目的 评估不同预冲方案在双重血浆分子吸附系统(double plasma molecular absorption system，DPMAS)治疗中的应用效果。 方法 选取2024年9月─2025年9月在首都医科大学附属北京佑安医院行DPMAS治疗的肝衰竭患者99例。随机分为基础组、基础预充方案增加向胆红素吸附器和血液灌流器内注入肝素钠浸泡30 min(泡罐组)和泡罐+静置组，每组33例。比较3组患者行DPMAS治疗中肝素用量、治疗后血浆分离器及管路凝血分级、不良反应发生率、预冲液中不溶性微粒检测及医护满意率。 结果 3组患者在DPMAS治疗中的肝素用量、治疗后血浆分离器及管路凝血分级评价比较，差异无统计学意义(F/χ2=0.703、0.457，P =0.497、0.988)。不良反应发生率中，口周麻木(χ2=0.471，P =0.790)、低血压(χ2=0.612，P =0.731)和置管处渗血(P =1.000)比较差异无统计学意义。预冲液不溶性微粒检测均值符合要求。3组间医护满意率比较差异具有统计学意义(P＜0.001)。 结论 采用基础组方案不增加患者不良反应发生风险，可以达到有效预冲的目的，还因其操作复杂度低、预冲时间短、减少药品使用、降低护理工作量，具有更高的医护满意度，值得临床推广。

Objective  To evaluate the application effects of different priming schemes in the treatment of double plasma molecular absorption system (DPMAS).  Methods  A total of 99 patients with liver failure who underwent DPMAS treatment at Beijing You'an Hospital affiliated to Capital Medical University from September 2024 to September 2025 were recruited for this study. The patients were randomly divided into a basic group, a bubble canister group, and a bubble canister + static group, with 33 patients in each group. Heparin dosage, coagulation grade in post-treatment plasma separator and tubing, incidence of adverse reactions, insoluble particle detection in priming solution, and doctor-nurse satisfaction rate were compared among the three groups undergoing DPMAS treatment.  Results  There were no statistically significant differences in heparin dosage, coagulation grade in post-treatment plasma separator and tubing among the three groups (F=0.703, P=0.497; χ2=0.457, P=0.988). There were no statistically significant differences in adverse reaction rates, including perioral numbness (χ2= 0.471, P=0.790), hypotension (χ2=0.612, P=0.731) and catheter site bleeding (P=1.000). The mean value of insoluble particles detected in the priming solution met the requirements. The satisfaction rates of medical staff were 100%, 6.06% and 0%, respectively, with statistically significant differences among the 3 groups (P＜0.001).  Conclusion  The basic group scheme does not increase the risk of adverse reactions in patients and can achieve effective priming. In addition to the low operational complexity, short priming time, reduced drug use, and decreased nursing workload in basic group, it is highly satisfactory among medical staff. This method is worthy of clinical promotion.