中国医药导报
中國醫藥導報
중국의약도보
CHINA MEDICAL HERALD
2014年
29期
47-50,54
,共5页
外周静脉置入中心静脉导管%植入式静脉输液港%乳腺肿瘤
外週靜脈置入中心靜脈導管%植入式靜脈輸液港%乳腺腫瘤
외주정맥치입중심정맥도관%식입식정맥수액항%유선종류
Peripherally inserted central catheter%Totally implantable venous access port%Breast neoplasms
目的：通过对外周静脉置入中心静脉导管(PICC)与植入式静脉输液港(TIVAP)在乳腺癌化疗的应用比较，为乳腺癌化疗选择理想深静脉通道提供科学依据。方法收集2008年7月~2012年1月于珠海市妇幼保健院诊治的乳腺癌患者244例，按照置管方式分为PICC组(139例)及TIVAP组(105例)。对两组患者在置管操作时间、置管长度、置管成功率、置管并发症发生率等各方面进行对比分析。结果 PICC组置管操作时间[(12.63±8.03)min]明显少于TIVAP组[(33.84±11.74)min]，PICC组置管长度[(42.85±2.48)cm]长于TIVAP组[(11.76±0.70)cm]，差异均有高度统计学意义(P<0.01)。两组置管总成功率均为100.00%，PICC组一次置管成功率为92.09%(128/139)，二次置管成功率为6.47%(9/139)，三次置管成功率为1.44%(2/139)；TIVAP组一次置管成功率为88.57%(93/105)，二次置管成功率为11.43%(12/105)；两组置管成功率及一次置管成功率比较，差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。PICC组的导管异位发生率(9.35%)、静脉炎发生率(9.35%)及导管堵塞发生率(4.32%)均高于TIVAP组(均为0.00%)，差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)；TIVAP组总并发症发生率(9.52%)低于PICC组总并发症发生率(35.97%)，差异有高度统计学意义(P<0.01)。结论 TIVAP比PICC并发症发生率低，更加安全、可靠，可作为乳腺癌化疗理想深静脉通道。
目的：通過對外週靜脈置入中心靜脈導管(PICC)與植入式靜脈輸液港(TIVAP)在乳腺癌化療的應用比較，為乳腺癌化療選擇理想深靜脈通道提供科學依據。方法收集2008年7月~2012年1月于珠海市婦幼保健院診治的乳腺癌患者244例，按照置管方式分為PICC組(139例)及TIVAP組(105例)。對兩組患者在置管操作時間、置管長度、置管成功率、置管併髮癥髮生率等各方麵進行對比分析。結果 PICC組置管操作時間[(12.63±8.03)min]明顯少于TIVAP組[(33.84±11.74)min]，PICC組置管長度[(42.85±2.48)cm]長于TIVAP組[(11.76±0.70)cm]，差異均有高度統計學意義(P<0.01)。兩組置管總成功率均為100.00%，PICC組一次置管成功率為92.09%(128/139)，二次置管成功率為6.47%(9/139)，三次置管成功率為1.44%(2/139)；TIVAP組一次置管成功率為88.57%(93/105)，二次置管成功率為11.43%(12/105)；兩組置管成功率及一次置管成功率比較，差異均無統計學意義(P>0.05)。PICC組的導管異位髮生率(9.35%)、靜脈炎髮生率(9.35%)及導管堵塞髮生率(4.32%)均高于TIVAP組(均為0.00%)，差異均有統計學意義(P<0.05)；TIVAP組總併髮癥髮生率(9.52%)低于PICC組總併髮癥髮生率(35.97%)，差異有高度統計學意義(P<0.01)。結論 TIVAP比PICC併髮癥髮生率低，更加安全、可靠，可作為乳腺癌化療理想深靜脈通道。
목적：통과대외주정맥치입중심정맥도관(PICC)여식입식정맥수액항(TIVAP)재유선암화료적응용비교，위유선암화료선택이상심정맥통도제공과학의거。방법수집2008년7월~2012년1월우주해시부유보건원진치적유선암환자244례，안조치관방식분위PICC조(139례)급TIVAP조(105례)。대량조환자재치관조작시간、치관장도、치관성공솔、치관병발증발생솔등각방면진행대비분석。결과 PICC조치관조작시간[(12.63±8.03)min]명현소우TIVAP조[(33.84±11.74)min]，PICC조치관장도[(42.85±2.48)cm]장우TIVAP조[(11.76±0.70)cm]，차이균유고도통계학의의(P<0.01)。량조치관총성공솔균위100.00%，PICC조일차치관성공솔위92.09%(128/139)，이차치관성공솔위6.47%(9/139)，삼차치관성공솔위1.44%(2/139)；TIVAP조일차치관성공솔위88.57%(93/105)，이차치관성공솔위11.43%(12/105)；량조치관성공솔급일차치관성공솔비교，차이균무통계학의의(P>0.05)。PICC조적도관이위발생솔(9.35%)、정맥염발생솔(9.35%)급도관도새발생솔(4.32%)균고우TIVAP조(균위0.00%)，차이균유통계학의의(P<0.05)；TIVAP조총병발증발생솔(9.52%)저우PICC조총병발증발생솔(35.97%)，차이유고도통계학의의(P<0.01)。결론 TIVAP비PICC병발증발생솔저，경가안전、가고，가작위유선암화료이상심정맥통도。
Objective To compare peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) and totally implantable venous access port (TIVAP) in chemotherapy of breast cancer, and provide scientific basis for choosing ideal deep venous channel. Methods From July 2008 to January 2012, in Maternity and Child Health Hospital of Zhuhai City, 244 patients with breast cancer were enrolled and divided into two groups:PICC group (139 cases) and TIVAP group (105 cases). Operat-ing time, catheter length, success rate and incidence rate of complication were compared between the two groups. Re-sults The average operating time [(12.63±8.03) min] of were shorter than that of TIVAP group [(33.84±11.74) min], and the average catheter length [(42.85±2.48) cm] of PICC group were longer than that of TIVAP group [(11.76±0.70) cm] in and, the differences were statistically significant (P < 0.01). In both two groups, total success rate was 100.00%; in PICC group, one time success rate was 92.09% (128/139), two times success rate was 6.47% (9/139), three times suc-cess rate was 1.44% (2/139), in TIVAP group, those were 88.57% (93/105), 11.43% (12/105) respectively, the differ-ences between two groups were not statistically significant (P>0.05). The incidence rate of ectopy (9.35%), the inci-dence rate of phlebitis (9.35%) and the incidence ratecatheter obstruction (4.32%) of PICC group were higher than those of TIVAP (all were 0.00%), the differences were statistically significant (P< 0.05); the total incidence rate of complications of TIVAP group was than that of PICC group (9.52%vs 35.97%), the differences were statistically signif-icant (P<0.01). Conclusion The incidence rate of complication of TIVAP was lower than that of PICC group, TIVAP was safer and more reliable than PICC, it can be an ideal deep venous channel in chemotherapy of breast cancer.
