双腔中心静脉留置管引流大量心包积液的应用和护理

急性心包炎常产生心包积液，当大量心包积液时常导致心包填塞，临床表现为循环衰竭和呼吸困难，如不及时心包穿刺引流以减轻压迫，就会引起心包填塞，危及患者生命。以往大量心包积液的治疗需反复心包穿刺或外科心包切开引流，操作有较高的危险性，且疗效较差，近年来我科开展中心静脉留置管引流治疗大量心包积液，获得满意疗效。     

心包穿刺置管治疗恶性心包积液37例护理体会

本文对 37例癌症患者伴恶性心包积液采用Ｂ超引导下行心包腔内置管引流、灌注药物治疗 ,现将护理体会总结如下。资料与方法1 　资料　自 1 998年 6月— 2 0 0 1年 9月收治的恶性心包积液患者 37例 ,其中肺癌 2 3例、乳腺癌 8例、恶性淋巴瘤 2例、肝癌 1例、原因不明癌 1例、横纹肌肉瘤术后1例、卵巢癌 1例。2 　方法　在Ｂ超定位引导下 ,采用Ｓｅｌｄｉｎｇｅｒ法穿刺引流。置管成功后 ,连接引流管并接引流器 ,应用调节器控制流速 ,使液体持续缓慢滴出。若为心包填塞病人 ,可先予抽吸 30 0ｍｌ～ 5 0 0ｍｌ积液 ,症状缓解后改为缓慢滴出。积…     

中心静脉导管心包腔置管引流治疗大量心包积液的效果

目的探讨中心静脉导管心包腔置管引流治疗大量心包积液的效果。方法选取2018年2月至2019年2月郑州颐和医院收治的31例大量心包积液患者,均接受中心静脉导管心包腔置管引流治疗。统计穿刺情况、疗效、并发症、留置导管时间及引流量。结果 31例大量心包积液患者均一次穿刺成功,6例左侧胸壁进针,25例剑突下进针;无严重并发症,1例肺癌所致的心包积液患者第2天引流管堵塞,肝素水冲注后再通,引流液300 mL左右后心包填塞症状得到缓解;留置导管时间5～14 d,平均(8.31±1.42)d;总引流量500～1 500 mL,平均(978.16±72.64)mL;治愈26例,治愈率为83.87%,显效5例,显效率为16.13%,总有效率为100%。结论中心静脉导管心包腔置管引流治疗大量心包积液,具有取材方便、操作简单、治愈率高、并发症少等优势,可替代传统心包穿刺抽液,作为首选治疗手段。     

中心静脉导管引流治疗心包积液16例临床观察

目的探讨留置引流术治疗大量心包积液的安全性、方便性和有效性。方法对16例伴有填塞症状的病人，应用单腔中心静脉导管经皮置人心包腔内行持续引流和局部用药。结果本组患者心包穿刺置管成功率100％，术后心包填塞症状迅速缓解，积液量减少或消失。平均置管时间9天，无穿刺并发症发生，无继发感染，病人耐受性好。结论中心静脉导管持续引流术是治疗大量心包积液安全、方便、有效的理想方法。     

心包积液206例临床分析

目的 探讨心包积液的病因和诊治特点。方法 回顾分析206例心包积液患者的临床资料。结果 肿瘤、结核、心脏介入手术、非特异性等原因所致心包积液的比例分别占33％、15％、12．6％、12．1％。患者有无压塞症状，除和心包积液的量有关外，还和产生的速度有关。发生心包填塞后，可进行心包减压术。结论 肿瘤、结核仍是心包积液的主要原因，心脏介入手术为重要原因。心包置管引流是解决心包填塞的较好方法。     

心包积液206例临床分析

目的探讨心包积液的病因和诊治特点.方法回顾分析206例心包积液患者的临床资料.结果肿瘤、结核、心脏介入手术、非特异性等原因所致心包积液的比例分别占33%、15%、12.6%、12.1%.患者有无压塞症状,除和心包积液的量有关外,还和产生的速度有关.发生心包填塞后,可进行心包减压术.结论肿瘤、结核仍是心包积液的主要原因,心脏介入手术为重要原因,心包置管引流是解决心包填塞的较好方法.     

