心包积液76例置管引流的体会

目的为了探讨经皮穿刺置入导管引流心包积液的疗效与安全性。方法76例心包积液的患者在超声引导下置管行心包闭式引流。结果76例患者均置管成功。置管时间3～34d，平均12d，均无脏器、组织损伤或感染等。结论经皮穿刺置入导管行心包引流是一种安全，有效的治疗方法。     

经皮穿刺中心静脉导管心包引流治疗心包积液疗效观察

目的:探讨心包内置入中心静脉导管持续引流治疗心包积液的疗效及安全性.方法:48例大量心包积液患者应用二维超声定位穿刺点、并将中心静脉导管经皮穿刺置入心包内,间断或持续引流积液.结果:均一次穿刺成功,心包内顺利留置中心静脉导管引流,导管留置时间5h～12d,平均5.6 d;置管操作及留置过程中未发生与导管穿刺相关并发症,患者均好转出院.结论:心包穿刺置管引流是治疗心包积液的一种简便、有效的方法,可避免一次性抽液过多或反复穿刺所致的并发症,效果及安全性均优于常规心包穿刺术.     

经皮穿刺心包置管治疗大量心包积液的护理体会

目的：探讨经皮穿刺心包置管治疗大量心包积液的效果及临床护理。方法选择2012年8月至2012年12月第三军医大学附属西南医院诊断为大量心包积液并行心包穿刺置管的7例患者为研究对象,在剑突下或心尖部置入中心静脉导管,加强术前护理,术中配合,置管后做好体位、留置导管、心理及生活方面的护理指导并密切观察病情,探讨经皮穿刺心包置管的治疗及护理效果。结果7例大量心包积液患者均成功置入Seldinger导管。导管留置时间5～30 d ,中位时间17 d。置管后1例出现穿刺点渗液,1例出现导管松脱,1例发生导管堵塞。结论经皮心包置管治疗大量心包积液具有安全、简单、痛苦少、损伤小、并发症少、引流彻底、恢复快等优点,结合行之有效的护理是取得满意疗效的重要保证。     

心包穿刺置管治疗心包积液43例体会

目的：探讨一种安全心包穿刺并有效治疗心包积液的方法。方法：心包穿刺后采用Seldinger法置入猪尾巴导管及浅扩方法置入硅胶管对心包积液进行引流治疗，观察疗效，结果：置入猪尾巴导管引流12例，其中肿瘤性积液5例，结核性6例，化脓性1例，置入硅胶管31例，其中肿瘤性积液14例，结核性12例，化脓性2例，结缔组织疾病2例，尿毒症1例，43例经引流和（或）心包内注药后，积液消失或明显减少，以浅扩方法置入硅胶管简单，方便，引流彻底；采用Seldinger法置入猪尾巴管管引流相对创伤上，导管远端体积大，难以调整位置，伤口易渗液。结论：心包穿刺置管安全，有效，穿刺后以浅扩方法置入硅胶管简单，安全，创伤小，渗液少，引流彻底。     

PTC穿刺针在心包积液穿刺置管引流中的应用

目的探讨超声引导下PTC穿刺针经皮穿刺心包积液并置管引流心包积液的疗效及安全性。方法 55例中等量到大量心包积液的患者在超声引导下PTC穿刺针经皮穿刺心包积液并置管行心包持续引流。结果 55例患者均置管成功,留置时间(5～16 d)平均8 d,均无组织脏器损伤及感染。10例发生导管堵塞,经肝素生理盐水冲洗后再通。结论超声引导下PTC穿刺针经皮穿刺心包积液并置管引流术是一种更安全、有效的治疗心包积液方法。     

超声引导下经皮穿刺引流治疗心包积液

目的探讨超声引导经皮穿刺引流治疗心包积液的安全性、成功率及临床应用。方法对36例心包积液的患者在超声引导下进行经皮穿刺,在心前区或剑突下置入中心静脉导管,观察心包积液引流情况及并发症。结果 36例心包积液患者全部安全、有效、成功置管引流,术后心包积液引流通畅,心脏压塞症状缓解,未出现气胸、心室扩张急性肺水肿、心肌或冠状血管损伤、感染等并发症。结论超声引导经皮穿刺引流是治疗心包积液简单、安全、有效的方法,便于临床应用。     

