心包腔内置管引流与传统心包穿刺抽液的安全性、有效性评价

目的通过比较心包腔内置管引流和传统心包穿刺抽液两种方法,评价其安全性与有效性.方法 78例心包积液病人分为两组,一组心包腔内置管引流(n=41),一组传统心包穿刺抽液(n=37),比较两组并发症的发生率和心包积液引流量.结果心包腔内置管引流和传统心包穿刺抽液两种方法所致的穿刺并发症发生率相似.心包腔内置管引流对心包穿刺所致的心包填塞有防止作用,且心包积液引流量远大于传统心包穿刺抽液(P<0.05) .结论心包腔内置管引流比传统心包穿刺抽液更安全有效.

Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of laying vena duct drainage or traditional pericardiocentesis in treating pericardial effusion

Objective To evaluate the safety and efficacy of laying vena duct drainage or traditional pericardiocentesis in treating the moderate and severe pericardial effusion.Methods Seventy eight patients with pericardial effusion were divided into two groups: vena duct drainage group ( n =41) and traditional pericardiocentesis group ( n =37),analysing their complication and estimating the volume of the drainage fluid.Results There was no difference between vena duct drainage and traditional pericardiocentesis in the complications.However,vena duct drainage can prevent the pericardial tamponade by pericardiocentesis and had the larger volume of the drainage fluid ( P <0.05).Conclusion Vena duct drainage is better than traditional pericardiocentes in safety and efficacy.