4.6 Article

Preferential Cephalic Redistribution of Left Ventricular Cardiac Output during Therapeutic Hypothermia for Perinatal Hypoxic-Ischemic Encephalopathy

期刊

JOURNAL OF PEDIATRICS
卷 164, 期 5, 页码 999-+

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2014.01.028

关键词

-

资金

  1. Child & Family Research Institute
  2. Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research
  3. Bloorview Children's Hospital Chair in Pediatric Neuroscience
  4. Canada Research Chair (Tier 2)
  5. Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research Scholar award

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective To determine the relationship between left ventricular cardiac output (LVCO), superior vena cava (SVC) flow, and brain injury during whole-body therapeutic hypothermia. Study design Sixteen newborns with moderate or severe hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy were studied using echocardiography during and immediately after therapeutic hypothermia. Measures were also compared with 12 healthy newborns of similar postnatal age. Newborns undergoing therapeutic hypothermia also had cerebral magnetic resonance imaging as part of routine clinical care on postnatal day 3-4. Results LVCO was markedly reduced (mean +/- SD 126 +/- 38 mL/kg/min) during therapeutic hypothermia, whereas SVC flow was maintained within expected normal values (88 +/- 27 mL/kg/min) such that SVC flow represented 70% of the LVCO. The reduction in LVCO during therapeutic hypothermia was mainly accounted by a reduction in heart rate (99 +/- 13 vs 123 +/- 17 beats/min; P < .001) compared with immediately postwarming in the context of myocardial dysfunction. Neonates with brain injury on magnetic resonance imaging had higher SVC flow prerewarming, compared with newborns without brain injury (P = .013). Conclusion Newborns with perinatal hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy showed a preferential systemic-to-cerebral redistribution of cardiac blood flow during whole-body therapeutic hypothermia, which may reflect a lack of cerebral vascular adaptation in newborns with more severe brain injury.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据