三种中心静脉置管路径的比较

目的:比较三种中心静脉导置管路径的优劣。方法:回顾性分析314例行中心静脉置管的住院患者资料，根据置管路径不同分为3组，颈内静脉路径组103例，锁骨下静脉路径组105例，股静脉路径组106例，比较其穿刺成功率、置管成功率、置管时间及各种并发症的发生率。结果:3组中无1例发生空气栓塞、深静脉血栓形成及心律失常。3组内穿刺成功率、置管成功率、置管时间及局部渗血、血肿、血气胸、中心静脉导管相关性血流感染、导管堵塞及导管脱出的发生率比较，差别无统计学意义。结论:三种路径的使用效果和安全性无显著差异。

A comparative study of three different accesses for central venous catheterization

AIM:To explore the advantages and disadvantage of three different accesses for central venous catheterization. METHODS: Clinical data of 314 patients who underwent central venous catheterization were retrospectively analyzed. According to different catheterization accesses, 314 cases were divided into three groups: internal jugular vein group (n=103), subclavian vein group (n=105) and femoral vein group (n=106). Success rate of puncture, success rate of central venous catheterization, mean time of catheterization and incidence of different complications were compared among the three groups. RESULTS: Air embolism, deep venous thrombosis or arrhythmia occurred in none of the three groups. Differences among the three groups were not significant in success rate of puncture, success rate of central venous catheterization, mean time of catheterization, incidence of local bleeding, hematoma, hemopneumothorax, central catheter related bloodstream infection, catheter occlusion and catheter dislocation. CONCLUSION: The safety and effectiveness of three venous accesses for central venous catheterization showed no significant differences.