微创置管引流治疗心包积液24例分析

目的：探讨微创置管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24例伴有填塞症状的患者，应用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。甲均置管时间9d，无穿刺并发症发生，无继发感染，患者耐受性好。结论：微创置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。     

B超引导下心包穿刺置管在心包积液诊治中的临床应用

目的讨论B超引导下经皮心包穿刺置管持续引流心包积液的疗效、安全性及临床应用。方法在心尖部或心前区置入中心静脉导管引流。结果80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。可长期保留（5～16天）。操作并发症少。结论B超引导下经皮心包积液置管法简单、安全、有效，便于临床应用。     

中心静脉导管心包腔置管引流治疗心包积液46例

目的探讨应用中心静脉导管心包腔置管引流治疗心包积液的价值。方法本组46例在超声心动图定位指导下剑突左侧或心尖内侧穿刺留置中心静脉导管于心包腔内，连接引流袋引流心包积液。结果46例均穿刺置管成功，无心脏穿破及撕裂、冠状动脉损伤、心律失常、急性肺水肿、气体栓塞、气胸、腹内脏器损伤、医源性感染等并发症。置管引流1～2h后临床症状都明显缓解。置管引流3～28d，平均（14．0±5．0）d，本组病例均无术后心包继发细菌感染。结论中心静脉导管心包置管引流治疗心包积液，是一种操作简单、安全、疗效迅速、创伤小的方法，可以替代传统的心包穿刺引流术。     

Seldinger法心包穿刺置管引流心包积液的应用

目的:探讨Seldinger法心包穿刺置管引流心包积液的临床疗效及安全性。方法:对35例中、重度心包积液患者分别于剑突下,左第5、6肋间隙心浊音界内1.5￣2.0cm处,心尖部,以Seldinger法穿刺心包留置中心静脉导管,观察心包积液引流以及临床情况。结果:全部病例均一次性安全成功心包穿刺置管,后引流或间歇抽液,均取得满意效果。发生不良反应5例,其中1例死亡。结论:Seldinger法心包穿刺置管引流,治疗心包积液疗效确切,操作简单、方便,引流比较彻底,副反应少,安全性比较大,但操作时仍须大胆、细心,术中、术后注意观察。     

超声定位下应用中心静脉导管引流治疗心包积液的护理体会

目的介绍超声定位下心包穿刺置管引流术的护理体会。方法对26例中大量的心包积液患者术前经二维超声心动图定位,应用中心静脉导管引流治疗心包积液,术前、术中、术后护理进行系统的观察、护理。结果 26例病例均一次穿刺置管成功,导管留置时间2~5 d,引流液量300~3 800 mL,心包积液引流彻底,未出现严重并发症。结论该方法简单、安全、可靠、疗效好。     

介入性超声下引导心包穿刺置管治疗心包积液的临床探讨

目的探讨超声引导下经皮心包穿刺置管持续引流心包积液的临床应用。方法在100例心包积液患者心尖部或心前区置入中心静脉导管引流。结果 100例心包积液病人全部安全有效置管成功,得到有效救治,25例心脏压塞患者引流后症状迅速缓解。置管可长期保留（5~16 d）,操作并发症少。结论超声引导下经皮心包积液置管法简单、安全、有效,便于临床应用。     

A simple method for continuous pericardial drainage

Needle pericardiocentesis is performed routinely for relief of symptoms in patients with pericardial effusion and cardiac tamponade. In many patients however, reaccumulation of fluid requires further aspiration or surgical drainage, occasionally as a matter of urgency. Both procedures carry significant risks which may be avoided by insertion of an indwelling catheter. The Viggo subclavian cannula proves ideal for prolonged drainage of pericardial effusions and for relief of tamponade in an emergency situation. Introduction into the pericardium is simple, safe, and can be performed quickly without specialised equipment. This procedure is described and illustrated in patients with tuberculous and rheumatoid pericarditis.     

