阿司匹林对经外周静脉置入中心静脉导管相关性血栓的预防作用

目的评估阿司匹林对经外周静脉置入中心静脉导管（PICC）相关性血栓的预防作用。方法将360例接受PICC置管的肿瘤患者随机分为对照组和试验组两组,每组180例。对照组按照常规方法进行PICC置管后,给予常规PICC导管维护;试验组除按照常规进行PICC置管,给予常规PICC导管维护外,给予100mg阿司匹林每日1次口服,连续21d。观察两组患者的静脉炎和血栓发生情况。结果试验组患者的静脉炎和血栓发生率分别为3．3％和0,明显低于对照组的8．9％（P=0．025）和1．7％（P=0．025）。结论PICC置管后给予口服阿司匹林可降低PICC相关性血栓和静脉炎的发生。     

早产儿应用经外周静脉置人中心静脉导管非正常拔管的原因

目的分析早产儿经外周静脉置入中心静脉导管（PICC）术后非正常拔管的原因。方法回顾性分析了104例应用PICC导管早产儿的临床资料,对其非正常拔管原因进行分析。结果104例早产儿中,93例（89．4％）为正常拔管,11例（10．6％）为非正常拔管。非正常拔管组患儿PICC管尖端位于锁骨下静脉比例明显高于正常拔管组患儿（x2=24．931,P=0．000）。非正常拔管组患儿的平均置管长度为（8．4±2．2）cm,明显低于正常拔管组的（10．2±1．6）em（t=3．391,P=0．001）。结论导管尖端未达到腔静脉可能是导致PICC非正常拔管的主要原因。     

不同置放途径中心静脉导管的临床效果研究

目的 对比两种经不同途径置放中心静脉导管的临床效果及并发症。方法 选择需长期输液治疗的患80例，分为A、B两组，每组各40例。A组应用双腔或单腔中心静脉导管(美国Arrow公司)经锁骨下静脉穿刺至上腔静脉置管，B组应用“经外周静脉置人中心静脉导管”(美国B—D公司Peripherally Insented Central Catheter，简称PICC)经外周静脉置人中心静脉，观察2组置管成功率、流速及导管相关并发症30天。结果 置管成功率相近(P=0．5562)：PICC导管置管成功97．5％(39例)；锁骨下静脉穿刺成功100％(40例)。导管堵塞率有明显差别(P=0．0231)：PICC9例(22．5％)，锁骨下静脉穿刺2例(5％)。锁骨下静脉置管流速明显快于PICC(P＝0．0001)。其他导管相关并发症两组无明显差异(P＝0．1521～0．5562)。气、血胸并发症：PICC末发生，锁骨下静脉穿刺1例(2．5％)。动脉损伤：PICC末发生，锁骨下静脉穿刺1例(2．5％)。导管易位：PICC2例(5％)，锁骨下静脉穿刺1例(2．5％)。静脉炎：PICC2例(5％)，锁骨下静脉穿刺末发生。导管感染：PICC末发生，锁骨下静脉穿刺2例(5％)。大多数PICC置管可由护士完成，而锁骨下静脉置管全部由医师操作。结论 经锁骨下静脉置入的中心静脉导管流速大，是抢救危重患的首选导管。PICC导管穿刺更安全、易推广；导管堵塞或感染后，能进行原地置换；是长期输液和大剂量长时间化疗的首选中心静脉导管。两种置管途径的导管相关感染率无统计学羌异。     

