胸腔镜肺减容术治疗慢性阻塞性肺气肿终末期的临床疗效(附18例)

目的:探讨胸腔镜肺减容术治疗慢性阻塞性肺气肿终末期的临床应用价值。方法:回顾性分析腔镜下肺减容手术18例。术前根据计算机体层摄影术(CT)和同位素肺通气肺灌注扫描选择肺气肿手术靶区,经胸腔镜肺减容术,术中使用腔内切割缝合器切除病变,并用奈维补片(可吸收聚乙醇酸修补材料)防止肺泡漏气。结果:全组病例无围术期死亡,所有患者气促症状明显改善。结论:胸腔镜下肺减容术能改善慢性阻塞性肺气肿终末期患者肺功能,缓解呼吸困难,提高运动能力,但远期效果却有待观察。     

肺气肿并发肺大疱肺减容术患者的围手术期护理

肺气肿是一种严重威胁人类健康的慢性阻塞性肺部疾病 ,肺大泡一般继发于阻塞性肺气肿。一般采用肺减容手术切除部分无功能的肺组织 ,减少肺总量 ,使膈肌恢复正常隆状 ,使压迫的正常肺泡复张 ,加大呼吸功能 ,改善气体交换 ,从而改善阻塞性肺气肿患者的临床表现。我科 2 0 0 4年 1月～ 2 0 0 4年 10月施行 4例肺减容手术 ,1例为双侧肺减容术 ,3例为单侧肺减容术。现就围手术期护理体会报告如下 :1　临床资料4例均为男性 ,年龄 5 6～ 70岁。全部为阻塞性肺气肿合并肺大泡的患者 ,反复自发性气胸在内科外科保守治疗 3年以上无效。手术前 ,3例患…     

胸腔镜肺减容术治疗慢性阻塞性肺气肿的临床疗效

目的:分析胸腔镜肺减容术治疗慢性阻塞性肺气肿的手术疗效。方法:回顾分析2003年4月至2012年4月为91例慢性阻塞性肺气肿患者行肺减容手术的临床资料,其中71例行胸腔镜手术(腔镜组),20例行传统开胸手术(对照组)。对比两组患者住院时间、术中出血量、带管时间、胸引量及患者疼痛程度,并分析两组患者的肺功能与血气指标。结果:腔镜组住院时间、带管时间较短,术中出血量、胸引量少,患者疼痛程度轻,与对照组相比差异均有统计学意义(P0.05)。两组患者肺功能、血气指标如1秒用力呼气容积、残气量、动脉氧分压及二氧化碳分压术后均得到改善(P0.05),但两组间差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:胸腔镜肺减容术治疗慢性阻塞性肺气肿具有患者创伤小、康复快的优点,是理想的治疗方式。     

慢性阻塞性肺气肿病人肺减容手术的配合

慢性阻塞性肺气肿是一种常见的慢性肺部疾病 ,病程长 ,严重影响病人的身心健康。我院 1997年 8月至 2 0 0 0年 10月对 16例慢性阻塞性肺气肿病人实施肺减容手术 ,取得较好的近期效果。现将手术配合总结如下。1　临床资料1 1　一般资料16例中 ,男 13例、女 3例 ,年龄 4 0～ 72岁 ,平均 6 3 5岁。术前均需间断吸氧。行Ｘ线、肺ＣＴ、肺功能、心电图、超声心动图等检查 ,其中 4例进行了右心导管检查和肺动脉压测定。按呼吸困难判定标准 ,Ⅱ级 2例 ,Ⅲ级 9例 ,Ⅳ级 5例。1 2　手术方法在常规开胸下行同期双肺减容手术 9例 ,单侧肺减容术 3例 …     

胸腔镜肺减容术围期手术的护理

目的:慢性阻塞性肺气肿是一种常见的呼吸道疾病,以往主要是内科治疗,但疗效不显著,电视胸腔镜肺减容术(LVRS)是近年肺气肿治疗领域里新开展的最有效方法.本文旨在探讨该术式围术期的护理.方法:从2008年9月至2009年8月我科对12例肺功能极差的慢性阻塞性肺气肿患者施行肺减容手术.加强围手术期护理,术前作好心理护理和呼吸道准备.术后密切现察生命体征,呼吸功能的维护.加强呼吸道管理,保持呼吸通畅.结果:本组12例患者经肺减容手术术后未出现严重并发症,术后恢复良好,原来的呼吸困难基本消失,术后肺功能和血气检查基本正常.生活质量均明显提高.结论围手术期有效的护理措施是肺减容手术成功的重要步骤.     

