中国医师进修杂志
中國醫師進脩雜誌
중국의사진수잡지
CHINESE JOURNAL OF POSTGRADUATES OF MEDICINE
2010年
21期
18-20
,共3页
黄海波%伍晓扬%王金凤%叶强
黃海波%伍曉颺%王金鳳%葉彊
황해파%오효양%왕금봉%협강
外科缝合器%止血%脑血管造影术
外科縫閤器%止血%腦血管造影術
외과봉합기%지혈%뇌혈관조영술
Surgical staplers%Hemostasis%Cerebral angiography
目的 评价Perclose缝合器在脑血管造影和介入治疗术后应用的安全性、有效性和临床应用价值.方法 将289例脑血管造影和介入治疗术后患者,采用随机数字表法分为两组:应用Perelose缝合止血143例(缝合组),应用手工压迫止血146例(手工压迫组).比较两组即刻止血时间、下肢制动时间、血管并发症、止血成功率和因卧床引起的不适发生率.结果 缝合组和手工压迫组止血成功率分别为96.5%(138/143)和97.9%(143/146),两组止血成功率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);缝合组即刻止血时间、下肢制动时间分别为(3.13±2.17)min和(1.99±1.11)h,较手工压迫组的(15.91±3.27)min和(17.93±7.82)h明显缩短(P<0.01),小血肿、大血肿及术后不适的发生率较手工压迫组明显降低(P<0.01).结论 脑血管造影和介入治疗术后应用Perclose缝合器安全、有效,能大幅度缩短卧床时间,降低血管并发症.
目的 評價Perclose縫閤器在腦血管造影和介入治療術後應用的安全性、有效性和臨床應用價值.方法 將289例腦血管造影和介入治療術後患者,採用隨機數字錶法分為兩組:應用Perelose縫閤止血143例(縫閤組),應用手工壓迫止血146例(手工壓迫組).比較兩組即刻止血時間、下肢製動時間、血管併髮癥、止血成功率和因臥床引起的不適髮生率.結果 縫閤組和手工壓迫組止血成功率分彆為96.5%(138/143)和97.9%(143/146),兩組止血成功率比較差異無統計學意義(P>0.05);縫閤組即刻止血時間、下肢製動時間分彆為(3.13±2.17)min和(1.99±1.11)h,較手工壓迫組的(15.91±3.27)min和(17.93±7.82)h明顯縮短(P<0.01),小血腫、大血腫及術後不適的髮生率較手工壓迫組明顯降低(P<0.01).結論 腦血管造影和介入治療術後應用Perclose縫閤器安全、有效,能大幅度縮短臥床時間,降低血管併髮癥.
목적 평개Perclose봉합기재뇌혈관조영화개입치료술후응용적안전성、유효성화림상응용개치.방법 장289례뇌혈관조영화개입치료술후환자,채용수궤수자표법분위량조:응용Perelose봉합지혈143례(봉합조),응용수공압박지혈146례(수공압박조).비교량조즉각지혈시간、하지제동시간、혈관병발증、지혈성공솔화인와상인기적불괄발생솔.결과 봉합조화수공압박조지혈성공솔분별위96.5%(138/143)화97.9%(143/146),량조지혈성공솔비교차이무통계학의의(P>0.05);봉합조즉각지혈시간、하지제동시간분별위(3.13±2.17)min화(1.99±1.11)h,교수공압박조적(15.91±3.27)min화(17.93±7.82)h명현축단(P<0.01),소혈종、대혈종급술후불괄적발생솔교수공압박조명현강저(P<0.01).결론 뇌혈관조영화개입치료술후응용Perclose봉합기안전、유효,능대폭도축단와상시간,강저혈관병발증.
Objective To evaluate the safety and efficacy of Perclose device after cerebral angiography or intervention procedures. Methods Two hundred and eighty-nine patients who underwent cerebral angiography or intervention procedure were divided into two groups: 143 patients accepted Perclose device for hemostasis (device group), 146 patients accepted manual method for hemostasis (handwork group). Time to achieve hemostasis and ambulation,complications associated with the procedure,the rates of successful hemostasis and patients' discomfort were compared. Results The rates of successful hemostasis were 96.5%( 138/143) in the device group and 97.9%( 143/146) in the handwork group (P> 0.05). Time to achieve hemostasis and ambulation in the device group were (3.13 ± 2.17) min and (1.99 ± 1.11) h ,they were shorter than those in the handwork group [(15.91 ± 3.27) min and (17.93 ± 7.82) h](P< 0.01). The occurrence rate of complication at the femoral access site and patients' discomfort rates from staying in bed in the device group were lower than those in the handwork group (P < 0.01). There were 7 cases of large hematoma and 1 case of pseudoaneurysm in the handwork group. Conclusions The use of Perclose device is a safe and effective method for hemostasis of the femoral access site after cerebral angiography and intervention. It could shorten the time of staying in bed and decrease vascular complications significantly.