血管超声结合塞丁格技术改进经外周静脉置入中心静脉导管的成功率和减少并发症

目的探讨血管超声结合塞丁格（MST）技术在改进经外周静脉置人中心静脉导管（PICC）的成功率和减少并发症方面的适用性和优越性。方法选取108例采用血管超声结合MST技术行PICC置管的患者及108例采用常规直视盲穿PICC的患者,比较两组一次穿刺成功率、一次置管成功率、置管所需时间、早期并发症的发生率。结果超声组一次穿刺成功率88．89％高于盲穿组的72．22％（P=0．002）;一次置管成功率82．41％高于盲穿组的57．41％（P=0．000）;穿刺失败率0．09％低于盲穿组的7．4％（P=0．017）;导管颈内异位2例（P=0．003）、穿刺点渗血2例（P=0．017）、静脉炎3例（P=0．001）、导管堵塞1例（P=0．010）分别低于盲穿组的13、10、18、9例;两组置管所需时间超声组〈15min15例,15～25min72例,〉25min21例;盲穿组〈15min12例,15～25min70例,〉25min26例,两组比较差异无统计学意义（P=0．685）。结论血管超声结合MST技术行PICC置管具有定位靶向血管、提高穿刺置管成功率、减少局部组织损伤和并发症的优势,为患者提供了更优化的PICC的技术方式。     

腔内心电图技术在三向瓣膜式经外周静脉置入中心静脉导管置管术中的应用

目的　评估腔内心电图技术在三向瓣膜式经外周静脉置入中心静脉导管（PICC）穿刺置管术中的应用。方法　入选2013年1月至2014年12月期间武汉大学中南医院因各种临床情况而需置入三向瓣膜式PICC 的妇科肿瘤患者168例（年龄20~76岁）。置管过程中以腔内心电图P波特征指导置管操作及导管头端定位，判断导管头端位置和方向。导管固定后行X线检查确定导管尖端位置，据此评估腔内心电图技术在三向瓣膜式PICC穿刺置管术中的准确率及敏感度。结果　所有研究对象腔内心电图的P 波均有特征性改变，15例患者在置管中第1     

经外周置入中心静脉导管在普外科护理中的应用价值和护理体会

目的探讨经外周置入中心静脉导管（PICC）在普外科护理中的应用价值和护理体会。方法将74例患者随机分为两组,对照组采用传统外周浅静脉穿刺建立静脉通路,观察组采用PICC建立静脉通路。结果对照组和观察组并发症的发生率分别为62．1％和15．5％,差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）;静脉炎和感染的发生率也具有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。结论对患者采用PICC静脉置管,并加强置管与维护过程的护理,可明显提高治疗的安全性。     

经头静脉植入PICC异位处理后发生静脉炎的情况

目的探讨经头静脉植入经外周静脉穿刺中心静脉导管（PICC）异位处理后患者发生静脉炎的情况。方法286例经头静脉置管的患者，经胸部X线检查发现PICC异位39例，其中26例使用末端开口PICC，13例使用三向瓣膜式PICC，观察PICC异位处理后输入化疗药过程中患者发生静脉炎的情况。结果在输化疗药时，使用末端开口PICC患者静脉炎发生率（11．5％）显著低于使用三向瓣膜式PICC患者（76．9％）（P〈0．05）。结论临床PICC置管过程中应注意选择导管类型。出现异位后正确处理，加强置管后局部观察和护理，可以提高异位导管的使用率。     

两种不同固定方法对经外周置入中心静脉导管置管后导管脱出情况的比较

目的比较经外周置入中心静脉导管（PICC）两种不同固定方法对置管过程中导管脱出情况。方法800例行PICC置管术的患者分为采用缝合固定组（447例）和采用免缝胶带固定组（353例），观察两组患者带管期间导管脱出情况。结果在PICC带管使用过程中，缝合固定组导管脱出发生率（3．6％）显著低于免缝胶带固定组（57．5％）（P〈0．01）。结论在PICC导管使用过程中，应根据患者情况和病情需要选择固定方法。如果出现导管脱出，根据无菌原则，脱出部分不能再送入体内，导管尖端无法位于上腔静脉，将影响导管的滴速和导管使用寿命。     

