初次髋关节置换后不放置引流管的安全性

背景：初次全髋关节置换后放不放引流管还有争议。目的：探讨初次全髋关节置换后伤口不放置引流管的安全性和有效性。方法：92例患者按入院次序编号随机均分为单号组和双号组。单号组患者置换后放置引流管（全部为静脉输血管）;双号组患者置换后不放置引流管。通过对比两组换药次数、大腿周径变化、疼痛评分、住院时间、红细胞比容下降程度、输血量多少、不良反应发生率来评价放不放引流管效果。结果与结论：在大腿周径变化、疼痛评分、住院时间、红细胞比容下降程度、输血量多少、不良反应发生率等方面两组差异无显著性意义;而在换药次数方面,不放置引流管患者明显少于放置引流管患者,差异有显著性意义。说明在初次全髋关节置换后不放置引流管较放置引流管效果好。

Safety of the primary hip replacement without closed suction drainage

BACKGROUND： There is controversy about whether put or not put the closed suction drainage after primary hip replacement. OBJECTIVE： To investigate the safety and effectivity of the primary hip replacement without closed suction drainage. METHODS： Ninety-two patients scheduled for primary hip replacement were assigned for the odd numbers group （with closed suction drainage and all of them were intravenous blood transfusion tube） and the even numbers group （without closed suction drainage）. The effect of the primary hip replacement without closed suction drainage was evaluated through the comparison of the number of dressing changes, the swelling of thigh, pain scores, hospital stay, degree of hematocrit decreasing, number of blood transfusions and the rate of adverse reaction. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION： There was no significant difference of the swelling of thigh, pain scores, hospital stay, degree of hematocrit decreasing, number of blood transfusions and the rate of adverse reaction between two groups; the number of dressing changes in the even numbers group was significantly larger than that in the odd numbers group and the difference was significant. Primary hip replacement without closed suction drainage has more advantages than those with closed suction drainage.