目的探讨影响重型新型冠状病毒肺炎(COVID-19)早期治疗效果的相关危险因素。方法回顾性分析2020年1月至2月在湖北省武汉市汉口医院住院的71例严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2(SARS-CoV-2)核酸检测阳性的重型COVID-19患者资料。收集患者入...目的探讨影响重型新型冠状病毒肺炎(COVID-19)早期治疗效果的相关危险因素。方法回顾性分析2020年1月至2月在湖北省武汉市汉口医院住院的71例严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2(SARS-CoV-2)核酸检测阳性的重型COVID-19患者资料。收集患者入院早期生命体征、临床表现、静息状态下脉搏氧饱和度、血常规、肝功能、肾功能、血生物化学、电解质、超敏肌钙蛋白T、凝血功能、脑钠肽前体、肺部CT表现、序贯器官功能衰竭评分(SOFA),以及治疗方式和早期治疗转归等资料。根据治疗2周后的治疗效果分为临床改善组和临床进展组,比较两组患者各项指标的差异,分析影响早期治疗效果的危险因素。结果临床缓解组患者43例,经治疗后均转为普通型;临床进展组患者28例,10例死亡,15例进展至危重型,3例治疗后无明显改善。两组患者发病前均存在武汉疫区居住史。临床进展组患者中吸烟者所占比例(75.0%,21/28)高于临床缓解组患者(46.5%,20/43),差异有统计学意义(P=0.033)。与临床缓解组患者相比,临床进展组患者淋巴细胞计数[0.80(0.70,0.90)×10^9/L vs 0.70(0.60,0.70)×10^9/L]、血小板计数[222(174,310)×10^9/L vs 193(152,232)×10^9/L]、纤维蛋白原水平[4.22(3.71,4.80)g/L vs 3.81(2.96,4.38)g/L]降低,差异均有统计学意义(P均<0.05)。两组患者常见临床症状、生命体征、静息状态下脉搏氧饱和度、其余实验室检查指标、SOFA评分、治疗方式等差异均无统计学意义(P均>0.05)。多因素logistic回归分析结果显示,吸烟(OR=4.88,95%CI 1.33~25.00,P=0.020)、白细胞计数≤3.5×10^9/L(OR=10.00,95%CI 1.47~100.00,P=0.008)、淋巴细胞计数<0.1×10^9/L(OR=16.67,95%CI 3.33~100.00,P<0.001)是影响患者早期治疗效果的危险因素。结论有吸烟史、白细胞计数≤3.5×109/L及淋巴细胞计数<0.1×10^9/L的重型COVID-19患者早期治疗效果不佳的风险较高,建议临床上对有上述危险因素的重型COVID-19患者进行重点诊疗,及早采取有效治疗措施进行干预,以改善预后。展开更多
Background The usual transbronchial coagulation techniques include microwave, argon plasma coagulation （APC）, electrocautery and cryotherapy. However, there are serious clinical problems in the safety of each. By an...Background The usual transbronchial coagulation techniques include microwave, argon plasma coagulation （APC）, electrocautery and cryotherapy. However, there are serious clinical problems in the safety of each. By analyzing the experimental data and clinical observations, we observed the variable effects of different coagulation techniques via bronchofibroscopy, to look for an optimal interventional management of luminal bronchus diseases, and evaluate the safety and the equivalent point. Methods Four kinds of coagulation techniques under bronchoscopy were performed on the fresh bronchus of healthy sheep, and the pathologic changes in all groups were observed under the microscope. The different treatment parameters were as follows： microwave 60 Wxl second, 3 seconds, 5 seconds and 40 W×1 second, 3 seconds, 5 seconds; APC 40 W×1 second, 3 seconds, 5 seconds; electrocautery 40 W×1 second, 3 seconds, 5 seconds; cryotherapy 100 Ω×60 seconds, 120 seconds. Results After treatment, ovine bronchial mucosa in all groups showed pathologic changes such as local necrosis and amotio of the mucosa lining epithelium, local submucosa coagulative necrosis or tissue defects, while inflammation in the surrounding tissue was not obvious. Under the same output power and action time, different methods had different outcomes. The damage by APC was the most superficial, microwave was the second, and electrocautery caused the worst damage. The study also found that effects of electrocautery at 40 W×3 seconds, microwave at 40 W×5 seconds or 60 W×3 seconds, APC at 40 W×5 seconds and cryotherapy at 100 Ω×120 seconds were the equivalent point conditions. The appearance included mucosa absence, partial submucosa absence, and collagen fiber coagulation in treatment areas. Conclusions Each coagulation technique has its own characteristic. It is very important to choose the appropriate power and action time of the suitable method according to the therapy requirement.展开更多
