中国血液净化

›› 2004, Vol. 3 ›› Issue (3): 150-153.

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

连续性肾脏替代治疗与间歇性血液透析治疗重症急性肾功能衰竭的比较

于长青 林洪丽 王可平 李 平 杭洪东 谢 华   

  1. 116011 大连，辽宁省大连医科大学附属第一临床医院肾内科
  • 收稿日期:1900-01-01 修回日期:1900-01-01 出版日期:2004-03-12 发布日期:2004-03-12

  • Received:1900-01-01 Revised:1900-01-01 Online:2004-03-12 Published:2004-03-12

RichHTML

0

PDF

208

摘要：

目的 比较连续性肾脏替代治疗（ CRRT）与间歇性血液透析治疗（IHD）对重症急性肾功能衰竭的治疗效果。 方法 收集我科自2001年12月至2002年12月重症急性肾功能衰竭患者52例。每次治疗前、后采血测肾功能、离子，透析前、透析后及透析中每隔2小时测量血压、心率，记录肾功能恢复时间，并记录治疗结束后APACHE-Ⅱ评分。结果 CRRT组与IHD组透析中低血压的发生次数、心律失常发生次数分别为(1.93±0.35)、(3.88±1.23)， P<0.05；(1.39±2.37)、(3.75±3.39)，P<0.01；24小时尿量达到600毫升的时间分别为(15.44±5.29)天、(22.93±8.44)天， P<0.05。治疗后两组 APACHE-Ⅱ评分分别为(14.20±5.56)、(17.30±4.37)，P<0.05。结论 重症急性肾功能衰竭用 CRRT治疗在血流动力学稳定性、溶质清除率及预后方面优于IHD。

关键词: 连续性肾脏替代治疗, 间歇性血液透析治疗, 急性肾功能衰竭

Abstract:

Objective To investigate which is more effective between continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) and intermittent hemodialysis(IHD) in patients with severe acute renal failure. Method Fifty-two severe ARF patients who accepted renal replacement therapy between December 2001 and December 2002 were studied. Of them, 28 were treated with CRRT and 24 with IHD. Results The frequency of low blood pressure, arrhythmia in the CRRT group were much lower than that in the IHD group (1.93±0.35 vs 3.88±1.23, P<0.05 and 1.39±2.37 vs 3.75±3.39, P<0.01). Renal function recovery time was shorter in the CRRT group than that in the IHD group(15.44 ± 5.29 days vs 22.93 ± 8.44 days, P<0.05). APACHE-Ⅱ scores of both groups after treatment are(14.20±5.56 and 17.30±4.37 respectively, P<0.05). Conclusion CRRT may be the best choice for treating severe ARF patients. It can offer more stable dynamic and better prognosis.

Key words: Intermittent hemodialysis, Acute renal failure 

中图分类号: