不同导管胸膜腔置管闭式引流治疗自发性气胸疗效比较
CSTR:
作者:
作者单位:

作者简介:

李红义,男,主治医师,主要研究方向是睡眠呼吸障碍领域。

通讯作者:

中图分类号:

R 655

基金项目:


Comparison of Curative Effect of Closed Drainage with Different Catheterized Pleural Cavity in Treatment of Spontaneous Pneumothorax
Author:
Affiliation:

Fund Project:

  • 摘要
  • |
  • 图/表
  • |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献
  • |
  • 相似文献
  • |
  • 引证文献
  • |
  • 资源附件
  • |
  • 文章评论
    摘要:

    摘 要目的:比较不同导管胸膜腔置管闭式引流治疗自发性气胸疗效。 方法:选取新乡市第一人民医院 2018 年 9 月至 2023 年 9 月收治的 90 例自发性气胸患者作为研究对象,应用随机数字表法将其分为三组,即中心静脉导管组、 胸腔引流管组与三腔气囊导尿管组,各组均为 30 例。所有患者均采取胸膜腔置管闭式引流术进行治疗,三组患者分 别采取中心静脉导管、胸腔引流管和三腔气囊导尿管进行引流。比较三组患者临床疗效,置管时疼痛发生率、置管时 出血量、二次置管率与调整引流管率,平均切口大小、肺复张时间、置管时间、住院时间,术后疼痛程度,术后并发 症发生情况。 结果:胸腔引流管组和三腔气囊导尿管组的总有效率高于中心静脉导管组;中心静脉导管组和三腔气囊 导尿管组患者置管时疼痛发生率、二次置管率与调整引流管率以及置管时出血量均明显低于胸腔引流管组;中心静脉 导管组患者平均切口大小明显短于三腔气囊导尿管组和胸腔引流管组,且三腔气囊导尿管组短于胸腔引流管组;术后 1 d、3 d、5 d,中心静脉导管组和三腔气囊导尿管组患者的视觉模拟评分法(VAS)评分明显低于胸腔引流管组,中 心静脉导管组和三腔气囊导尿管组切口感染、肺水肿 / 皮下气肿、胸膜反应发生率明显低于胸腔引流管组;差异均具 有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。 结论:采取胸腔引流管与三腔气囊导尿管进行胸膜腔置管闭式引流治疗自发性气胸疗效 优于中心静脉导管,而应用中心静脉导管和三腔气囊导尿管患者置管时疼痛发生率较低,能够降低二次置管率、创伤 性较低,降低术后疼痛程度,减少并发症发生率。

    Abstract:

    AbstractObjective To compare the effect of different catheterized pleural cavity closed drainage on spontaneous pneumothorax. Methods A total of 90 patients with spontaneous pneumothorax admitted to Xinxiang First People's Hospital from September 2018 to September 2023 were selected as the research objects, and divided into three groups, namely, central venous catheter group, thoracic drainage catheter group and three-chamber balloon catheter group, with 30 cases in each group. All patients were treated with pleural catheter closed drainage, and the three groups had central venous catheter, thoracic chamber and three-chamber balloon catheter for drainage. The clinical efficacy of the three groups were compared, including the incidence of pain during catheterization, blood loss during catheterization, secondary catheterization rate and adjustment rate of drainage tube, the average incision size, lung reconstruction time, catheterization time, hospital stay time, postoperative pain degree, and the occurrence of postoperative complications. Results The total effective rate of the thoracic drainage catheter and the three-chamber balloon catheter group was higher than that of the central venous catheter group; The incidence of pain, secondary catheterization rate, adjusted drainage rate and the amount of bleeding in the central venous catheter group and the three-chamber balloon catheter group were significantly lower than those of the thoracic drainage catheter group; The mean incision size of patients in the central venous catheter group was significantly shorter than the three-chamber balloon catheter group and the thoracic drainage catheter group, and the three-chambe balloon catheter group was shorter than the thoracic drainage catheter group; postoperative 1 d, 3 d and 5 d, the visual analogue scales (VAS) of patients in the central venous catheter group were significantly lower than those in the thoracic drainage catheter group. The incidence of incision infection, pulmonary edema / subcutaneous emphysema and pleural reaction in the central venous catheter group and the three-chamber balloon catheter group was significantly lower than that in the thoracic drainage catheter group. The differences were all statistically significant (P < 0.05). Conclusion Take thoracic drainage catheter and three-chamber balloon catheter for pleural cavity tube closed drainage treatment of spontaneous pneumothorax is better than the central venous catheter, and the application of central venous catheter and three cavity balloon catheter patients with straight pain rate is low, can reduce secondary catheterization rate, low trauma, reduce the degree of postoperative pain, reduce the incidence of complications.

    参考文献
    相似文献
    引证文献
引用本文
分享
文章指标
  • 点击次数:
  • 下载次数:
  • HTML阅读次数:
  • 引用次数:
历史
  • 收稿日期:2023-12-29
  • 最后修改日期:
  • 录用日期:
  • 在线发布日期: 2024-06-20
  • 出版日期:
文章二维码
特别声明

近期有不法分子冒充我刊名义给作者打电话或发邮件,编造各种理由要求添加微信或QQ、伪造复制我刊编辑部公章发放假冒录用通知书等等各种方式试图骗取作者钱财。为强化编辑部工作规范,加强单位公章管理,维护作者的正当权益和财产利益, 我刊在此郑重声明:(1)编辑部与作者沟通方式为电话和邮件,在本刊唯一官方网站(http:/szzxyjhzz.szrch.com)“联系我们”下拉菜单,或者网站最下端信息栏可以查询),绝对不会要求作者添加微信或QQ。 (2)自2025年2月1日起,注销废除“深圳中西医结合杂志编辑部”电子公章;我刊稿件录用通知调整为加盖编辑部实体公章的纸质文件或其扫描件,录用稿件仅收取合理版面制作费和审稿费,收款单位为“深圳市第二人民医院”对公账户,其他加盖电子公章或涉及私人账户者均为伪造假冒。望广大作者提高警惕,谨防上当受骗。 《深圳中西医结合杂志》编辑部

关闭