中文摘要：

目的：评价经食管超声心动图（TEE）法与肺动脉导管（PAC）法监测心脏容量负荷与心脏血流动力学指标的一致性。方法：选择在我院进行冠状动脉旁路移植手术的45例患者,术中分别采用TEE及PAC监测右室舒张末期容量（RVEDV）、右室收缩末期容量（RVESV）和右室射血分数（RVEF）,比较两种方法监测数据的一致性。结果：与基础值比较,TEE和PAC法均显示,负荷后RVEDV[TEE：（38±6）ml比（51±9ml）,PAC：（153±17）ml比（188±19）ml]、RVESV[TEE：（19±4）ml比（33±5）ml,PAC：（92±16）ml比（110±23）ml]均显著增加（P均〈0.01）,RVEF均无显著差异（P〉0.05）。PAC与TEE法在治疗前监测的RVEDV、RVESV、RVEF结果均具有良好相关性,相关系数均在0.8以上（r=0.844、0.862、0.916,P均〈0.01）,在治疗后监测的RVEDV、RVESV的相关系数显著降到0.6以下（r=0.552、0.579,P均〈0.05）,RVEF的相关系数仍保持在0.8以上（r=0.892,P〈0.01）。结论：经食管超声心动图与肺动脉导管在临床监测中一致性较高,前者为非创伤性检查,便于临床采用。

英文摘要：

Objective： To evaluate the consistency of transesophageal echocardiography （TEE） and pulmonary artery catheter （PAC） method in monitoring cardiac volume load and cardiac hemodynamic indexes. Methods： A total of 45 patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting in our hospital were selected. The right ventricular end-dias- tolic volume （RVEDV）, right ventricular end-systolic volume （RVESV） and right ventricular ejection fraction （RVEF） were monitored during surgery by TEE and PAC respectively. Consistency of monitored data was compared between two methods. Results： Both TEE and PAC indicated that compared with baseline level, after loading, there were significant rise in RVEDV [TEE： （38 ± 6） ml vs. （51 ± 9ml）, PAC： （153 ± 17） ml vs. （188 ± 19） ml], RVESV [TEE： （19 ± 4） ml vs. （33± 5） ml, PAC： （92 ± 16） ml vs. （110 ± 23） ml], P〈0.01 all, but there was no significant change in RVEF, P〉0.05. Before therapy, RVEDV, RVESV and RVEF monitored by PAC and TEE showed significant positive correlation, and all relevant coefficients were 〉0.8 （r = 0. 844, 0. 862, 0. 916, P〈 0.01 all） ; after therapy, correlation of RVEDV and RVESV significantly reduced to 〈0.6 （ r = 0. 552, 0. 579, P〈 0. 05 both）, but RVEF correlation remained 〉0.8 （r = 0. 892, P〈0.01）. Conclusion： In clinical monitor, the con- sistency of TEE and PAC is high, the former is non-traumatic, and is more convenient for clinical use.