PICC插管与CVC插管在急性脑血管病患者中应用的比较

目的比较经外周导入中心静脉置管(PICC)和锁骨下静脉插管(CVC)在急性脑血管病患者治疗中的优劣,为临床应用提供参考。方法分别观察记录PICC患者59例和CVC患者52例的一次置管成功率、操作时间及并发症。结果PICC组一次置管成功率为94.9%,CVC组为98.1%,P>0.05;PICC组平均操作时间为10 min,CVC组为21 min,P<0.01;PICC组并发症为3.4%,CVC组并发症为23.1%,P<0.01。结论两组一次置管成功率无差异,而操作时间、并发症发生率差异有显著性;PICC具有节省时间和人力、并发症低、病人痛苦时间短,满足急性脑血管病患者治疗的需要,在临床上值得推广应用。

Application and Comparison of Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter and Under Collarbone Central Venous Catheter for patients with Acute cerebrovascular diseases

Objective To compare the advantages and disadvantages of peripheral inserted central catheters(PICC) and under collarbone central venous catheter(CVC) for patients with acute cerebrovascular deseases and provide more information on the clinical application.Methods Fifty-nine patients who were punctured peripherally inserted Central Catheters were the group of PICC.Fifty-two patients who were punctured under collarbone Central Venous Catheter were selected as the group of CVC.The successful rate of tuber insertion,operation time and side reaction for the two group were recorded and evaluated.Results The successful rate of insertion for group of PICC was 94.9%,for the group of CVC that was 98.1%,there were no differences between the two groups(P>0.05).The mean time of puncture for PICC group was 10 min,for CVC group was 21 min.the differences between the two groups were significant((P<0.01).The incidence of side reaction for PICC group was 3.4%.and CVC group was 23.1%,there were significant differences between them(P<0.01).Conclusion The Successful rate between group of PICC and group of CVC had no difference.However,the group of PICC is superior in operation time and had lower side reaction.PICC is worth extending on the clinical application.