4.7 Review

The future of intensive care: the study of the microcirculation will help to guide our therapies

期刊

CRITICAL CARE
卷 27, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s13054-023-04474-x

关键词

Hemodynamic resuscitation; Microcirculation; ICU; Hand-held vital microscopes; Artificial intelligence

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The goal of hemodynamic resuscitation is to optimize the microcirculation of organs to meet their oxygen and metabolic needs. Clinicians currently lack the ability to assess and analyze the microcirculation, hindering individualized treatment. The future challenge is to develop noninvasive equipment for reliable assessment and analysis of the microcirculation at the bedside.
The goal of hemodynamic resuscitation is to optimize the microcirculation of organs to meet their oxygen and metabolic needs. Clinicians are currently blind to what is happening in the microcirculation of organs, which prevents them from achieving an additional degree of individualization of the hemodynamic resuscitation at tissue level. Indeed, clinicians never know whether optimization of the microcirculation and tissue oxygenation is actually achieved after macrovascular hemodynamic optimization. The challenge for the future is to have noninvasive, easy-to-use equipment that allows reliable assessment and immediate quantitative analysis of the microcirculation at the bedside. There are different methods for assessing the microcirculation at the bedside; all have strengths and challenges. The use of automated analysis and the future possibility of introducing artificial intelligence into analysis software could eliminate observer bias and provide guidance on microvascular-targeted treatment options. In addition, to gain caregiver confidence and support for the need to monitor the microcirculation, it is necessary to demonstrate that incorporating microcirculation analysis into the reasoning guiding hemodynamic resuscitation prevents organ dysfunction and improves the outcome of critically ill patients.

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

4.7
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