电视胸腔镜下肺减容术治疗重度慢性阻塞性肺气肿68例

目的 评价电视胸腔镜肺减容术治疗慢性阻塞性肺气肿的临床疗效.方法 回顾性分析2002年6月至2012年6月,68例重度慢性阻塞性肺气肿患者施行肺减容术的随访资料.随访观察对比术前及术后6个月、1年和2年的第1秒用力呼气量(FEV1.0)、最大肺活量(FVC)、残气量(RV)、动脉血氧分压(PaO2)、动脉血二氧化碳分压(PaCO2)和6 min步行距离(6-MWD)的改变.结果 术后患者肺功能、血气指标、6 min步行距离均有明显改善.结论 胸腔镜肺减容术能明显改善部分具有手术适应证的重度慢性阻塞性肺气肿患者的临床症状和生理状况,提高生活质量.     

肺减容术治疗晚期肺气肿

目的 总结肺减容术治疗晚期肺气肿的临床经验。方法 回顾性分析22例晚期肺气肿行肺减容术患者的临床资料。结果 患者术前1s用力呼吸量（FEV1）为24．5％、残气量（RV）为196．5％、总肺活量（TLC）为130．5％,术后FEV1为27．8％、RV为148．8％,TLC为112．5％。术前16例患者经常吸氧,术后5例活动后需吸氧。术前16例完成6min行走试验,平均行走198m,术后所有患者均完成行走试验,平均行走256m。术前呼吸困难14例3级,8例4级;术后5例2级,13例3级,4例4级。结论 靶区明确的非均质型尤其泡性肺气肿是肺减容术最佳适应证,经严格选择均质型肺气肿病例亦可手术。手术适应证及禁忌证值得进一步探讨;胸腔镜辅助腋下小切口单侧肺减容术安全、可靠、有效;机械缝切器和牛心包加垫可减少漏气。     

肺减容术治疗重度肺气肿12例

1997年 10月至 2 0 0 1年 10月 ,我们对 12例慢性阻塞性肺气肿患者在胸腔镜辅助下行肺减容术 16次 ,取得了良好的早期临床效果。1　临床资料与方法1.1　一般资料　 12例均为男性 ;年龄 4 6～ 80岁 ,平均年龄6 5 .1岁。均有长期吸烟史。患者有咳嗽、咳痰、呼吸困难和桶状胸等。需长期吸氧 6例 ,间断吸氧 4例。胸部 X线片和电子计算机体层扫描 (CT)诊断为肺气肿。行同位素显像电子计算机体层扫描 (ECT) 8例 ,有明确的低灌注高通气区域。所有患者手术前后肺功能和血气分析指标见表 1。表 1　 12例患者肺减容术前后监测指标变化 (x±s)指标…     

肺减容术治疗重度肺气肿43例疗效分析

目的 评价肺减容术（LVRS）治疗重度肺气肿的中长期疗效。手术指征选择及围术期处理经验。方法 回顾性分析1996年7月至2001年3月，43例重度肺气肿病人施行肺减容术的随访资料。双侧肺减容术11例。单侧肺减容术28例，胸腔镜肺减容术5例。术前第1秒用力呼气量（FEV1）平均0.87L(26%预计值），6min行走试验（6MMT）平均228m，气急指数2.54。结果 双侧LVRS术后FEV1平均提高57%，单侧LVRS术后FEV1平均提高仅32%。术后6-12个月，FEV1改善达高峰，持续2年，以后肺功能逐年降低，但生活质量，气急指数仍改善，本组术后1、3年生存率分别为97.4%,92.3%，手术死亡率4.7%，术后并发症发生率53.5%。结论 肺减容术能明显改善部分具有手术适应证的重度肺气肿病人的临床症状和生理状况，双侧肺减容术应是标准选择术式。     