文摘目的探讨影响重型新型冠状病毒肺炎(COVID-19)早期治疗效果的相关危险因素。方法回顾性分析2020年1月至2月在湖北省武汉市汉口医院住院的71例严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2(SARS-CoV-2)核酸检测阳性的重型COVID-19患者资料。收集患者入院早期生命体征、临床表现、静息状态下脉搏氧饱和度、血常规、肝功能、肾功能、血生物化学、电解质、超敏肌钙蛋白T、凝血功能、脑钠肽前体、肺部CT表现、序贯器官功能衰竭评分(SOFA),以及治疗方式和早期治疗转归等资料。根据治疗2周后的治疗效果分为临床改善组和临床进展组,比较两组患者各项指标的差异,分析影响早期治疗效果的危险因素。结果临床缓解组患者43例,经治疗后均转为普通型;临床进展组患者28例,10例死亡,15例进展至危重型,3例治疗后无明显改善。两组患者发病前均存在武汉疫区居住史。临床进展组患者中吸烟者所占比例(75.0%,21/28)高于临床缓解组患者(46.5%,20/43),差异有统计学意义(P=0.033)。与临床缓解组患者相比,临床进展组患者淋巴细胞计数[0.80(0.70,0.90)×10^9/L vs 0.70(0.60,0.70)×10^9/L]、血小板计数[222(174,310)×10^9/L vs 193(152,232)×10^9/L]、纤维蛋白原水平[4.22(3.71,4.80)g/L vs 3.81(2.96,4.38)g/L]降低,差异均有统计学意义(P均<0.05)。两组患者常见临床症状、生命体征、静息状态下脉搏氧饱和度、其余实验室检查指标、SOFA评分、治疗方式等差异均无统计学意义(P均>0.05)。多因素logistic回归分析结果显示,吸烟(OR=4.88,95%CI 1.33~25.00,P=0.020)、白细胞计数≤3.5×10^9/L(OR=10.00,95%CI 1.47~100.00,P=0.008)、淋巴细胞计数<0.1×10^9/L(OR=16.67,95%CI 3.33~100.00,P<0.001)是影响患者早期治疗效果的危险因素。结论有吸烟史、白细胞计数≤3.5×109/L及淋巴细胞计数<0.1×10^9/L的重型COVID-19患者早期治疗效果不佳的风险较高,建议临床上对有上述危险因素的重型COVID-19患者进行重点诊疗,及早采取有效治疗措施进行干预,以改善预后。
文摘Background The usual transbronchial coagulation techniques include microwave, argon plasma coagulation （APC）, electrocautery and cryotherapy. However, there are serious clinical problems in the safety of each. By analyzing the experimental data and clinical observations, we observed the variable effects of different coagulation techniques via bronchofibroscopy, to look for an optimal interventional management of luminal bronchus diseases, and evaluate the safety and the equivalent point. Methods Four kinds of coagulation techniques under bronchoscopy were performed on the fresh bronchus of healthy sheep, and the pathologic changes in all groups were observed under the microscope. The different treatment parameters were as follows： microwave 60 Wxl second, 3 seconds, 5 seconds and 40 W×1 second, 3 seconds, 5 seconds; APC 40 W×1 second, 3 seconds, 5 seconds; electrocautery 40 W×1 second, 3 seconds, 5 seconds; cryotherapy 100 Ω×60 seconds, 120 seconds. Results After treatment, ovine bronchial mucosa in all groups showed pathologic changes such as local necrosis and amotio of the mucosa lining epithelium, local submucosa coagulative necrosis or tissue defects, while inflammation in the surrounding tissue was not obvious. Under the same output power and action time, different methods had different outcomes. The damage by APC was the most superficial, microwave was the second, and electrocautery caused the worst damage. The study also found that effects of electrocautery at 40 W×3 seconds, microwave at 40 W×5 seconds or 60 W×3 seconds, APC at 40 W×5 seconds and cryotherapy at 100 Ω×120 seconds were the equivalent point conditions. The appearance included mucosa absence, partial submucosa absence, and collagen fiber coagulation in treatment areas. Conclusions Each coagulation technique has its own characteristic. It is very important to choose the appropriate power and action time of the suitable method according to the therapy requirement.