床边心包穿刺置管在心包积液诊治中的应用

目的 讨论床边心包穿刺置管在心包积液诊治中的应用。方法 在心尖部或剑突下置入中心静脉导管引流。结果 34例心包积液病人全部安全有效置管成功得到有效救治。8例心包填塞患者引流后症状迅速缓解。置管可长期保留(7～49d)。操作并发症少。结论 床边心包积液置管法简单、安全、有效，便于临床应用。     

改良心包穿刺引流治疗心脏术后心包积液

目的探讨改良心包穿刺引流术治疗心脏术后心包积液的安全性及效果。方法采用一次性中心静脉穿刺管、心尖部径路对36例心脏术后心包积液行心包穿刺引流术,分别比较引流前、后患者呼吸、心率、动脉收缩压和平均动脉压的变化,拔管后1个月复查心脏超声。结果35例患者经心包穿刺置管引流后,呼吸困难明显好转或消失,心率减慢,动脉收缩压和平均动脉压升高(P均<0.01),1个月再次复查心脏超声,无明显心包积液,1例行部分心包切除痊愈。结论该法安全有效,未见严重并发症,适用于心脏术后心包积液治疗,值得临床推广应用。     

中心静脉导管引流治疗心包积液16例临床观察

目的探讨留置引流术治疗大量心包积液的安全性、方便性和有效性。方法 对16例伴有填塞症状的病人,应用单腔中心静脉导管经皮置入心包腔内行持续引流和局部用药。结果本组患者心包穿刺置管成功率100％,术后心包填塞症状迅速缓解,积液量减少或消失。平均置管时间9天,无穿刺并发症发生,无继发感染,病人耐受性好。结论中心静脉导管持续引流术是治疗大量心包积液安全、方便、有效的理想方法。     

心包积液和心包填塞的治疗

目的讨论心包积液和心包填塞的治疗.方法根据患者临床表现结合检查结果进行诊断并治疗.结论尽管心包穿刺可以有效缓解心包填塞,但有时也需要进行经皮球囊心包切除、经剑突下心包切除或是通过外科手术进行胸膜心包开窗或腹膜心包开窗.对于肿瘤性心包积液患者,一项回顾性研究显示于心包内注射硬化剂与外科手术开放引流同样有效.然而,无论是良性还是恶性心包积液,经剑突下心包切除都比经皮引流更为安全和有效.因此有学者推荐只有在患者血流动力学不稳定的情况下才采用经皮穿刺引流.     

Limitatoins of surgical methods of pericardial drainage. Echocardiographic observations.

To assess the efficacy of surgical methods of pericardial drainage in preventing the accumulation of pericardial effusion, we performed M-mode and cross-sectional echocardiograms in 26 patients before and one week after the creation of a pericardial window or leaving the pericardium open after cardiac surgery. A pericardial window was created in six patients (group 1) who had pericardial effusions. Group 2 consisted of 20 patients who had heart surgery. Echocardiography disclosed moderate or large pericardial effusions preoperatively in all group 1 patients but in one of the group 2 patients. Following operation, three of the group 1 patients had complete clearing of pericardial effusion, while three showed reaccumulation. In group 2, thirteen patients had either no effusion or a small effusion. Seven patients had moderate or large pericardial effusions that were located posterior to the heart; only one had an anterior pericardial effusion. Cross-sectional echocardiography showed posterior loculation of effusion in six of the seven patients. Pericardial drainage is not always effective in preventing accumulation of pericardial effusions.     

