CAJ | 학술논문

目的比较锁骨下静脉穿刺与头静脉切开途径安置单腔心脏起搏器的价值.方法将146例需安置心脏单腔起搏器的患者随机分为锁骨下静脉穿刺组(98例)和头静脉切开组(48例).观察两种手术径路安置起搏器的手术成功率、手术时间、X线曝光时间、手术并发症.结果头静脉切开组成功率89％ (43/48),锁骨下静脉穿刺组成功率100％(98/98).两组比较差异有统计学意义(x2=10.5,P均＜0.05).无论是手术时间,还是X线曝光时间,锁骨下静脉穿刺组比头静脉切开组明显缩短[(118±35) min与(256±75) min和(15±5) min与(35±10) min,t值分别为12.12、13.08,P均＜0.01].两组并发症各发生1例,分别是囊袋内血肿和电极导线脱位,发生率差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论安置单腔心脏起搏器可首选锁骨下静脉穿刺.
목적 비교쇄골하정맥천자여두정맥절개도경안치단강심장기박기적개치.방법 장146례수안치심장단강기박기적환자수궤분위쇄골하정맥천자조(98례)화두정맥절개조(48례).관찰량충수술경로안치기박기적수술성공솔、수술시간、X선폭광시간、수술병발증.결과 두정맥절개조성공솔89％ (43/48),쇄골하정맥천자조성공솔100％(98/98).량조비교차이유통계학의의(x2=10.5,P균＜0.05).무론시수술시간,환시X선폭광시간,쇄골하정맥천자조비두정맥절개조명현축단[(118±35) min여(256±75) min화(15±5) min여(35±10) min,t치분별위12.12、13.08,P균＜0.01].량조병발증각발생1례,분별시낭대내혈종화전겁도선탈위,발생솔차이무통계학의의(P＞0.05).결론 안치단강심장기박기가수선쇄골하정맥천자.
Objective To compare the value of pacemaker implantation using the subclavian vein (SCV) puncture and thecephalic vein(CV) cutdown approach.Methods One hundred and forty-six patients were randomized into SCV group (98 patients) and CV group (48 patients).We observed the success rate,surgery duration,fluoroscopy time and complications of the two groups.Results The SCV group had significantly higher success rate,shorter duration of surgery and fluoroscopy than the CV group (success rate:100％ (98/98) vs.89％ (43/48),x2 =10.5,P ＜ 0.05 ; duration of surgery:(118 ± 35) min vs.(256 ± 75)min,t =12.12,P ＜0.01 ; duration of fluoroscopy:(15 ±5) min vs.(35 ± 10) min,t =13.08,P ＜0.01).Both groups had one case who developed compilations which were pocket hematoma and wire electrode dislocation respectively.The rate of complications was not significantly different between the two groups (P ＞ 0.05).Conclusion The SCV approach should be considered a preferable access in pacemaker implantation.