Outcomes of primary and secondary treatment of pericardial effusion in patients with malignancy

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the treatment strategies for primary and secondary management of malignancy-related pericardial effusions. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective review of Mayo Clinic Rochester charts and external records of patients with pericardial effusion associated with malignant disease who required treatment between February 1979 and June 1998 was performed. Telephone interviews with patients, their families, or their physicians were conducted to determine the outcomes of treatment. Recurrence of pericardial effusion and survival were the main outcome measures. RESULTS: Of 1002 consecutive pericardiocenteses performed during the period under study, 341 were performed in 275 patients with confirmed malignant disease. Patients were followed up for a minimum of 190 days, unless death occurred first. Of 275 patients, recurrence of pericardial effusion or persistent drainage necessitated secondary management in 59 (43 of 118 simple pericardiocenteses, 16 of 139 pericardiocenteses with extended catheter drainage, and 0 of 18 pericardial surgery following temporizing pericardiocentesis). Recurrence was strongly and independently predicted by absence of pericardial catheter for extended drainage, large effusion size, and emergency procedures. Recurrence after secondary management occurred in 12 patients: 11 underwent successful pericardiocentesis with extended catheter drainage, and 1 had pericardial surgery. Median survival of the cohort was 135 days, and 26% survived the first year after diagnosis of pericardial effusion. Male sex, positive fluid cytology for malignant cells, lung cancer, and clinical presentation of tamponade or hemodynamic collapse were independently associated with poor survival. CONCLUSION: Echocardiographically guided pericardiocentesis with extended catheter drainage appears to be safe and effective for both primary and secondary management of pericardial effusion in patients with malignancy.     

B超引导心包穿刺置管药物灌注治疗恶性心包积液37例

目的 探讨安全的心包穿刺置管引流方法，及观察药物局部灌注治疗恶性心包积液。方法 采用B超定向、定位及实时指导下行心包穿刺置入引流管，引流心包腔内积液，并经导管注入化疗及免疫药物治疗。结果 37例恶性心包积液行41例次的治疗，其有效率(CR PR)100％，其中完全缓解率92％。无心肌损伤，心跳骤停，血流动力学明显改变等严重并发症。腔内治疗毒副作用轻微。可长时间保留心包内引流。结论 本方法可安全、高效的治疗恶性心包积液。     

Emergency echocardiography to detect pericardial effusion in patients in PEA and near-PEA states

OBJECTIVES: Emergency echocardiography (EM echo) has been proposed to assist in decision-making in patients with pulseless electric activity (PEA) or PEA-like states. We observed the value of EM echo by emergency physicians in detecting pericardial effusion in patients in PEA and near PEA states. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Observational, prospective series at a Level 1 urban ED of patients with non-traumatic PEA or near PEA states who had EM echoes performed by emergency physicians during an 18-month period. Outcomes of patients with EM echoes were established by review of clinical course, formal echocardiography, radiography, operation or autopsy. RESULTS: Twenty patients had EM echo for non-traumatic hemodynamic collapse. Eight of 20 patients (40%) were without cardiac ventricular motion and were refractory to ACLS measures. Twelve of 20 (60%) patients had cardiac kinetic motion observed on echo. Eight of the 12 (67%) patients with cardiac motion had a pericardial effusion observed on EM echo. Formal echocardiography or other imaging studies confirmed all pericardial effusion cases. The following diagnoses were subsequently confirmed in patients with pericardial effusion: one aortic aneurysm, two aortic dissections, two metastatic cancers, one post-dialysis effusion, two minimal effusions. Three patients had tamponade with emergency pericardial drainage or surgery. In two of four patients with cardiac activity without pericardial effusion, EM echo was useful by detecting pacer capture and ROSC, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Emergency echocardiography performed by emergency physicians in patients in PEA or near PEA states can detect pericardial effusions with correctable etiologies versus true PEA with ventricular standstill.     

Traumatic pericardial effusion: Impact of diagnostic and surgical approaches

Introduction

In trauma patients with chest injuries, traumatic pericardial effusion is an important scenario to consider because of its close linkage to cardiac injury. Even with advances in imaging, diagnosis remains a challenge and use of which surgical approach is controversial. This study reviews the treatment algorithm, surgical outcomes, and predictors of mortality for traumatic pericardial effusion.