Seldinger技术指导心包穿刺置管引流治疗急性心肌梗死溶栓并发心包积液

目的评价Seldinger技术指导心包穿刺置管引流治疗急性心肌梗死溶栓并发心包积液的疗效及安全性。方法急性心肌梗死溶栓并发心包积液18例,在床边超声心动图定位指导,采用Seldinger技术,经皮穿刺并内置深静脉留置导管进行心包腔内持续或间断引流心包积液。结果18例患者均1次穿刺并留置导管引流成功．未出现因继发感染、出血、血气胸、严重心律失常、心脏穿破及与心包穿刺置管导致的死亡。留置时间7～21d,平均（9.4±3．7）d;引流量为180～450ml,平均（190±50）ml。结论采用Seldinger技术心包穿刺置管引流治疗急性心肌梗死溶栓并发心包积液,方法简单,安全有效,成功率高,可替代传统穿刺方法。     

恶性心包积液的手术引流治疗

目的：选择适当的手术方法治疗恶性心包积液。方法：对经剑突下小切口或左前外侧切口开胸行心包开窗引流术的24例恶性肿瘤合并心包积液的患者进行临床回顾性分析。结果：24例患者中，术后确诊19例，均为血性。术后全组患者呼吸困难、胸疼等症状有显著好转，无手术死亡。引流时间为3～16d，平均5．2d。心胸比值从术前平均0．65减少为平均0．43。术后3个月时，2例经剑突下切口途径患者因心包积液复发而再次手术开窗引流。而经左前外侧切口途径患者有1例胸腔内有中等量积液，行2～3次胸穿后积液消失。术后有6例出现循环血量不足的表现。结论：对于恶性心包积液有明显的血液动力学障碍，尤其是怀疑心包腔内有粘连者，可以根据具体情况选则这两种手术方式治疗。     

Cardiac tamponade complicating a case of fever of unknown origin

A 16-year-old male was transferred to Children's Hospital of Wisconsin (CHW) after 17 days of fever of unknown origin. An echocardiogram revealed a small pericardial effusion only. Serial echocardiography demonstrated an increased size of this effusion with collapse of the right atrium during diastole. A subxiphoid open pericardiostomy was performed to relieve the impending tamponade and to assist in the diagnosis of his fever. The diagnostic criteria for cardiac tamponade are discussed.     

心包开窗和经皮心包穿刺引流治疗心包积液的比较

目的 比较经皮心包穿刺和剑下心包开窗治疗有症状心包积液的结果.方法 回顾性分析10年间分别接受经皮心包穿刺和剑下心包开窗手术治疗的心包积液患者的结果.结果 160例患者因症状性心包积液接受治疗,其中106例为剑下心包开窗.54例为经皮心包穿刺.经皮心包穿刺组并发症发生率为2%.与心包开窗组的5%相近(P=0.64).心包开窗组中10例(11%)心包积液复发,6例(6%)出现心包缩窄;而经皮穿刺组有12例(25%)复发,10例(21%)发生缩窄(P=0.01).单纯心包积液细胞学对恶性疾病的确诊率为19%,低于心包积液联合心包活检的确诊率(45%),有显著性差异(P=0.02).结论 经皮心包穿刺和心包开窗同样有效而安全.心包开窗治疗后的复发率和心包缩窄发生率较低,而且能够通过心包活检提高恶性疾病的确诊率.     

中心静脉导管在心包积液穿刺和引流中的应用

目的探讨中心静脉导管置管技术在心包积液穿刺、引流中的应用,达到诊断、治疗、减少并发症的目的。方法对45例心包积液患者术前经二维超声心动图定位、定向并测定进针深度后,以Seldinger法进行心包穿刺置入中心静脉导管,连接无菌引流袋持续引流,必要时进行冲洗并注入相应的药物,观察疗效、安全性及不良反应。结果 45例病例均一次穿刺置管成功,导管留置时间5～15 d,引流量500～1500 ml,心包积液引流彻底,心包压塞症状消失,未出现严重并发症。结论应用中心静脉置管技术治疗心包积液安全、有效,由于该方法操作简单,取材方便,成功率高,明显减少不良反应,可替代传统穿刺方法,便于推广。     

Pleuropericarditis and pericardial tamponade associated with inflammatory bowel disease

