论文部分内容阅读
目的:通过对3种不同胸腔闭式引流术在治疗自发性气胸的疗效对比分析评价猪尾巴导管治疗自发性气胸的临床效果。方法:回顾性分析我院90例自发性气胸患者,根据不同手术方式分为3组,粗硅胶管组、中心静脉导管组及猪尾巴导管组。对3组疗效、并发症等方面进行比较分析。结果:猪尾巴导管组在肺复胀时间和肺复张成功率方面与硅胶管组比较差异无统计学意义,明显优于中心静脉导管组(P<0.05),堵管发生率显著低于单腔中心静脉导管组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。猪尾巴导管在并发症发生率较粗硅胶管组明显降低,拔管时间、住院时间较粗硅胶管组及中心静脉导管组明显缩短(P<0.05)。结论:猪尾巴导管行胸腔闭式引流治疗自发性气胸与传统硅胶管引流疗效相当,明显优于中心静脉导管,带管舒适度及并发症方面明显优于粗硅胶管,值得临床推广应用。
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical effect of pig tail catheter in the treatment of spontaneous pneumothorax by comparing the curative effects of three different types of thoracic closure drainage in the treatment of spontaneous pneumothorax. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 90 patients with spontaneous pneumothorax in our hospital, according to different surgical methods are divided into 3 groups, crude silicone tube group, central venous catheter group and pig tail catheter group. Three groups of efficacy, complications and other aspects of comparative analysis. Results: Compared with silicone tube group, there was no significant difference between the pig tail tube group and the silicone tube group in the duration of pulmonary expansion and the success rate of lung recruitment (P <0.05), and the incidence of occlusion was significantly lower than that in the single Central venous catheter group, the difference was statistically significant (P <0.05). Pig tail catheter in the incidence of complications was significantly lower silicone tube group, extubation time, hospital stay in the thick silicone tube group and central venous catheter group was significantly shorter (P <0.05). Conclusion: The treatment of closed tail drainage of pig tail with thoracic cavity drainage is equivalent to traditional silicone tube drainage in treating closed-loop drainage of spontaneous pneumothorax, which is obviously superior to central venous catheter. The comfort and complications of tube are better than that of crude silicone tube, which deserves clinical application.