Response In Cardiogenic Shock Patient

0
21

RESEARCH PROJECT TOPIC ON RESPONSE IN CARDIOGENIC SHOCK PATIENT

TABLE OF CONTENT

Title Page———i

Certification——–ii

Dedication———iii

Acknowledgement——-iv

Abstract ———vi

Table of Content——–vii

Chapter One

1.0 Introduction ——-1

1.1 Statement of Problem——4

1.2 Purpose of the Study——5

1.3 Significance of Study——8

1.4 Limitation——–9

1.5 Scope of Study——-11

Chapter Two

2.0 Review of Related Literature —-12

Chapter Three

3.0 Research Methodology and Procedure—22

3.1 Population ——–22

3.2 Sample and Sampling Technique—-22

3.3 Validation of the Instrument —-23

3.4 Reliability of the Instrument —–23

3.5 Data Analysis——-23

Chapter Four

4.0 Presentation and Discussion of Result—24

4.1 Analysis and Interpretation of Data—25

4.2 Discussion of Results——38

Chapter Five

5.0 Summary, Conclusion and Recommendation –40

5.1 Summary——–40

5.2 Conclusion——–41

5.3 Recommendation——42

References ———45

Appendix 1——–47

Appendix ———50

Abstract 

These data suggest that the response to reactive hyperemia is attenuated in cardiogenic shock. This appears to reflect increased vasoconstriction and an impaired capacity for vasodilation. Decreased erythrocyte deformability may also be important in limiting systemic microvascular flow. However, evidence supporting a role for neutrophil-endothelial cell interactions was not observed.

Forearm blood flow was measured at rest and during reactive hyperemia by venous air plethysmography. Red cell deformability was determined by filtration. Leukocyte aggregation was detected by the leukergy test. Neutrophil CD11b/CD18 expression and soluble intercellular adhesion molecule-1 levels were also measured. In cardiogenic shock, forearm arterial resistance was significantly increased at rest and during reactive hyperemia compared with controls and patients with septic shock. The response to reactive hyperemia was attenuated in cardiogenic and septic shock patients, as measured by the absolute change in forearm blood flow from baseline, which was significantly less as compared with controls (p < .01). The percent change in forearm blood flow during reactive hyperemia compared with forearm blood flow at rest was significantly lower in cardiogenic shock (60+/-10) and in septic shock (50+/-11) compared with controls at baseline (145+/-20; p < .01). Red cell deformability was significantly decreased in cardiogenic shock (1.2+/-0.2 mL/min; p < .05) and septic shock (1.1+/-0.2 mL/min; p < .05), compared with controls (1.8+/-0.1 mL/min). Neutrophil CD11b/CD18 expression, leukergy, and serum intercellular adhesion molecule-1 levels in cardiogenic shock patients were not significantly different from controls.

Click to DOWNLOAD Materials

Leave a Reply