Extraintestinal manifestations have been described with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Cardiac involvement in IBD is rare and may present as pericardial effusion, myopericarditis and conduction defects. Here we present a case of IBD with asymptomatic pericardial tamponade. A 37-year-old African-American man with ulcerative colitis with history of previous colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis was hospitalized for resection of the stricture of ileorectal anastomosis. The patient was afebrile with stable vitals and modest jugular venous distension, but no pulsus paradoxus. Cardiopulmonary examination was normal. A CT scan done to evaluate rise in liver function tests following removal of stricture showed a large 3.1 cm pericardial effusion. A transthoracic 2-D echocardiogram showed a moderate-sized posterior pericardial effusion limiting left ventricular filling. Central venous pressure was 18 mm Hg and the patient underwent drainage of 300 ml of old bloody pericardial effusion. Pericardial biopsy showed organizing fibrinohemorrhagic chronically inflamed pericardium without granuloma or neoplastic process. Serologies for EBV, Coxsackie virus and hepatitides were negative. Drug-related pericarditis seems less likely as the patient was not on sulfasalazine, and ANA, dsDNA and rheumatoid factor titers were negative. The patient was diagnosed to have pericardial tamponade associated with IBD.     

Cardiac tamponade as the initial presentation of malignancy: is it as rare as previously supposed?

Advanced malignant disease frequently involves the heart and pericardium, and pericardial effusion is a common postmortem finding in such patients. Identification of pericardial effusions in life is uncommon, however, even when symptomatic. Cardiac tamponade occurring as the first presentation of malignancy appears to be uncommon. We present five cases of cardiac tamponade due to undiagnosed malignancy which presented to a general medical unit over 18 months. The availability of echocardiography was an important factor in correct diagnosis, since clinical features were non-specific. Bronchial adenocarcinoma was the cause in three of the five cases. Review of the literature confirms adenocarcinomas of the bronchus as the most common cause of this complication. The majority of cases have presented with large volume, haemorrhagic effusions, and cytology (with or without carcinoembryonic antigen measurement) was diagnostic in most patients. Immediate treatment with subxiphoid pericardiotomy is recommended; the role of balloon catheter pericardiotomy remains to be established. Combined chemotherapy and radiotherapy appears to extend survival, which in some cases may be prolonged. We recommend that early echocardiography should be obtained in all patients presenting with apparent cardiac failure, since early treatment of malignant effusions provides symptomatic relief.     

Subxiphoid pericardial window in stable cardiac proximity injuries

The use of the subxiphoid pericardial window (SPW) in evaluating stable patients with cardiac proximity injuries is presented in a short case series. There were 11 patients with four positive and seven negative SPW. There was one false positive and no false negatives. Review of the literature on the use of the SPW as a diagnostic tool in evaluating cardiac proximity injuries shows the SPW to be a rapid and reliable method of detecting occult cardiac injuries, and is especially useful in areas where emergency echocardiography is not available.     

Causes and prognosis of symptomatic pericardial effusions treated by pericardiocentesis in an Asian academic medical centre

INTRODUCTIONThis study aimed to investigate the causes, clinical management and outcomes of clinically significant pericardial effusions, and evaluate the practice of pericardiocentesis within an academic medical centre in Singapore, a multiethnic country in Southeast Asia.METHODSConsecutive patients undergoing pericardiocentesis at a single Asian academic medical centre were identified. Patient demographics, echocardiographic findings, investigations, pericardiocentesis procedural details and clinical progress were tracked using a comprehensive electronic medical records system.RESULTSOf 149 patients who underwent pericardiocentesis, malignancy (46.3%) was the most common cause of pericardial effusions, followed by iatrogenic postsurgical complications (17.4%). 77.3% of effusions were large and 69.8% demonstrated tamponade physiology. Pericardiocentesis guided by echocardiography and fluoroscopy was successful in 99.3% of patients and had a complication rate of 2.0%. Likelihood of effusion recurrence and survival to discharge was determined by the aetiology of the pericardial effusion. 24.6% of malignant effusions recurred, and the survival rate 12 months after drainage of a malignant pericardial effusion was 45.0%. Short-term mortality was highest among patients presenting with tamponade due to acute aortic syndromes and those with myocardial rupture due to ischaemic heart disease.CONCLUSIONCancer and iatrogenic complications were the most common causes of pericardial effusion in this large cohort of Singapore patients. Pericardiocentesis has a high success rate and relatively low complication rate. Prognosis and clinical course after pericardiocentesis are determined by the underlying cause of the pericardial effusion.