改良塞丁格技术联合血管超声在乳腺癌患者术后化疗经外周静脉置入中心静脉导管置管中的作用

目的探讨改良塞丁格技术联合血管超声在乳腺癌患者术后化疗经外周静脉置入中心静脉导管（PICC）置管中的临床效果。方法将接受术后化疗乳腺癌患者120例按照随机数字表法分为观察组和对照组各60例,观察组采用改良塞丁格技术联合血管超声PICC置管,对照组采用传统盲穿PICC置管,比较两组患者一次穿刺成功率、一次置管成功率、置管后机械性静脉炎及静脉血栓的发生率。结果观察组一次穿刺成功率、一次置管成功率、置管后机械性静脉炎发生率分别为91．67％、100％和3．33％,对照组一次穿刺成功率、一次置管成功率、置管后机械性静脉炎发生率分别为76．67％、86．67％和45％,两组比较差异均有统计学意义（P=0．0061,P=0．0434,P〈0．0001）。观察组置管后静脉血栓发生率为0,对照组置管后静脉血栓发生率为6．67％,两组比较差异无统计学意义（P=0．1187）。结论将改良塞丁格技术联合血管超声PICC置管应用于乳腺癌患者术后化疗置管成功率高,置管后机械性静脉炎发生率低,具有较高的临床应用价值。     

改良PICC置管技术在169例肺癌患者化疗中的应用

目的研究改良经外周静脉置入中心静脉导管（PICC）置管技术对导管异位的影响。方法将169例肺癌置管患者随机分为试验组（88例）与对照组（81例）,试验组在行HCC置管术送管至25cm时,助手用手紧贴患者锁骨上窝按压穿刺侧颈内静脉和颈外静脉下端;对照组采取常规歪头的方法。统计两组导管异位的发生率。结果试验组仅有1例导管被送人颈外静脉,导管颈部异位发生率为1．1％（1／88）;对照组导管异位发生率为11．1％（9／81）,两组比较差异无统计学意义（X^2=7．3636,P〈0．01）。结论肺癌患者PICC置管过程中,术者采取相应的干预手法可明显减少导管异行进入颈静脉的并发症。     

经外周静脉置入中心静脉导管与中心静脉置管在外科营养中的应用

目的 探讨经外周静脉置入中心静脉导管( PICC)与中心静脉置管(CVC)在外科肠外营养中的应用.方法 回顾性分析PICC与CVC的置管用时、置管成功率、导管留置时间、穿刺异常及不良反应.结果 CVC组置管操作平均时间(28.67±5.13) min短于PICC组的(45.20±6.89) min (P=0.035);PICC组平均导管留置时间(114.85±10.29)d长于CVC组的(24.78±8.42)d(P=0.033);PICC组与CVC组的置管成功率比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05);PICC组优于CVC组的并发症有5项,而CVC组优于PICC组的并发症仅为静脉炎.结论 对于长期营养(＞4周)的患者提倡使用PICC,护理管理者应着眼于PICC技术的培训与发展;而CVC具有置管操作时间短、流速快的优点,更适合于重症急诊患者的抢救治疗.     

Effect of central venous catheter type on infections: a prospective clinical trial

This study reports on a block clinical trial of two types of central venous catheters (CVCS): antiseptic-impregnated catheters (AIC) and non-impregnated catheters (non-AIC), on catheter tip colonization and bacteraemia. In total, 500 catheters were inserted in 390 patients over the 18 month study period, 260 (52.0%) AIC and 240 (48.0%) non-AIC. Of these, 460 (92.0%) tips (237 AIC and 223 non-AIC) were collected. While significantly fewer AIC, 14 (5.9%), than non-AIC, 30 (13.5%), catheters were colonized (P<0.01), there was no difference in the rates of bacteraemias in the two groups (0.8% vs. 2.7%, respectively, P=0.16). There were 6.87 (95% CI 3.38-14.26) and 16.92 (95% CI 10.61-27.12) colonized AIC and non-AIC catheters, respectively, per 1000 catheter days, a difference that was significant (P<0.01). However, no difference emerged between bacteraemias in AIC and non-AIC catheters per 1000 catheter days measured at 0.98 (95% CI 0.24-5.54) and 3.38 (95% CI 1.29-9.34), respectively (P=0.10). Of the 444 CVCs that were sited in the subclavian or jugular veins and had tips collected, significantly more catheters were colonized in the jugular group, 19 (20%), compared with the subclavian group, 24 (6.9%; P< or =0.01). Overall, the low rates of colonization and bacteraemia may be explained by the population studied, the policies used and the employment of a clinical nurse dedicated to CVC management.     