肺减容手术治疗重度肺气肿的临床研究

目的评价肺减容手术对重度肺气肿患者的疗效。方法36例重度肺气肿患者行肺减容手术,双侧8例,单侧28例。术前、术后3、6个月分别测量动脉血气(PaO2,PaCO2)、肺功能(FEV1、RV、TLC)、6分钟运动试验(6-MWD),并对其结果进行比较分析。结果本组无手术死亡,均痊愈出院;术后动脉血氧分压比术前明显提高(P<0.05),二氧化碳分压比术前明显降低(P<0.05);术后3、6个月的FEV1、6-MWD较术前有明显提高(P<0.05),RV、TLC较术前有明显降低(P<0.05);呼吸困难指数再分级,26例术前Ⅲ级中10例转为Ⅰ级,16例转为Ⅱ级;10例Ⅳ级中3例转为Ⅰ级,5例转为Ⅱ级,2例转为Ⅲ级。结论重度肺气肿患者选择性手术,能改善患者肺功能,提高生活质量。     

肺减容手术(LVRS)治疗重度阻塞性肺气肿

目的探讨重度肺气肿采用肺减容术的适应症、围手术期准备及手术方法。方法对6例重度肺气肿患者施行肺容积减少术，其中间期双侧2例，单侧4例。为控制肺切面漏气，缝合时衬以牛心包片。本组切除一侧肺容积25％—30％。结果无手术死亡。术后2例并发急性呼吸衰竭，经积极抢救处理而治愈。术后随诊3—12个月，肺功能有明显改善，PaO2均有显著上升，PaCO2亦有所下降。结论肺减容术是治疗严重肺气肿的有价值的治疗方法之一。     

A Clinical Use of the Kyocera Gyro C1E3 Centrifugal Pump

In patients with reduced respiratory function, lung resection is associated with high risk because separate ventilation is generally needed for safe management. For patients with end-stage emphysema, intraoperative respiratory management is important and particularly difficult because neither incomplete oxygenation nor selective ventilation can be performed, so the operation may be interrupted. In this study, we assess the effectiveness of the percutaneous cardiopulmonary support (PCPS) system for lung volume reduction surgery in patients with severe hypercapnia (arterial carbon dioxide tension >50 mm Hg) and discuss the significance of PCPS for patients who are beyond the standard criteria for lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS). We studied 3 patients with severe hypercapnia due to emphysema who underwent volume reduction surgery. One patient was previously treated surgically for contralateral pneumothorax. All patients had a severe smoking history and were suspected to have fragile lungs. During the operation. PCPS provided sufficient support flow. Intraoperative management using PCPS was easy, and no severe complications were observed. One patient exhibited severe hemodynamic deterioration on postoperative Day 15. Other patients' PaCO2 improved postoperatively. One had a calcification of a femoral artery, but there was no trouble inserting a cannula. Bilateral or unilateral volume reduction surgery was performed under PCPS in patients with end-stage emphysema. We conclude that PCPS is an adjunct to LVRS, useful for intraoperative management of some patients with severe hypercapnea, and the LVRS indications can be extended.     

