains elusive. Aggressive large-volume resuscitation has been the mainstay based on controlled hemorrhage animal models. For uncontrolled hemorrhagic shock, liberal fluid resuscitative strategies exacerbate the lethal triad, invoke resuscitative injury, and increase mortality while more restrictive fluid strategies tend to ameliorate trauma-induced coagulopathy and favor a greater chance of survival. This article discusses the current evidence regarding liberal and restrictive fluid strategies for trauma.
机译:大规模出血仍然是创伤死亡的主要原因。 理想的流体复苏策略很有争论。 研究提供了对哪些流体策略是理想的不一致结果; 最佳流体类型,时序和体积仍然难以捉摸。 积极的大体积复苏是基于受控出血动物模型的主干。 对于不受控制的出血性休克,自由液复苏策略加剧了致命的三合会,调用复苏损伤,增加了死亡率,而更具限制性的流体策略往往会改善创伤诱导的凝血病变,并有利于生存的更大机会。 本文讨论了关于创伤的自由主义流体策略的现行证据。

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