Tip position of long-term central venous access devices used for parenteral nutrition

BACKGROUND: Venous thrombosis is a potential postplacement complication of a central venous access device (VAD). Improper catheter tip position is a predisposing factor, especially when the device is used to administer parenteral nutrition (PN). American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (A.S.P.E.N.) guidelines recommend that a central VAD used for PN be placed with its tip in the superior vena cava (SVC) adjacent to the right atrium (RA). The purpose of this study is to determine the prevalence of improper central VAD tip position and factors associated with malpositioning. METHODS: All adult patients with a longterm VAD (ie, tunneled central venous catheter, peripherally inserted central catheter [PICC], or implanted port) placed before the current admission who were scheduled to receive PN also received chest x-rays to evaluate position of the catheter tip. Position was determined by a staff radiologist. A catheter with its tip ranging from the middle third of the SVC to the RA was considered acceptable; a catheter with its tip in any other position was considered malpositioned. Subjects with multiple VADs or multiple evaluations for the same catheter had the first placement and last evaluation considered. A logistic regression analysis was used to study the univariable and multivariable associations of these factors with tip malposition. RESULTS: Data were collected for catheters in 124 patients, including 74 tunneled catheters (71 Hickman, 2 Broviac, 1 Groshong), 38 PICCs, and implanted ports. Most of the catheters were placed for (81.9%) or chemotherapy (14.5%). Median catheter duration was 1.6 months at time of evaluation. Of 138 catheters studied, 15.9% (95% confidence interval, 10.2-23.1) were malpositioned at time of evaluation. According to univariable analysis, factors associated with malpositioned catheters included shorter catheter duration (p = .001), greater number of lumens (p = .029), venous entry site on the arm (p <.001) and catheters placed at institutions other than Cleveland Clinic (p = .007). Additionally, PICCs were likely to be malpositioned at time of evaluation compared with other long-term VADs combined (34.2% vs 9.0%; p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: A high percentage of long-term VADs improperly positioned for PN in the present study. were more likely to be malpositioned at time of evaluation compared with tunneled catheters and implanted These findings suggest the tip position of long-term should be confirmed before infusing PN.     

Complications and cost associated with parenteral nutrition delivered to hospitalized patients through either subclavian or peripherally-inserted central catheters

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Total parenteral nutrition (TPN) is typically delivered through catheters inserted into the superior vena cava (SVC) via a subclavian or internal jugular vein approach. A peripherally-inserted central venous catheter (PICC), utilizing a cephalic or basilic venous approach, may provide a safe alternative to the standard catheter approach and, because non-physician providers can insert the PICC, may introduce a potential cost-savings to health care institutions. We sought to determine if PICC lines are safer and more cost-effective than the standard central venous catheter approach for hospitalized patients who require TPN. METHODS: One hundred and two hospitalized patients (age range, 18-88 years) who required TPN were prospectively randomized to receive therapy via a centrally-inserted subclavian catheter (n=51) or a peripherally-inserted PICC line (n=51). The primary end-point was the development of a complication requiring catheter removal. Other end-points included catheter infection and thrombophlebitis. Cost associated with insertion and maintenance of each catheter was also studied. RESULTS: Complication-free delivery rate (without the need to remove or replace the catheter) was 67% for subclavian catheters and 46% for PICC lines (P<0.05). The overall infection rate was 4.9 per 1000 catheter days and was similar for each catheter type (P=0.68). PICC lines were associated with higher rates of clinically-evident thrombophlebitis (P<0.01), difficult insertion attempts (P<0.05), and malposition on insertion (P<0.05). No catheter complications resulted in significant long-term morbity or mortality. No significant difference was noted between the two catheter types in terms of aborted insertion attempts (P=0.18), dislodgement (P=0.12), or line occlusion (P=0.25). After standardizing costs for each hospital, the direct institutional costs for insertion and maintenance of PICC lines (US$22.32+/-2.74 per day) was greater than that for subclavian lines (US$16.20+/-2.96 per day;P<0.05). CONCLUSION: PICC catheters have higher thrombophlebitis rates and are more difficult to insert into certain patients when compared to the standard subclavian approach for central venous access in hospitalized patients who require TPN. Because of this, PICCs may be less cost-effective than currently believed because of the difficulty in inserting and maintaining the catheter.     