Surgery for lung volume reduction

OBJECTIVES: To define the place of lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) for non-bullous emphysema, to discuss the mechanisms of postoperative functional improvement and to suggest guidelines for perioperative medical management. DATA SOURCES AND EXTRACTION: The Medline data base was searched for any article (original papers, editorials, comments, reviews) published in English, French or German, from 1980 to April 1998. The key words were: lung volume reduction surgery, emphysema, respiratory failure, anaesthesia, lung transplantation. The data have been analysed to explain the physiological mechanisms underlying the postoperative improvements and to assess the risk-benefit ratio associated with LVRS. Finally, proposals are suggested for selection criteria and perioperative medical strategies. DATA SYNTHESIS: Besides pharmacological treatment and lung transplantation, LVRS is considered as an alternative treatment for patients with end-stage pulmonary emphysema. Perioperative management includes selective lung ventilation, continuous peridural analgesia and a general anaesthetic technique that can be easily reversed. Care should be taken to detect and rapidly correct dynamic hyperinflation, pneumothorax, tube malpositioning and major air leaks. In a majority of selected patients (70-80%), resection of 20-30% of lung volume produces significant clinical and physiological improvement (dyspnoea, exercise capacity, FEV1, VO2max), as well as of the quality of life that has been attributed to greater elastic recoil, reduced respiratory workload and better diaphragmatic and right ventricular function. The most common complication is prolonged air leaks. In-hospital mortality varies widely (0-20%, with a median value at 4%), depending in part on the experience of the surgical team and on the selection criteria. Several factors may predict an unfavourable outcome: advanced age, hypercapnia, diffuse emphysema, predominant airway disease and previous thoracic surgery. CONCLUSIONS: According to the favourable preliminary results and an acceptable incidence of perioperative complications, LVRS is presently considered as a new therapeutic option for some patients with respiratory failure. Future clinical studies should be focused on appropriate selection criteria, operative techniques and long term outcome data.     

Salvage by volume reduction of chronic allograft rejection in emphysema.

BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that native lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) would improve respiratory function in patients who had previously undergone single lung transplantation for emphysema and who were disabled by obliterative bronchiolitis. METHODS: Seven single lung transplant recipients who had advanced bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (BOS grade 3b), absence of active infection, and suitable anatomy underwent native LVRS. Mean time from lung transplantation to LVRS was 39 +/- 17 months. RESULTS: Mean FEV1 rose from 684 +/- 164 ml before LVRS to 949 +/- 219 ml at 3 months after LVRS, an increment of 40% (p = .002). Mean 6-minute walk rose from 781 +/- 526 ft before LVRS to 887 +/- 539 ft at 3 months after LVRS (p = .031), and mean dyspnea index declined from 3.1 +/- 1.1 before LVRS to 1.6 +/- 0.5 at 3 months after LVRS (p = .010). Mean native lung volume declined from 2956 +/- 648 ml before LVRS to 2541 +/- 621 ml at 3 months after LVRS, but the change was not statistically significant (p = .12). Mean transplant lung volume was little changed before and after LVRS (2099 +/- 411 ml and 1931 +/- 607 ml, respectively, p = NS). There was also a trend toward increased ventilation and perfusion of the native lung and reduction in ventilation and perfusion of the transplant lung, but these changes did not achieve statistical significance. By six months after LVRS, three patients died (two as a consequence respiratory failure), and survivors began to show evidence of deteriorating spirometry. CONCLUSIONS: LVRS is capable of salvaging respiratory function in chronic allograft rejection in emphysema by reducing native lung hyperinflation. These benefits, however, appear to be limited in magnitude and duration by the severity of the underlying allograft dysfunction.     

Significance of percutaneous cardiopulmonary bypass support for volume reduction surgery with severe hypercapnia

In patients with reduced respiratory function, lung resection is associated with high risk because separate ventilation is generally needed for safe management. For patients with end-stage emphysema, intraoperative respiratory management is important and particularly difficult because neither incomplete oxygenation nor selective ventilation can be performed, so the operation may be interrupted. In this study, we assess the effectiveness of the percutaneous cardiopulmonary support (PCPS) system for lung volume reduction surgery in patients with severe hypercapnia (arterial carbon dioxide tension >50 mm Hg) and discuss the significance of PCPS for patients who are beyond the standard criteria for lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS). We studied 3 patients with severe hypercapnia due to emphysema who underwent volume reduction surgery. One patient was previously treated surgically for contralateral pneumothorax. All patients had a severe smoking history and were suspected to have fragile lungs. During the operation. PCPS provided sufficient support flow. Intraoperative management using PCPS was easy, and no severe complications were observed. One patient exhibited severe hemodynamic deterioration on postoperative Day 15. Other patients' PaCO2 improved postoperatively. One had a calcification of a femoral artery, but there was no trouble inserting a cannula. Bilateral or unilateral volume reduction surgery was performed under PCPS in patients with end-stage emphysema. We conclude that PCPS is an adjunct to LVRS, useful for intraoperative management of some patients with severe hypercapnea, and the LVRS indications can be extended.     