Patients and methods

Information on demographics, mechanisms of trauma, injury scores, diagnostic tools, surgical procedures, associated injuries, and hospital events were collected retrospectively from a tertiary trauma center.

Results

Between June 2003 and December 2009, 31 patients (23 males and 8 females) with a median age of 31 (range 16-77), who had undergone surgical drainage of pericardial effusion were enrolled in the study. Blunt trauma accounted for 27 (87.1%) insults, and penetrating injury accounted for 4 (12.9%). Patients were diagnosed by Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (FAST) (8 patients), computerized tomography (7 patients), echocardiography (9 patients), and incidentally during surgery (7 patients). Notably, sixteen (51.7%) patients required surgical repair for traumatic cardiac ruptures, including 6 (19.6%) with pericardial defects who presented initially with hemothorax. The surgical approaches were subxiphoid in 8 patients (25.8%), thoracotomy in 7 (22.6%), and sternotomy in 19 (61.2%), including 3 conversions from thoracotomy. The survival to discharge rate was 77.4% (24/31). Concomitant cardiac repair, associated pericardial defects, and initial surgical approach did not affect survival, but the need for massive transfusion, cardiopulmonary cerebral resuscitation (CPCR), trauma score, and incidental discovery at surgery all had a significant impact on the outcome.

Conclusions

Precise diagnoses of traumatic pericardial effusions are still challenging and easily omitted even with FAST, repeat cardiac echo and CT. The number of patients with traumatic pericardial effusion requiring surgical repair is high. Standardized therapeutic protocol, different surgical approaches have not impact on survival. Correct identification, prompt drainage, and preparedness for concomitant cardiac repair seem to be the key to better outcomes.     

Large pericardial effusion after cardiac surgery: role of echocardiography in diagnosis and management

We performed M-mode and two-dimensional (2-D) echocardiograms prospectively in 140 patients an average of eight days after open heart surgery. Large pericardial effusions occurred in 13 patients; three had complete circumcardiac pericardial effusion, four had local anterior adhesions, five had extensive anterior adhesions (posterior loculated effusion), and one had a large loculated pericardial effusion contiguous to the right atrium. In five patients with tamponade, the effusion was drained, with immediate reversal of symptoms and signs of tamponade. In the other eight patients, who had no deterioration in cardiovascular status, the effusion was not drained; instead, these patients were treated medically with indomethacin and observed with serial echocardiograms, and the effusions eventually disappeared. The most consistent echocardiographic differences between the five patients with and the eight patients without tamponade were that patients with tamponade had larger posterior pericardial effusions, more severe left atrial compression, and more indentation of the right atrial wall. Echocardiography plays an essential role in diagnosis and management of large pericardial effusions after open heart surgery. Patients with large pericardial effusions who are clinically stable need only medical management, including serial echocardiograms, but drainage is indicated if the cardiovascular or respiratory status worsens. Certain echocardiographic findings indicate a high probability of tamponade.     

超声监测经皮心包内多部位活检,引流和灌洗治疗

本文介绍应用介入性超声技术在原因不明的心包积液诊断和治疗取得显著效果。３７例患者经心包多部位活检明确病因诊断章取义务兵例，病理论断率８６．３％，比以往常规心包穿刺术诊断率提高了６０％以上；２１例急慢性心包填塞的患者经过导管引流得到完全缓解；根据病因在超声控制引流完全后给予心包腔内灌洗治疗，使数月、数年不能治愈的心包积液变为３－－１０天完成治疗，全部病例复查随访三个月无一例复发。本文详细描述了操作方     

Non-surgical management in hemodynamically unstable blunt traumatic pericardial effusion: A feasible option for treatment

Introduction

Little is known about the outcomes of deliberate non-surgical management for hemodynamically unstable patients with blunt traumatic pericardial effusion. We evaluated the efficacy of management with pericardiocentesis or subxiphoid pericardial window in hemodynamically unstable patients who reach the hospital alive with blunt traumatic pericardial effusion.