自我管理教育对经外周静脉置入中心静脉导管置管患者的影响

目的 探讨自我管理教育对经外周静脉置人中心静脉导管(PICC)患者的自我管理能力和自我效能的影响.方法 60例PICC置管患者按随机数字表随机分配进入自我管理教育组(n=32)与常规护理组(n=28),分别进行6个月的自我管理教育及常规的置管后护理,比较两组患者在体现自我管理能力的自我管理行为、健康状况、导管功能、卫生服务利用率方面及自我效能水平的差别.结果 与常规护理组相比较,自我管理教育组患者自我管理能力中除与护士交流评分(P=0.618)、健康状况总分(P=0.083)及疼痛评分(P=0.069)外,其余各项指标差异均有统计学意义(P均<0.05),且并发症发生率明显降低(P=0.038),自我效能水平明显提高(P=0.012).结论 自我管理教育可以提高PICC置管患者的自我管理能力和自我效能,从而降低并发症的发生率,是导管有效利用、改善患者健康状况的有效方法.

Abstract：

Objective To investigate the influence of self-management education(SME)on the selfmanagement ability and self-efficacy of patients with peripherally inserted central catheters(PICC).Methods Sixty patients with PICC were randomly divided into SME group(n=32)and control group(n=28).Patients in the SME group took SME and the control group received routine nursing;both lasted six months.The self-management ability(including self-management action,health status,catheter function,utility of health service)and selfefficacy were compared between these two groups.Results Except the scores of communication with the nurse (P=0.618),health status(P=0.083),and pain(P=0.069),the other indicators of self-management ability in the SME group had significantly higher scores than those in control group(all P<0.05).The incidence of complications was significantly lower(P=0.038)and the self-efficacy was significantly higher in SME group(P=0.012).Conclusion SME can improve the self-management ability and self-efficacy and prevent the catheter-related complications in patients with PICC.     

自我管理教育对经外周静脉置入中心静脉导管置管患者的影响

目的 探讨自我管理教育对经外周静脉置人中心静脉导管(PICC)患者的自我管理能力和自我效能的影响.方法 60例PICC置管患者按随机数字表随机分配进入自我管理教育组(n=32)与常规护理组(n=28),分别进行6个月的自我管理教育及常规的置管后护理,比较两组患者在体现自我管理能力的自我管理行为、健康状况、导管功能、卫生服务利用率方面及自我效能水平的差别.结果 与常规护理组相比较,自我管理教育组患者自我管理能力中除与护士交流评分(P=0.618)、健康状况总分(P=0.083)及疼痛评分(P=0.069)外,其余各项指标差异均有统计学意义(P均<0.05),且并发症发生率明显降低(P=0.038),自我效能水平明显提高(P=0.012).结论 自我管理教育可以提高PICC置管患者的自我管理能力和自我效能,从而降低并发症的发生率,是导管有效利用、改善患者健康状况的有效方法.     

水胶体敷料预防肿瘤患者PICC相关机械性静脉炎的效果

目的探讨水胶体敷料对肿瘤患者经外周静脉置入中心静脉导管(PICC)所致机械性静脉炎的防治效果。方法选取2014年3月—2015年3月于某院接受PICC的100例恶性肿瘤患者,随机分为观察组(采用水胶体敷料进行PICC置管处护理)和对照组(给予湿热敷进行PICC置管处护理),各50例,比较两组患者机械性静脉炎发生率、舒适度及护理操作时间。结果观察组和对照组患者机械性静脉炎发生率分别为4.0%(2/50)、22.0%(11/50),观察组患者机械性静脉炎等级低于对照组,组间比较差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。观察组患者皮肤刺激、活动限制及肢体暴露发生率(分别为0、2.0%、0)均低于对照组(分别为10.0%、14.0%、16.0%);观察组和对照组护理人员操作时间分别为(2.8±1.1)、(35.2±7.4)min,组间比较差异有统计学意义(均P0.05)。结论采用水胶体敷料护理,可有效降低PICC置管所致机械性静脉炎的发生率,提高患者舒适度,减轻护理工作量。