Yayın:
Invasive hemodynamic monitoring for fluid management in septic shock patients

dc.contributor.authorTAŞKIN, Öztürk
dc.contributor.authorDAŞ, Ayşe Nur
dc.contributor.authorBALCI, Canan
dc.date.accessioned2026-01-04T17:32:09Z
dc.date.issued2022-12-08
dc.description.abstractAim Sepsis is still one of the most common causes of death, despite advances in treatment and technologies. Invasive monitoring in sepsis can improve survival. In this study, we aimed to compare the efficacy of hemodynamic monitoring in the fluid treatment of patients with septic shock. Material and Method Forty septic shock patients were divided into two groups. Group I (n = 20) was monitored with central venous pressure, and Group II (n = 20) with a cardiac output device (EV1000). Arterial blood gases were analyzed four times daily for the groups, and lactate values, diuresis status, need for dialysis, and inotrope need was recorded. For Group I, the central venous pressure and mean arterial pressure values were recorded for group II, cardiac output, cardiac index, stroke volume, stroke volume index, and mean arterial pressure values. Results There was a significant difference between the mean arterial pressures of the groups on the 1st and 2nd days (p = 0.034 and p = 0.026, respectively). In Group II, mean arterial pressures were higher on days 1 and 2. There was no significant difference between the other data recorded. Conclusion We observed no significant difference between central venous pressure monitoring and invasive monitoring in septic shock patient follow-up.
dc.description.urihttps://doi.org/10.51271/kmj-00106
dc.identifier.doi10.51271/kmj-00106
dc.identifier.eissn2757-9336
dc.identifier.endpage134
dc.identifier.openairedoi_________::b18835f3314c43eca52816b6ebb0b23c
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0001-7328-9579
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0002-6737-6024
dc.identifier.startpage131
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12597/40188
dc.identifier.volume2
dc.publisherMediHealth Academy
dc.relation.ispartofKastamonu Medical Journal
dc.rightsOPEN
dc.subject.sdg3. Good health
dc.titleInvasive hemodynamic monitoring for fluid management in septic shock patients
dc.typeArticle
dspace.entity.typePublication
local.api.response{"authors":[{"fullName":"Öztürk TAŞKIN","name":"Öztürk","surname":"TAŞKIN","rank":1,"pid":{"id":{"scheme":"orcid","value":"0000-0001-7328-9579"},"provenance":null}},{"fullName":"Ayşe Nur DAŞ","name":"Ayşe Nur","surname":"DAŞ","rank":2,"pid":{"id":{"scheme":"orcid","value":"0000-0002-6737-6024"},"provenance":null}},{"fullName":"Canan BALCI","name":"Canan","surname":"BALCI","rank":3,"pid":null}],"openAccessColor":"gold","publiclyFunded":false,"type":"publication","language":{"code":"und","label":"Undetermined"},"countries":null,"subjects":[{"subject":{"scheme":"FOS","value":"03 medical and health sciences"},"provenance":null},{"subject":{"scheme":"FOS","value":"0302 clinical medicine"},"provenance":null},{"subject":{"scheme":"SDG","value":"3. Good health"},"provenance":null}],"mainTitle":"Invasive hemodynamic monitoring for fluid management in septic shock patients","subTitle":null,"descriptions":["<jats:p>Aim Sepsis is still one of the most common causes of death, despite advances in treatment and technologies. Invasive monitoring in sepsis can improve survival. In this study, we aimed to compare the efficacy of hemodynamic monitoring in the fluid treatment of patients with septic shock. Material and Method Forty septic shock patients were divided into two groups. Group I (n = 20) was monitored with central venous pressure, and Group II (n = 20) with a cardiac output device (EV1000). Arterial blood gases were analyzed four times daily for the groups, and lactate values, diuresis status, need for dialysis, and inotrope need was recorded. For Group I, the central venous pressure and mean arterial pressure values were recorded for group II, cardiac output, cardiac index, stroke volume, stroke volume index, and mean arterial pressure values. Results There was a significant difference between the mean arterial pressures of the groups on the 1st and 2nd days (p = 0.034 and p = 0.026, respectively). In Group II, mean arterial pressures were higher on days 1 and 2. There was no significant difference between the other data recorded. Conclusion We observed no significant difference between central venous pressure monitoring and invasive monitoring in septic shock patient follow-up.</jats:p>"],"publicationDate":"2022-12-08","publisher":"MediHealth Academy","embargoEndDate":null,"sources":["Crossref"],"formats":null,"contributors":null,"coverages":null,"bestAccessRight":{"code":"c_abf2","label":"OPEN","scheme":"http://vocabularies.coar-repositories.org/documentation/access_rights/"},"container":{"name":"Kastamonu Medical Journal","issnPrinted":null,"issnOnline":"2757-9336","issnLinking":null,"ep":"134","iss":null,"sp":"131","vol":"2","edition":null,"conferencePlace":null,"conferenceDate":null},"documentationUrls":null,"codeRepositoryUrl":null,"programmingLanguage":null,"contactPeople":null,"contactGroups":null,"tools":null,"size":null,"version":null,"geoLocations":null,"id":"doi_________::b18835f3314c43eca52816b6ebb0b23c","originalIds":["10.51271/kmj-00106","50|doiboost____|b18835f3314c43eca52816b6ebb0b23c"],"pids":[{"scheme":"doi","value":"10.51271/kmj-00106"}],"dateOfCollection":null,"lastUpdateTimeStamp":null,"indicators":{"citationImpact":{"citationCount":0,"influence":2.5349236e-9,"popularity":1.8548826e-9,"impulse":0,"citationClass":"C5","influenceClass":"C5","impulseClass":"C5","popularityClass":"C5"}},"instances":[{"pids":[{"scheme":"doi","value":"10.51271/kmj-00106"}],"license":"CC BY NC ND","type":"Article","urls":["https://doi.org/10.51271/kmj-00106"],"publicationDate":"2022-12-08","refereed":"peerReviewed"}],"isGreen":false,"isInDiamondJournal":false}
local.import.sourceOpenAire

Dosyalar

Koleksiyonlar