Anesthesia for lung volume reduction surgery

Background: Lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) has become a novel palliative procedure for a subgroup of patients with advanced non-bullous emphysema. METHODS: Seventy-six patients with severe emphysema were evaluated: ten patients were considered for lung transplantation and only 24 underwent LVRS. In all patients an epidural catheter was inserted between the T5-T9 space. During one lung ventilation (OLV), ventilatory setting was adjusted to avoid air trapping and/or dynamic hyperinflation and high frequency jet ventilation was used when PaO2/ FiO2 was lower than 60 mmHg in 5 patients. Permissive hypercapnia (PaCO2=53 mmHg) was allowed to avoid hyperinflation and reach hemodynamic stability. RESULTS: During OLV PaO2/FiO2 was 148+/-80 mmHg, PaCO2 53+/-11 mmHg, mPA 27+/-2 mmHg and Qsp/Qt was 38+/-6%. Although the high risk patients, there were no complications due to hypercapnia during surgery. Twenty-three patients were extubated successfully at the end of the surgery (PaO2/FiO2 179+/-34 mmHg and PaCO2 59+/-11 mmHg) and only one patient was not extubated because of air leakage and died for postoperative respiratory failure after 20 days. Another patient died because of sepsis after 15 days. Numeric Ordinal Verbal Scale (by Keele modified) was used for postoperative pain degree at 0, 12th and 24th hours. No patients had pain>2. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, a careful anesthesia technique with an accurate intraop monitoring associated with thoracic epidural analgesia even in Video Assisted Thoracic Surgery is suggested in LVRS patients; 12 months postoperative data confirm the validity of the procedure (FEV1 24 AE 36%, FVC 53 AE 70%, RV 265 AE 199% and 6MWT 213 AE 330 m).     

肺移植与肺减容术治疗终末期肺气肿的疗效分析

目的探讨肺移植和肺减容手术(LVRS)治疗终末期肺气肿患者的临床疗效及卫生经济学指标,为临床选择治疗方案提供参考。方法回顾性分析自2002年9月至2008年8月无锡市人民医院61例终末期肺气肿患者行LVRS和肺移植术治疗的临床资料,根据手术方式不同将61例患者分为3组,LVRS组:39例,行单侧肺减容术;单肺移植术(SLTx)组:14例,行SLTx;双肺移植术(BLTx)组:8例,行BLTx。于围术期、术后6个月、1年和3年住院复查肺功能、血气分析指标、6 min步行距离(6-MWD)的改变,观察1年、3年生存率。并通过成本-效用分析进行卫生经济学评价。结果术后6个月、1年和3年LVRS组、SLTx组和BLTx组FEV1.0较术前分别改善75%、83%和49%,176%、162%和100%,260%、280%和198%;LVRS组、SLTx组和BLTx组FVC分别较术前改善21%、41%和40%,68%、73%和55%,82%、79%和89%;LVRS组、SLTx组和BLTx组6-MWD分别较术前增加75%、136%和111%,513%、677%和608%,762%、880%和741%。LVRS组、SLTx组和BLTx组患者1年、3年生存率分别为74.40%和58.90%,85.80%和64.30%,62.50%和50.00%。SLTx组随访3年的成本-效用比高于BLTx组(1 668.00 vs.1 168.55,P<0.05)和LVRS组(1 668.00 vs.549.46,P<0.05)。结论 SLTx、BLTx组术后各项功能指标较LVRS组明显改善。3年内成本-效用分析结果表明,LVRS组更经济、实惠。随着医疗技术的进步、移植医疗费用的降低、免疫抑制剂的国产化价格降低,肺移植总费用也随之降低,肺移植术将成为终末期肺气肿患者首选的外科治疗方法。     

