首页> 外文期刊>European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery: Official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery >High-vacuum drains rival conventional underwater-seal drains after pediatric heart surgery.
【24h】

High-vacuum drains rival conventional underwater-seal drains after pediatric heart surgery.

机译:小儿心脏手术后,高真空引流管可与传统的水下密封引流管相媲美。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objective: The collection of fluid in the mediastinum after cardiac surgery is traditionally prevented using underwater seal drains that may be connected to low-pressure suction. High-vacuum drains (redivac drains) are a potential alternative to this arrangement and have previously been utilized in areas of general surgery, as well as in the treatment of post-sternotomy mediastinitis. There has been no study to date addressing the safety and efficacy of these drains following pediatric cardiac surgery. Methods: Five hundred and forty-six patients were prospectively randomised to receive either the redivac drains or the conventional underwater-seal drains attached to low-pressure wall suction. We sought to test the null hypothesis that there was no difference in the incidence of residual pericardial or pleural collections requiring drainage between the 2 drainage systems. Secondary endpoints included time to drain removal, volume of drainage and drain size. Analysis was performed on an intention to treat basis. Results: Two hundred and thirty-seven patients were allocated to the redivac group, while 241 were allocated to the conventional drain group. Age and gender distribution, the use of cardiopulmonary bypass, numbers of patients with univentricular morphology and number of drains utilized were similar in the 2 groups. The use of redivac drains resulted in a significantly lower incidence of residual pleural effusions requiring drainage (4 vs. 18, P=0.003). There was no difference in the incidence of pericardial effusion requiring drainage. Redivac drains drained an equivalent volume through smaller calibre tubes (12 Ch vs. 16 Ch, P<0.0001) over a shorter period of time (42h (IQR 22-45) vs. 43h (IQR 27-52), P<0.01) than the conventional drainage system. Conclusions: Redivac drains are as safe and effective as conventional drains in the pediatric setting, and resulted in a lower incidence of residual pleural effusions requiring drainage. Together with their ease of care, earlier mobilisation of patients and greater cost-effectiveness, the routine use of high-vacuum drains can be recommended following pediatric heart surgery.
机译:目的:传统上,可以使用可能与低压抽吸相连的水下密封排水管来防止心脏手术后纵隔积液。高真空引流管(redivac引流管)是这种布置的一种潜在替代方法,以前已用于普外科以及胸骨切开术后纵隔炎的治疗。迄今为止,还没有研究解决小儿心脏手术后这些引流管的安全性和有效性。方法:前瞻性将546例患者随机分入接受低压壁吸引术的重瓣引流管或常规水下密封引流管。我们试图检验零假设,即两个引流系统之间需要引流的残留心包或胸膜集合的发生率没有差异。次要终点包括排水时间,排水量和排水尺寸。分析是根据治疗意图进行的。结果:237例患者被分配到redivac组,而241例被分配到常规引流组。两组的年龄和性别分布,体外循环的使用,单心室形态的患者数量以及引流的数量相似。使用重排引流可显着降低需要引流的残留胸腔积液的发生率(4比18,P = 0.003)。需要引流的心包积液发生率没有差异。 Redivac排水管在较短的时间段内(42h(IQR 22-45)与43h(IQR 27-52),P <0.01)通过较小口径的管子(12 Ch vs. 16 Ch,P <0.0001)排出了相等的体积。比传统的排水系统。结论:小儿引流术与常规引流术一样安全有效,并导致需要引流的残留胸腔积液发生率降低。加上其易于护理,患者尽早动员和更高的成本效益,建议在儿科心脏手术后常规使用高真空引流管。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号