中华临床营养杂志
中華臨床營養雜誌
중화림상영양잡지
CHINESE JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NUTRITION
2014年
1期
53-57
,共5页
刘赵琪%江勇%陈文婷%蔺佩鸿
劉趙琪%江勇%陳文婷%藺珮鴻
류조기%강용%진문정%린패홍
静脉输液港%锁骨下静脉入路%颈内静脉入路%并发症
靜脈輸液港%鎖骨下靜脈入路%頸內靜脈入路%併髮癥
정맥수액항%쇄골하정맥입로%경내정맥입로%병발증
Central venous access ports%Approach of internal jugular vein%Approach of internal jugular subclavian%Complication
目的 通过对比分析颈内静脉入路和锁骨下静脉入路植入静脉输液港的临床效果,探讨两种手术方式的利弊.方法 620例患者分别存在长期输液及化疗等需求且周围静脉输注不便,采用锁骨下静脉入路植入静脉输液港398例,颈内静脉入路植入静脉输液港222例.回顾性分析两组患者一次性置管成功率和围术期、远期并发症的发生率.结果 620例患者静脉输液港均植入成功,锁骨下静脉入路组与颈内静脉入路组一次性穿刺成功率分别为97.24％ (387/398)与89.19％ (198/222),两组一次性穿刺成功率比较差异有统计学意义(U=0.171,P＜0.01).颈内静脉入路组围术期并发症发生率为0.90％ (2/222),远期并发症发生率为1.80％ (4/222)；锁骨下静脉入路组围术期并发症发生率为1.26％ (5/398),远期并发症发生率为2.01％ (8/398),两组并发症发生率比较差异均无统计学意义(U值分别为0.041、0.025,P均＞0.05).结论 颈内静脉入路和锁骨下静脉入路输液港植入术均比较安全、可靠,只要技术操作得当,极少引起严重并发症.
目的 通過對比分析頸內靜脈入路和鎖骨下靜脈入路植入靜脈輸液港的臨床效果,探討兩種手術方式的利弊.方法 620例患者分彆存在長期輸液及化療等需求且週圍靜脈輸註不便,採用鎖骨下靜脈入路植入靜脈輸液港398例,頸內靜脈入路植入靜脈輸液港222例.迴顧性分析兩組患者一次性置管成功率和圍術期、遠期併髮癥的髮生率.結果 620例患者靜脈輸液港均植入成功,鎖骨下靜脈入路組與頸內靜脈入路組一次性穿刺成功率分彆為97.24％ (387/398)與89.19％ (198/222),兩組一次性穿刺成功率比較差異有統計學意義(U=0.171,P＜0.01).頸內靜脈入路組圍術期併髮癥髮生率為0.90％ (2/222),遠期併髮癥髮生率為1.80％ (4/222)；鎖骨下靜脈入路組圍術期併髮癥髮生率為1.26％ (5/398),遠期併髮癥髮生率為2.01％ (8/398),兩組併髮癥髮生率比較差異均無統計學意義(U值分彆為0.041、0.025,P均＞0.05).結論 頸內靜脈入路和鎖骨下靜脈入路輸液港植入術均比較安全、可靠,隻要技術操作得噹,極少引起嚴重併髮癥.
목적 통과대비분석경내정맥입로화쇄골하정맥입로식입정맥수액항적림상효과,탐토량충수술방식적리폐.방법 620례환자분별존재장기수액급화료등수구차주위정맥수주불편,채용쇄골하정맥입로식입정맥수액항398례,경내정맥입로식입정맥수액항222례.회고성분석량조환자일차성치관성공솔화위술기、원기병발증적발생솔.결과 620례환자정맥수액항균식입성공,쇄골하정맥입로조여경내정맥입로조일차성천자성공솔분별위97.24％ (387/398)여89.19％ (198/222),량조일차성천자성공솔비교차이유통계학의의(U=0.171,P＜0.01).경내정맥입로조위술기병발증발생솔위0.90％ (2/222),원기병발증발생솔위1.80％ (4/222)；쇄골하정맥입로조위술기병발증발생솔위1.26％ (5/398),원기병발증발생솔위2.01％ (8/398),량조병발증발생솔비교차이균무통계학의의(U치분별위0.041、0.025,P균＞0.05).결론 경내정맥입로화쇄골하정맥입로수액항식입술균비교안전、가고,지요기술조작득당,겁소인기엄중병발증.
Objective To investigate the advantages and disadvantages of two different approaches (i.e.internal jugular vein and subclavian vein) when used for the implantation of central venus access ports (CVAP).Methods We retrospectively analyzed 620 patients who underwent the implantation of CVAP via the approach of internal jugular vein (n =222) or subclavian vein (n =398) and compared the success rate on first attempt as well as the incidences of peroperative and long-term complications.Results The implantation of CVAP was successfully performed in all the 620 patients,with the success rate on first attempt being 97.24％ (387/398) in the subclavian vein group and 89.19％ (198/222) in the internal jugular vein group (U =0.171,P ＜ 0.01).The incidences of perioperative/long-term complications were 0.90％ (2/222) /1.80％ (4/222) in the internal jugular vein group and 1.26％ (5/398) /2.01％ (8/398) in the subclavian vein group,showing no significant differences (all P ＞ 0.05).Conclusions The implantation of CVAP via either the internal jugular vein approach or subclavian vein approach is safe and reliable.Few complications will occur if performed properly.