肺减容术治疗重度肺气肿临床探讨

目的 研究肺减容术对重度肺气肿的手术适应证和临床疗效。方法 选择２０例重度肺气肿患者,经胸骨正中劈开切口或电视辅助胸腔镜途径,用直线切割缝合器或Ｅｎｄｏ ＧＩＡ,切除因过度膨胀而破坏的、无功能肺组织。每侧肺切除其容量的２０％￣３０％。结果术后呼吸困难明显减轻或消失;９５％患者呼吸困难指数从４￣５级转变为１￣２级。肺功能１秒时间肺活量（ＦＥＶ１）增加４１．４％,残气量（ＲＶ）和肺总量（ＴＬＣ）分别     

Different effects of lung volume reduction surgery and lobectomy on pulmonary circulation

OBJECTIVE: To clarify the effects of lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) on cardiopulmonary circulation during exercise in comparison with pulmonary lobectomy for lung cancer. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: LVRS improves pulmonary function and dyspnea symptoms acutely in selected patients with heterogeneous emphysema. However, there are few data concerning the effects of LVRS on the cardiopulmonary circulation, especially during exercise. METHODS: Pulmonary function tests and pulmonary hemodynamic study at rest and during exercise were performed before and 6 months after LVRS (seven patients) or pulmonary lobectomy (eight patients). In the workload test, an electrically braked bicycle ergometer (25 w) was used in the supine position for at least 2 minutes or until exhaustion or breathlessness developed. RESULTS: After lung lobectomy, the values of vital capacity, percentage of predicted vital capacity, forced expiratory volume in 1 second, percentage of predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second, residual volume/total lung capacity, and maximal voluntary ventilation deteriorated significantly. Six months after LVRS, however, vital capacity, percentage vital capacity showed no significant change, and forced expiratory volume in 1 second, percentage of forced expiratory volume in 1 second, diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide, and maximal voluntary ventilation showed marked improvement. Cardiac index was changed neither at rest nor during exercise in either group by the operation. Although postoperative pulmonary arterial pressure in the lobectomy group was significantly increased by the exercise, LVRS did not affect postoperative pulmonary arterial pressure at rest or during exercise. Pulmonary capillary wedge pressure in the lobectomy group showed no significant change after the operation, whereas LVRS ameliorated the marked elevation of pulmonary capillary wedge pressure observed during exercise. After lobectomy, significant increases in the pulmonary vascular resistance index were observed at rest and during exercise. LVRS markedly increased the pulmonary vascular resistance index at rest but not during exercise. In the lobectomy group, the postoperative flow-pressure curve moved upward, and its gradient became steeper than the preoperative one. In the LVRS group, the curve moved upward in a parallel fashion. These results show that much more right-sided heart work is needed to achieve the same cardiac output against higher pulmonary arterial pressure, not only after lobectomy but also LVRS. CONCLUSION: The current study demonstrated that the effects of LVRS on the cardiopulmonary circulation were not negligible, especially during exercise, and successful LVRS may depend on improved respiratory function and also preserved cardiac function that can tolerate the damage to the pulmonary vascular bed induced by this operation.     

电视胸腔镜肺减容术治疗27例重度肺气肿的疗效分析

目的探讨电视胸腔镜（VATS）下行肺减容术（LVRS）治疗重度肺气肿的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析27例重度肺气肿患者在电视胸腔镜下行LVRS的资料,其中双侧12例,单侧15例,切除每侧肺容积的20%～40%,比较手术前后的肺功能、血气分析等指标变化。结果 15例行VATS下单侧LVRS,4例同期行VATS下双侧LVRS,8例半年内分期行VATS下双侧LVRS,无死亡病例。术前与术后的各项指标比较,肺功能、血气分析及6min步行距离,差异有统计学意义。结论 VATS下LVRS治疗重度肺气肿可以取得良好疗效,双侧LVRS是更好的治疗手段。