目的探讨中心静脉导管行胸腔闭式引流术与传统胸腔穿刺术两种不同方法治疗胸腔积液的临床疗效。方法将80例胸腔积液患者随机分为观察组和对照组,每组40例,观察组采用中心静脉导管行胸腔闭式引流术,对照组采用常规胸腔穿刺抽液术。对比观察两组患者的临床疗效、治疗情况及并发症的发生率。结果观察组的临床显效率和总有效率均明显高于对照组(P<0.05);观察组胸腔积液吸收天数、胸膜增厚度、气胸、胸膜反应的发生率均明显优于对照组(P<0.05),具有统计学意义。结论中心静脉导管行胸腔闭式引流术与传统胸腔穿刺术相比,具有简便、经济、创伤小的优点,且具有更好的综合疗效,值得临床推广。 Objective To investigate the clinical effects of two methods of thoracic drainage and thoracentesis for the treatment of pleural effusion in central venous catheter. Methods Eighty patients with pleural effusion were randomly divided into observation group and control group, 40 cases in each group. Central venous catheters were used in the observation group for closed thoracic drainage. The control group was treated by conventional thoracentesis. The clinical efficacy, treatment and complication rates were compared between the two groups. Results The clinical effective rate and total effective rate in the observation group were significantly higher than those in the control group (P <0.05). The days of pleural effusion absorption, pleural thickening, pneumothorax and pleura reaction in the observation group were significantly better than those in the control group (P <0.05), with statistical significance. Conclusions Central venous catheters with thoracic cavity drainage are simple, economical and less invasive than conventional thoracentesis, and have better comprehensive curative effect and worthy of clinical promotion.